Evidence of meeting #4 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was transaction.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Minister, I'm going to ask a third time: When did you find out about this transaction? What was the date?
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Mr. Fast, as I said to you, as an experienced minister, that transaction was subject.... As you know, I'm trying to be as fair and transparent with you as I can be under the act—
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
I'm trying to be as transparent as I can be with you and Canadians. What I can tell you is that under the act, as you know—
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Gentlemen, if I may intervene....
Let the minister finish answering, and then, Mr. Fast, you can ask....
I'll give the floor to Mr. Fast to ask his question.
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I hope this isn't clawing away at my time. We can't afford to have the minister not answer questions but waste the time of the committee. I am here with a serious effort to get to the bottom of this transaction.
I will move on to my next question, because the minister failed to answer that one.
Minister, did you receive a briefing from your officials on the transaction?
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
As I said, Mr. Fast, as you're very aware, there are a number of confidentiality requirements under the act, which I'm not at liberty to expand...but what I can say to you and all Canadians is that this transaction, because it involves a critical mineral, was reviewed for national security and was subject to enhanced scrutiny under the guidelines that I published last March.
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
As I said, again, you are familiar, because you're very experienced as a minister, that I'm not at liberty—
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
—is that the transaction was subject to a national security review.
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Okay. I'll move on.
Did you apply the enhanced scrutiny that your guidelines called for?
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
Absolutely, Mr. Fast. There are not two national security processes. There's only one national security process, which is a multistep process that involves, from day one, national security. I would refer you to the act. Under the act, as minister, the power to investigate, to compel the submission of documents and answering questions, starts from day one. So—
5:45 p.m.
Liberal
François-Philippe Champagne Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
—I'm not understanding what you're trying to get at, because what I'm saying is that national security is a multistep process that starts from day one.
5:45 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Minister, my question is this: Did you apply the enhanced security review that you yourself introduced with a new set of guidelines, yes or no?