Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 16th, 2021

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

So, if the prorogation were based on these reasons, it should have taken place in March.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

We shut down Parliament in March, Mr. Therrien.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

I understand. However, since you're saying that the prorogation took place for these reasons, meaning telework, the CERB, the wage subsidy and the vaccines, it should have taken place in March.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

We didn't even know whether we would return to Parliament, Mr. Therrien.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

So don't say that you prorogued Parliament in September because all this came about. It happened in March. You just confirmed this.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Out of respect, don't put words in my mouth, Mr. Therrien. I said that we made this decision because a second wave was coming and we had no idea how big it would get. In the end, it was huge. We wanted to focus the government's efforts on that.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Okay. However, when you bring up telework, the CERB and all these reasons for the prorogation, you're misleading the committee, because we started talking about this in March.

I'll go back to August 18. You're telling me that it's a date like any other. I'm troubled to hear this from the Leader of the Government in the House. I know you well, Mr. Rodriguez. I know that your comments are more specific and that you're smarter than this.

You're telling me that you chose August 18, but that it could have been another date.

Why did Mr. Morneau, who was the Minister of Finance, resign on August 17?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Look, you should refer to his own statements. I don't remember them, but I could send you his speech.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Are you serious? You don't know why!

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

I am serious. He had his own reasons for doing so—

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

We're talking about the Minister of Finance. We aren't talking about—

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

I'm not sure what this has to do with the prorogation.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Was he involved in the WE Charity scandal?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

The committees discussed this matter.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

I'm asking you the question. Was he involved in the scandal?

Was his name brought up in the meetings of the committees that looked at the WE Charity scandal?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Did the opposition bring up his name? Yes, they brought up his name, along with many other names—

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Okay. So he's involved in it.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

However, again, I don't see what this has to do with the prorogation.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

It's very clear to me. On August 17, the Minister of Finance was forced to resign because of his involvement in the scandal. On August 18, you prorogued Parliament, thereby putting an end to the work of the committees that were looking at the WE Charity scandal.

Who were you trying to save?

Once the Minister of Finance had resigned, who would have been next to end up in the hot seat and be forced to resign because of his involvement in the scandal?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Mr. Therrien, your time is up.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

It's your Prime Minister.

You saved your Prime Minister. You absolutely did that.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

With all due respect, Mr. Therrien, I completely disagree with you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Your time is up.

Mr. Blaikie, you have two and a half minutes.

Go ahead, please.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

You've said a few times that we should believe that the consultation requirements for the Speech from the Throne were sufficient reason to accept that the government prorogued Parliament when it did, even though there were several investigations into the WE Charity scandal going on at the time, even though it followed right on the heels of the resignation of the finance minister, apparently as a result of the same scandal, and even though there was still a lot of work yet to be done on how to replace CERB with another income support program, to not leave millions of Canadian families out in the cold.

The question isn't whether consultation is required when you're doing a speech like that. The question is whether government has the resources to both consult and continue to do the job of the government.

What I am hearing is that you don't believe that the government could continue to do the job of the government, including being accountable to Parliament, and consult adequately to prepare a Speech from the Throne. I find that incredible because it seems to me that government ought to continuously be consulting on important initiatives even as it runs the country and is responsible to Parliament.

What I can't fathom is how your government thinks it doesn't have the resources to consult with people about a meaningful Speech from the Throne while continuing to do the job of running the nation, including being accountable to Parliament. Why do you think your government can't pull off being consultative and accountable to Parliament at the same time?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

With all respect, Mr. Blaikie, you're coming back to the same question you've asked twice, so this is the third time, and I did answer.