Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Dec. 5th, 2024

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Jamie Schmale]

Okay, I think we got that.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

On the same point of order, Chair—

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Let's be respectful.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Jamie Schmale]

I think we're good.

Let's go to Mr. Carr and then Mr. Genuis.

Mr. Carr, go ahead.

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I think Mr. Drouin covered it. For the sake of our interpreters, particularly given that we have three different languages being interpreted here today, I think it's for the benefit of the committee that all members involved in the discussion be mindful of that.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Jamie Schmale]

Okay.

Mr. Genuis, go ahead.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I'll just speak briefly on the point of order.

The rules are not equal time between the questioner and the witnesses.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Jamie Schmale]

That is correct. However, given the circumstances—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

The rules are that the member controls the time. That needs to be understood.

Second, let's be clear that Mr. Boissonnault is not here because he chose to come. He is here because there was a House order requiring him to be here for two hours. A House order requiring him to be here was an unprecedented move. He has to be here for two hours, answering two hours' worth of questions, and these Liberal disruptions are just extending the amount of time we're going to be here.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Jamie Schmale]

Yes, you are correct, Mr. Genuis; that is the rule. I allowed a bit of latitude in terms of the length of time because, in fact, we do have three interpretations going on at the same time. However, I do understand that witnesses do try to stretch things out and that members do have the ability to take the floor back.

Let's go back to Mr. Cooper.

I even forget what question you asked, to be honest with you.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Chair, I asked Mr. Boissonnault if he had commenced legal action. He did not answer in the affirmative. I then asked Mr. Boissonnault if he had taken any legal steps whatsoever against Mr. Anderson. He changed the subject and didn't answer in the affirmative.

I would put it to him that he hasn't pursued legal action after five or six months because the brass tacks of a court proceeding would expose him as the other Randy, the Randy who violated the Conflict of Interest Act and had an active involvement in a shady, pandemic-profiteering PPE company implicated in fraud.

Mr. Boissonnault, your credibility as a witness is very much in doubt. You came before the ethics committee on June 4, and you left the committee with the distinct impression that you had not been in contact with Stephen Anderson, when that wasn't the case.

MP Brock put to you, “Did you call Mr. Anderson?” You said, “No. Why would I call Mr. Anderson? I would not. No.” You said that. Then, after new text messages were revealed connecting Randy in Vancouver to the time you were in Vancouver, suddenly you changed your story and said that you had actually spoken with Anderson and had a text message exchange with Anderson.

If you have nothing to hide, if you're not the Randy involved in the shakedown, why did you materially leave out that relevant fact?

[Randy Boissonnault, Liberal, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Mr. Cooper, let's go back to your earlier question. I stepped away from cabinet to deal with these issues. I have met with lawyers, and we are working on legal action against Mr. Anderson right now. Let's put that on the record.

The Ethics Commissioner, not once but twice, has indicated that I'm not the person to whom you're referring in—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

I asked you, Mr. Boissonnault, why it is that you materially omitted that fact, and—

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

—I put it to you....

I'm going to ask you another question—

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

—as Mr. Carr runs interference to protect you because you're a liar.

[An hon. member]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Easy....

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Chair—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Jamie Schmale]

The floor is Mr. Carr's.

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

—there are three things here. The first is that Mr. Cooper, a moment ago, referred to Mr. Boissonnault as a fraud. I'm not sure that that's within the scope of standing order provisions. Second, he just repeated the word “liar”, which you've already ruled on today, Mr. Chair. The third thing, Mr. Chair, is that you made a ruling earlier in this meeting that it's equal time for questions and answers.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Jamie Schmale]

That's correct, but I—

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

With regard to the point of Mr. Genuis, which is fair, regardless of whether or not the standing order provides a provision for that or not, you ruled on that, Mr. Chair, so we would have to come back to that commentary that you made earlier in the meeting.

Nonetheless, I hope, Mr. Chair, that you will advise Mr. Cooper to be mindful of language that he's using that you have already ruled to be out of the scope of order here.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Withdraw it.

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Quite frankly, it is really not well placed for parliamentarians.

Thank you.