Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Dec. 11th, 2023

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Upon becoming elected, the path you chose was a bit different from that of other members seeking to become chair occupants. Normally, someone might try to shed some of that partisanship in their recent past in order to establish the credentials or the impression of being a less partisan or non-partisan member of Parliament in order to present as a candidate for Speaker and in order to assure members of other parties that they could, in fact, be non-partisan. For example, in my case, I was Assistant Deputy Speaker and then Deputy Speaker. Other Speakers who have been elected to hold that role have spent time as committee chairs, often in roles that are less partisan than what goes on in the House.

Upon your election in 2015, you were.... Were you immediately nominated as a parliamentary secretary right after 2015, or was there some...?

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

Through you, Madam Chair, aside from your case and, perhaps, Mr. Rota's case, actually, I think most Speakers who were elected into the role, going back as far as Mr. Fraser, had a similar path as I had in the sense that they hadn't been an assistant Speaker or a Deputy Speaker before they assumed the role.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Right, but there are other ways to establish non-partisan credentials, such as committee chairmanships or at least taking a bit of a step back from the cut and thrust of the hyperpartisan roles that exist in the chamber.

I'm just pointing out that you held one of those positions. You were a parliamentary secretary right after the 2015 election.

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

Through you, Madam Chair, I was nominated parliamentary secretary after getting elected for the first time in 2015. I was then a member of the committee—not a parliamentary secretary, but a member of the finance committee—for two years. Just before the 2019 election, I was reappointed as a parliamentary secretary.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

That was parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister.

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

At that time, it wasn't parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister. It was parliamentary secretary to the President of the Treasury Board and the minister responsible for digital government.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Okay. How long were you parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister?

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

I believe it was from 2020 to this autumn.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

You say that a family friend of Mr. Fraser contacted you. It wasn't Mr. Fraser himself. It was a member of his family.

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

No, it wasn't Mr. Fraser himself. It was a member of his family who contacted my office. It wasn't Mr. Fraser, because it was supposed to be a surprise video at a private event.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Do you have any copies of correspondence that you could provide to the committee?

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

I'm more than happy to provide this committee with all correspondence...a phone record of a request that came into the office.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

In your opening remarks, you referenced your own comments about being an arbiter in the chamber.

I'm just asking you to ask yourself this: If you were involved in a situation that needed an arbitrator and you saw the arbitrator at an event with the person on the other side of the table.... Maybe we could imagine a union negotiation with management or some type of dispute between two parties. If you saw the arbitrator—the person whose hands your case was in—at an event with your opposing counsel or with your opposing partner in that situation, would you want that arbitrator to continue to hear your case and to make that decision? After seeing he or she in their full arbitrator's uniform—or at least with clear signals of that's who that person was at that time—saying nice things or being involved in any way with the person on the other side of the table, would you want that person to hear your case?

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

Madam Chair, am I permitted to respond?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Sure.

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

Madam Chair, I thank the honourable member for that question.

This has been something that has actually been a bit of an aha moment for me. The aha moment came in discussion with a member of the opposition when I realized that by talking about my past.... I thought it was a value-free statement. I was just recounting the things that I did, such as the questions that Mr. Scheer just asked me. The aha moment came in seeing that people don't see that. When I talk about my past, it's not a value-free statement. They see it, almost, as a way of making a statement today about my political partiality, and that was not my intention. I thought I was just talking about the post and the roles that I held in the past and the context in which things were made.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Lauzon, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much for being with us this morning, Mr. Fergus.

I'd like to talk to you about your role, your adjustment and the big learning curve facing you when you become Speaker of the House of Commons.

You left your seat as an MP and took up your duties as the Speaker from one day to the next. We understand perfectly well that you had some experience with the Standing Orders of the House, but tell me about that sharp learning curve. You had to put a team in place. You had to direct the entire team of clerks with whom you work directly. I imagine you had to field a lot of requests from all directions. And you made a video in the midst of it all.

Tell me about the learning curve that makes for a lot of work at the start of a Speaker's mandate. Tell me about your experience after two months in the chair.

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

Thank you for your question, Mr. Lauzon.

I can tell you that the learning period was mind-blowing. You go directly from a member's seat to the Speaker's chair. To be honest, in my mind, I wondered whether I could take just a one-week break to have all the briefing and training sessions before I began presiding over the House. However, it all went so quickly, in three days.

You're right. I had to assemble a team. Fortunately, some people from my predecessor's team had decided to stay on, but others unfortunately left. I had to hire people to round out the team, and I had to attend briefing sessions in order to understand all the aspects of the Speaker's role.

As you know, the Speaker is both the person who presides over the House of Commons and someone who occupies a diplomatic role that is fifth in the order of precedence in Canada, in addition to being an administrator.

The House of Commons has 2,800 employees, and you have to learn who they are, from our interpreters to the people who prepare for meetings, provide IT services, are responsible for security, provide transportation, prepare our meals and so on. Learning who all those employees are is a big adjustment.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Fergus.

As we all know, human beings aren't perfect. We all make mistakes, and we will continue to do so. The only people who don't make mistakes are those who don't dare to try. You dared. However, you admitted your mistake and made a public apology. I also thank you for the apology you made today.

I also want to give you an opportunity to tell us about the new process that you're developing and that you mentioned in your remarks. I'd like you to tell us more about how we can improve communications in future so we can remedy a situation such as this one. You have at least a minute to describe how that process will be put in place.

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

Thank you for your question, Mr. Lauzon.

Even before this situation occurred, we were working on establishing a process to ensure that all received invitations would be evaluated based on a new evaluation grid. We would thus be able to determine, for example, whether we should take part in a given exercise or whether we were running the risk of disappointing expectations that people might have of the Speaker of the House.

We will also submit that evaluation grid to the office clerks, who will evaluate it and decide whether they approve of it. The clerks definitely have a lot of experience in determining what has been done in the past. We'll thus be able to decide for each communication effort that we make, whether it's appropriate or not. It will be completely clear.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

We're all familiar with your past, Mr. Fergus. It's a very political past, characterized by a significant commitment to community and various organizations.

In future, will you take your past into consideration and make good decisions? Will you set aside your past political experience so you can serve your term as Speaker of the House?

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

I believe and maintain that all the decisions I have made to date demonstrate my impartiality. Where I need to make a greater effort is in my involvement in activities outside the House of Commons. I have good judgment in certain respects, but I never thought it would be problematic to discuss my political past. I believe my past is no more political than that of all the members here, most of whom have political experience within their own party. I think that—