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

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 23 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of January 25, 2021. Therefore members are attending in person in the room and remotely by using the Zoom application. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. Just so you are aware, the webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the committee.

Today's meeting is also taking place on Zoom webinar format. Webinars are for public committee meetings and are available only to members, their staff and witnesses. Members may have remarked that the entry to the meeting was much quicker and that they immediately entered as an active participant. All functionalities for active participants remain the same. Staff will be non-active participants only and can therefore view the meeting in gallery view only. I would like to take this opportunity to remind all participants to this meeting that screenshots and taking photos of your screen are not permitted.

Given the ongoing pandemic situation, and in light of the recommendations from health authorities to remain healthy and safe, all those attending the meeting in person are to maintain two metres of physical distance. They must wear a non-medical mask when circulating in the room. It is highly recommended that the mask be worn at all times, including when seated. As well, those attending must maintain proper hand hygiene by using the provided hand sanitizer at the room entrance. As the chair, I will be enforcing these measures for the duration of the meeting. I thank members in advance for their co-operation.

For those participating virtually, I'd like to outline a few rules to follow. Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice at the bottom of your screen of floor, English or French. With the latest Zoom version, you may now speak in the language of your choice without the need to select the corresponding language channel. You will also notice that the platform's “raise hand” feature is now in a more easily accessible location on the main toolbar, should you need to speak or alert the chair.

For members participating in person, proceed as you usually would when the whole committee is meeting in person in the committee room. Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. If you are on video conference, please click the microphone icon to unmute yourself. For those in the room, your microphone will be controlled, as normal, by the proceedings and verification officer.

All comments by members and witnesses should be addressed through the chair. When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute. With regard to the speaking list, the committee clerk and I will do our best to maintain a consolidated order of speaking of all members, whether they are participating virtually or in person.

I would now like to welcome our witnesses for today. We have Minister Rodriguez, the House leader; Mr. Allen Sutherland, assistant secretary to the cabinet; and Mr. Donald Booth, director of strategic policy and Canadian secretary to the Queen.

We will allow the minister an opening statement of about 10 minutes, which will precede probably two rounds of questions. Just so the committee is aware, the minister will be here for the first part of the meeting for one hour. The officials who are accompanying him will stay behind for the second hour for further questioning.

I want to take some time now to welcome a few new members today.

Welcome back, Mr. Nater.

I see that we have Mr. Fragiskatos with us again.

Mr. Kent, welcome to the committee. I know that an official change was made and that you and Mr. Nater will be our new permanent members of the committee. I think the committee is looking forward, as I definitely am, to working with all of you.

Minister, please go ahead with your opening remarks.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I will take only about five minutes so that we can have more direct exchanges.

Good morning, everyone.

Good morning, colleagues. I'm pleased to be with you virtually as you conduct your work on the issue of prorogation. This is very important work.

Back in the 2015 election, our party promised a new role for Parliament to examine this issue. As you may remember, the previous government invoked prorogation on multiple occasions without ever explaining to Parliament why it had done so. We promised to change the Standing Orders, and we did in 2017. Actually, many of you were there at the time.

The new standing order states that soon after Parliament resumes sitting following prorogation, the government must submit a document outlining the reasons for the prorogation. Once that happens, this document must immediately be referred to PROC, and this is exactly what has happened, Madam Chair, for the first time in our history.

The government has submitted an extensive report on the matter, and I'm here to speak to you about the report and answer all your questions. In other words, we're following through on our promise. We're being transparent and open in explaining our reasons for last year's prorogation.

So, let's review what happened last year. In December 2019, following the election, our government came forward with a Throne Speech that reflected our agenda. It was a forward-looking agenda, but one that was that was truly grounded in the reality of the time, when there was no COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic simply changed the world, not just here at home, but around the world. It has changed the priorities that any government must put at the top of its agenda.

We had to take steps to protect the lives of Canadians and reduce the risk of contracting COVID-19. These were unprecedented steps to support the financial health of Canadians and help them pay their bills. Pandemic or not, the bills kept coming. We needed to do everything we could to help our workers, our businesses and our guardian angels in the health sector, and we did it together.

Remember all the sessions of Parliament in the spring and summer when we passed all those bills together to help Canadians.

By the summer, it was clear that members of Parliament would be facing a new and much different landscape when the House of Commons returned in the fall. As the Prime Minister said in August when he announced the prorogation, Canada was “at a crossroads”. This was a time to protect Canadians, rebuild the economy and build a more resilient Canada that is healthier, safer, greener and more competitive. This would require a reset, a new plan. We committed to coming forward in Parliament with a new throne speech to reflect the extraordinary times we found ourselves in.

Just as important, members of Parliament would be given a chance to vote on this plan. That was fundamental. The Prime Minister was very clear in August when he made the announcement. You'll remember that.

Here are some of the things he said: “We are proroguing Parliament to bring it back on exactly the same week it was supposed to come back anyway, and force a confidence vote. We are taking a moment to recognize that the throne speech we delivered eight months ago had no mention of COVID-19, had no conception of the reality we find ourselves in right now. We need to reset the approach of this government for a recovery to build back better. And those are big, important decisions and we need to present that to Parliament and gain the confidence of Parliament to move forward on this [very] ambitious plan.”

Colleagues, this is exactly what happened.

Parliament began a second session with a new Speech from the Throne, which set out a clear roadmap to tackle the pandemic. The House voted in favour of the Speech from the Throne. It supported it, which was very important for the way forward.

Since then, as promised, our government has continued to focus its efforts to defeat the pandemic. For example, we announced a transition from the Canada Emergency Response Benefit to a more flexible, more accessible employment insurance system. For our businesses, we announced the new Canada Emergency Rent Subsidy, which we have extended to June 2021.

While the world looked forward to the day when vaccines against COVID-19 were ready, we continued the work we had begun long before. As we've said before—and we'll say it again —by September, we will have enough doses to vaccinate every Canadian who wants to be vaccinated.

These are some of the steps that have been taken. These are the actions of a government that put COVID-19 at the top of its agenda.

The House was prorogued last year for one reason: to come forward with a new plan to confront the biggest health and economic crisis of our time. That's it.

Now I am happy to answer your questions.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Minister.

I will just remind all the members that the government House leader's opening remarks were also circulated to everyone, in case you want to refer to them while you ask questions.

I believe we're going to begin with six minutes for Mr. Deltell.

Mr. Deltell, welcome to the committee and thank you for subbing in today. Go ahead, you have six minutes.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

I am very pleased to participate in this committee meeting. I want to greet all my colleagues, especially my colleague across the way, the minister responsible for Quebec and Government House Leader.

Madam Chair, the minister forgot two fundamental points in his speech. First, he forgot to say that everything that the Prime Minister said in his Speech from the Throne could very well have been said in a statement in the House of Commons. Indeed, there was absolutely nothing new that merited prorogation and a Speech from the Throne, since, as he said, the government and Parliament were already working to address the issues related to the pandemic. There was no need to prorogue Parliament and no need for a Speech from the Throne. A statement by the Prime Minister in the House would have done the trick. So why did he prorogue Parliament?

Let's review the events, Madam Chair.

On August 19, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, which was studying the WE charity scandal, was scheduled to receive the Speakers' Spotlight group, which had contracts with the WE movement and the Prime Minister's family. This group was scheduled to testify on August 19. However, as luck would have it, it was on August 18 that the Prime Minister decided to prorogue Parliament and dissolve this committee and the work of Parliament. Yet Speakers' Spotlight had stated that it had in the past held discussions with the Prime Minister's family and the Prime Minister himself.

Was the minister aware of the discussions between Speakers' Spotlight and the Prime Minister's family?

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

Madam Chair, you will not be surprised that I disagree with my colleague's analysis of the facts, although I am very pleased to see him. I even miss him, just imagine!

The government needed to focus all its efforts on the pandemic. As I said earlier, and as the Prime Minister said at the time, the entire government, not just the political wing but all the civil servants as well, needed to focus on the priority, which was COVID-19, the biggest public health crisis since the Spanish flu and the biggest economic crisis in a hundred years.

That's what we did. We're from different parties and we see things differently, and that's fine, but my reading of things is quite different from that of my colleague.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

My question is more specific, Minister. Did you know that Speakers' Spotlight had held discussions with Prime Minister Trudeau's family, yes or no?

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

My colleague, the Opposition House Leader, is asking specific questions about things I have no idea about. What I do...

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Did the Prime Minister influence things? You tell me you don't know. So, should the Prime Minister appear before this committee to give Canadians the straight goods if you can't do that?

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

Mr, Deltell, I am extremely pleased to be here on behalf of the government. I speak here on behalf of the government and all of my colleagues. I was the one who had the opportunity to table this report in the House, which I'm sure you've read. I'm here to answer your questions about the report and prorogation...

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

You speak for the government, but you are not able to...

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

Mr. Deltell, if you invite me to talk about the report and the prorogation, I expect there will be questions about it.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

The reason for the prorogation was that the family of the Prime Minister was to testify through Speakers' Spotlight, which was scheduled to appear on August 19. Did the Prime Minister have any influence on this decision, yes or no?

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

Madam Chair, we have two very different visions of things.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

I will help you answer the question. In your speech, you mentioned transparency three times. Are you prepared to table with the committee all the exchanges that took place between your office and the office of the Prime Minister that led to prorogation?

In the interest of transparency, are you prepared to table these documents, yes or no?

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

Madam Chair, committee members may make any request they wish.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

So, let me ask you: are you ready to do this?

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

Mr. Deltell, we are not in court before a jury. We're talking with colleagues, and in principle, we should be talking about prorogation and the enormous amount of work...

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Yes, but you're not able to tell me how much influence the Prime Minister had. I want to help you with your thinking. I invite you to table all documents, that is, notes, emails and texts exchanged between your office and the Prime Minister's Office relating to prorogation.

Are you ready to take part in this exercise in transparency, yes or no?

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

Mr. Deltell, this committee did an enormous amount of work. You were not at this committee...

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Answer yes or no.

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

...but your colleagues did an enormous amount of work. They discussed prorogation, they did research, they heard experts and university professors, and so on. This led to the report, and to my presence here today, to discuss prorogation with you.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Canadians want to know what the Prime Minister's role was in the ultimate decision to prorogue Parliament. He was the one who announced it. What led to that? We want to know the answer to that question.

What might help you and Canadians, most of all, is to agree to table the emails, text messages and notes exchanged between your office and the Prime Minister of Canada's office.

Are you ready to carry out this exercise in transparency, yes or no?

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

Mr. Deltell, you talk about what would help Canadians understand the reason for the prorogation, but I just explained it to you. I've done it in a few words, to limit my intervention and answer more questions...

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

So the answer is no. You are not willing to table the documents.

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

I explained to you why the government made this decision. Today, I speak for the government. I tabled the report in the House on behalf of the government, and I think that was a very serious process.

By the way, Mr. Deltell, you imply that this has never happened in history, but when your party was in government, it prorogued Parliament without any reason, and more than once.