Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 25th, 2023

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I have nothing to say, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Okay.

In that case, Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

We are at that point, Madam Chair. At the end of the day, we will ask what we want, with all the points that have been made, and I will not list them because we have been here for months. It makes perfect sense to hear from Mr. Johnston, since he has just tabled his report and we have questions, and a public inquiry needs to be launched, as it has been voted. Obviously, as long as there is an independent public inquiry, what more can we do?

The noose has been tightened to the maximum, and that has to stop. As some might say, enough is enough. We have to vote and be consistent with everything in our possession. Otherwise, what would be the argument against our experts, our constituents and the House of Commons? I would like to hear what my colleagues have to say. I think we can do a quick round and vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Ms. Gaudreau.

Seeing no hands, I will call the question on the subamendment by Mr. Barrett.

(Subamendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)

We will go back to the amendment of Mr. Fergus as amended.

Mrs. Roberts, I see that your hand is up.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Thank you.

I didn't get a chance to vote. My name wasn't called.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

The members who are signed in currently were the four members who were called.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

We will go back to Mr. Fergus's amendment as amended.

Seeing no hands, I am going to call the question.

(Amendment as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Now we will move to the main motion as amended.

I have next Mr. Fergus and then Mr. Berthold.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I no longer want to speak, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Okay.

Mr. Berthold.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I have a brief amendment. I move:

that paragraph (b) be deleted.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I'm sorry.

Mr. Berthold, do you want to clarify that?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

It will be simple, Madam Chair. I am a little tired of the NDP's attempt to help the Liberals get through this in such a disgraceful way. We saw Mr. Johnston defending the Prime Minister, and now we see the NDP defending the Liberals. The motion is clear and asks that a position be reiterated to the House that the NDP has already taken on a number of occasions. The NDP has reiterated several times today in the media that the opposition parties need to come together to call for an independent public inquiry within a specific time frame. I do not know for how many minutes the Liberals and the NDP have been trying to water down the motion and reduce its impact. I think this is at the expense of transparency and Canadian democracy.

As we mentioned, we would prefer to hear from Mr. Johnston first for three hours, as soon as possible. That way, we will be able to get answers about what led him to recommend that the leaders of each party keep this information private, secret, and the reasons that would justify this secrecy to Canadians. I think the intent is clear. The committee must first hear from Mr. Johnston. Then, in the coming weeks, we will have other opportunities to reiterate our support or not before the House, depending on the NDP's desire to have an independent public inquiry into the Beijing regime's interference in our elections.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Mr. Berthold.

Mr. Boulerice, you have the floor.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I would like to comment because I felt a little concerned by my Conservative colleague's last comments. While my colleague is saying that we do not want an independent public inquiry, he is proposing to delete paragraph (b) of the motion, in which we reiterate our call for an independent public inquiry. That is a square circle, a contradiction within a contradiction. It is quite funny.

On the contrary, the NDP has added something important to the debate, namely the fact that, after this important meeting, the party leaders will have had access to confidential documents and will be able to express themselves, just as Mr. Johnston and the Prime Minister were able to do. This puts the leader of the Conservative Party, the leader of the Bloc Québécois and the leader of the NDP on an equal footing with the Prime Minister and the special rapporteur, enabling them to have access to really important sensitive documents. Then they will be able to speak up and take action, in the same way as the special rapporteur and the Prime Minister. This is a step forward and a step in the right direction.

The NDP believes that this golden opportunity should not be blocked by a prerequisite that, in our opinion, was abusive, whereas, in the first sentence of paragraph (b), we reiterate that the committee wants to tell the House that we still want an independent public inquiry. It would be rather contradictory for the Conservative Party to want to delete a paragraph that reiterates our desire for an independent public inquiry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Mr. Boulerice.

Seeing no further debate, we will move to a vote on Mr. Berthold's amendment.

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)

We're now on the main motion as amended.

Is there any debate?

Mr. Fergus.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Madam Chair, four hours into the meeting, I am a little tired and I am getting a little lost in all this.

Could the clerk read the main motion as amended or distribute it to all members?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

We're going to need a few minutes to get that all together, so we're going to suspend for a few minutes to get that to everybody.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Fergus, you had asked us for the status of where we're at. Did you want the floor back or are you good with that?

He's good.

Seeing no other hands, I'm going to ask the clerk to call the vote.

Monsieur Berthold.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Chair, I just want to make sure that I have the floor back for a few minutes after the vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

You are not the only person who asked to have the floor back; someone asked before you.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

That's perfect.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mrs. Romanado, you're letting Mr. Berthold know that you told me that.... I will honour the conversation, but I need to call the question. That's how I can get to you after the question.

The clerk will call the question on Mr. Barrett's motion as amended a couple of times over.

(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 6; nays 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

I have Mrs. Romanado, followed by Mr. Berthold.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I move that this meeting now adjourn.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 6, nays 5)

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

The meeting is adjourned. See you Tuesday.