Evidence of meeting #55 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would like to suspend for 10 minutes.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
No. I would actually like to move to adjourn. I think this is a good time for us to adjourn, take a step back to think about it and come back tomorrow.
The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Miriam Burke
“That the committee do now adjourn” is the motion.
(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
The motion is defeated. We will continue with our speaking list.
Mr. Cooper would like to suspend. Can I have a show of hands on agreement to suspend?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
I'm going to pause for one second.
Thank you, Mr. Cooper. I just wanted to clarify what was going on.
Mr. Julian, the amendment that you presented was circulated, but I understand that you have amended the motion that you circulated. Is that true? Is our understanding correct?
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
The motion that was circulated was a stand-alone motion. I have amended Mr. Cooper's motion. It does the same thing, but different wording was circulated.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
I believe that it has just gone from Rachel Blaney's office.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
As per the usual practice, we are going to suspend for a few minutes to make sure all members have received it. Then we will continue. I will bring us back and give you the floor, Mr. Julian.
We're suspending just to make sure that everybody has a copy of the wording of the amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Welcome back.
I understand that everyone has received the amendment presented by Mr. Julian.
With that, I will pass the floor back to Mr. Julian.
Just so that we're all on the same page—
Conservative
Conservative
Damien Kurek Conservative Battle River—Crowfoot, AB
As a substitute, I have not yet received the proposed amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
It's on its way, Mr. Kurek.
Mr. Kurek, you should now have that in your inbox.
Excellent. I see a thumbs-up. Thank you.
The floor will go first to Mr. Julian, followed by Mrs. Sahota, Mr. Fergus, Mr. Kurek, and now I see Madame Gill. I will take names as hands are up.
Mr. Julian, we will go to you.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Our preference, that is, that of our leader and caucus, remains a national public inquiry, because this in an extremely important issue. If the Prime Minister refuses to launch the inquiry, it is up to the committee to conduct an in‑depth review. I hope the inquiry will be held but, in the meantime, we have to do our job, and that is what I am proposing with my amendment.
It’s important to look at all foreign interference, not just from China, but also from Russia. There are also concerns at the international level about Russia’s involvement.
That’s why we are suggesting to hear from a number of people who were involved in recent election campaigns, not just on the Liberal side, but on the Conservative side as well. We want to hear from Katie Telford, chief of staff to the Prime Minister, as well as Tausha Michaud, the former chief of staff to the former leader of the official opposition.
We are also asking for documents to be provided quickly, and for them to be unredacted. What we are proposing is the best way to access these documents, which are still matters of national security.
The amendment that I'm offering does a number of things. First off, my preference, and the preference of the leader and of the NDP, is that the Prime Minister call a national public inquiry. It is important that this be public and that Canadians get the answers they are looking for.
The reality is that I do not buy the argument that there's nothing to see here. There are concerns that have been widespread. There are allegations that potentially the electoral laws of our country were breached. This is serious. It's not something that should be set aside. Having a national public inquiry allows us to respond to that.
We've also heard the leader of the official opposition talk about a national public inquiry, but in a very restrained way, talking about China's involvement, when we have seen on multiple occasions the involvement of the Russian state government, the Russian state actors. We saw it with Donald Trump's election. We saw it with the Brexit referendum. We saw it with the financing of the United Kingdom's Conservative Party. We have found allegations, credible allegations, around the involvement of Russian state actors in supporting the so-called freedom convoy as well in Canada, and concerns—I mentioned the University of Calgary study—that indicate a widespread misinformation campaign that is generated by Russian state actors. I don't buy what the leader of the official opposition is saying, which is that there's nothing to see here with regard to Russian implications and Russian involvement and Russian interference.
We need to tackle this together. That means ensuring that we are hearing from credible witnesses. I've mentioned the two chiefs of staff, Katie Telford and Tausha Michaud, the campaign directors of both the Liberal Party and Conservative Party's campaigns, and Jenni Byrne, who is the senior leadership adviser to the leader of the official opposition. We saw a great deal of activity around the “freedom convoy”. Hopefully, there are no concerns there, but there are questions that definitely need to be asked. I think it is important that Jenni Byrne come before the committee to answer those questions—and ministers as well; the ministers that we are already convening, and we are looking at other potential witnesses as well.
Finally, there is the issue of documents. My colleague Mr. Turnbull had wording similar to what we put forward in a motion that I distributed this morning, talking about getting documents as quickly as possible from the ministry officials themselves. However, they would be redacted.
The Conservative motion—the original motion suggested by Mr. Cooper—asks for unredacted documents, but through the law clerk in a fairly cumbersome process.
I am suggesting the process that all parties had already agreed to in the memorandum of understanding that we all signed on October 31, 2022. That MOU allows an ad hoc committee of parliamentarians to look at those documents. If there are divisions as to whether or not they are concerned with national security, they would go to a panel of judges, who have already been chosen, that would allow the committee to ultimately have the unredacted documents that have been passed through that vetting process, in comparison with what we see from the ministry, which is likely to be, it's fair to say, substantially redacted. What this amendment does is provide for both sides, unredacted and redacted, in a way that allows access to the documents we need. That is what I'm proposing in terms of the amendment. It improves the committee.
I want to reiterate one more time that a national public inquiry is the way to handle this. That is not just me speaking or Jagmeet Singh speaking; I believe other opposition parties have also said the same thing. Jean-Pierre Kingsley, the head of Elections Canada, has a significant and stellar reputation, and a number of other actors from right across the country have called for a national public inquiry. This is not something that is singular to one or two people. It is something that I think has a broad consensus within our country.
That would be the preference. We'll have that debate tomorrow, when I hope to move the motion on the national public inquiry for which I provided notice of motion today. I hope we can have the committee endorse that motion tomorrow. Ultimately, the Prime Minister needs to make that decision, and I believe he needs to make it in a timely way.
I thank members of the committee for their consideration. I know that we have a drop-dead time in a few hours. Hopefully, we'll have some debate in the meantime.
Thank you.
Liberal