Evidence of meeting #23 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was prorogation.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:45 a.m.
Bloc
Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC
So, if the prorogation were based on these reasons, it should have taken place in March.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
11:45 a.m.
Bloc
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.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
We didn't even know whether we would return to Parliament, Mr. Therrien.
11:45 a.m.
Bloc
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.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
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.
11:45 a.m.
Bloc
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?
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
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.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
11:45 a.m.
Bloc
Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC
We're talking about the Minister of Finance. We aren't talking about—
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
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?
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
Did the opposition bring up his name? Yes, they brought up his name, along with many other names—
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
However, again, I don't see what this has to do with the prorogation.
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
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?
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
Alain Therrien Bloc La Prairie, QC
It's your Prime Minister.
You saved your Prime Minister. You absolutely did that.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC
With all due respect, Mr. Therrien, I completely disagree with you.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ruby Sahota
Your time is up.
Mr. Blaikie, you have two and a half minutes.
Go ahead, please.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
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?
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
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.