Justice Committee on Feb. 21st, 2019

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Can you tell me, Mr. Lametti, whether or not that issue had been shared with you prior to becoming the Minister of Justice and Attorney General?

[David Lametti]

I've already said that.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Can you answer it again for me, please?

[David Lametti]

I did not. I had a general knowledge. I believe you asked me this in the House of Commons. I had a general knowledge of the issue, as a Montreal MP.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

This is the last question for you.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Mr. Lametti, the Globe and Mail is reporting that there's a cabinet meeting. I'm not going to ask you about the contents of the cabinet meeting. It's more of a hypothetical question. Pretend you're the Attorney General, as you are. You're sitting in a cabinet meeting where a former attorney general alleges that there was improper influence on her at that time.

As the current Attorney General, do you have an obligation to resign?

[David Lametti]

I am going to rely on cabinet confidence—

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

I'm not asking about what happened, but in order to uphold the justice in the country, do you not have an obligation to resign?

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

The time is up, Ms. Raitt.

I'll give Mr. Lametti a chance to answer the question and then we'll move to the next questioner.

[David Lametti]

I can't answer that question on the basis of cabinet confidentiality.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Khalid.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses.

Thank you for your participation, Ms. Drouin.

I know we've talked a lot about the Shawcross doctrine. I am hoping we can, at the very least, help Canadians understand in layman's terms what the Shawcross standard is. Is it a complicated one?

When we talk about the interactions, and specifically about pressure, are we talking about an objective standard or are we talking about a subjective standard?

Madam Drouin, can you answer that for me, please?

[Nathalie Drouin]

As the minister said, it is a relatively difficult question.

I would like to draw the attention of this committee to a case that happened in 2006 and 2008 in the U.K. It was a very serious case where the director of a serious fraud case was responsible for both the investigation and the prosecution. It was about military procurement. During the investigation, the director was contacted by a country and also by the Prime Minister, saying that if the Attorney General continued the investigation and the prosecution, blood could be on the street. Finally, the director decided to stop the investigation and not to lay charges.

That case created a judicial review and it went up to the House of Lords. The House of Lords did say that this very difficult conversation didn't break the rule of law.

That, I think, really illustrates how serious the conversation can be.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Just to clarify, it did not break the rule of law.

[Nathalie Drouin]

It did not.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much for that clarification, Madam.

Thank you, Mr. Lametti, for being here today. It's really great.

I understand that you've actually taught some of our colleagues in the field of law.

We've had a lot of conversations about ethics, about character and about the nature of our conduct as members of Parliament, as cabinet ministers, and even as prime minister.

Can you explain to us and to Canadians what education or training you have that qualifies you to uphold the ethical obligations of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada?

[David Lametti]

Thank you for that question.

I have had good fortune. My parents came to this country with no formal education and all they wanted for their children to get was a formal education. It enabled me to get the highest quality legal education in Canada and abroad, through scholarships and bursaries. I have lived my life in a law faculty.

[Michael Cooper]

How is this relevant, Mr. Chair?

[David Lametti]

I have had mentors such as Justice Peter Cory of the Supreme Court of Canada and Professor Rod Macdonald, who had the highest ethical standards. We lived and taught professional ethics. We lived and taught ethics as lawyers on a day-to-day basis.

I am a member of two bars: Ontario and Quebec. I have maintained my ethical obligations in those bars, so I think I am highly qualified to perform this role.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Mr. Chair, if we had Mr. Lametti’s CV, we could move on to a more relevant topic, could we not?

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

All of the members of the committee have the right to ask questions during their allotted time. This is related to the witness’s background; if they want to ask those questions, they can do so.

Monsieur Lametti, try to wrap that one up as soon as you can, please.

[David Lametti]

I actually had finished, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Anthony Housefather]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Khalid, you have two minutes and 20 seconds.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you.

I will reiterate that the relevance of my question is that we've had a lot of conversations in our Parliament and among Canadians about what ethics and standards we govern ourselves with as Canadians. How do we govern ourselves and to what standards do we hold ourselves?

I would like to hear from the minister what qualifications and training he has that qualify him to be in such a high position and to make these very important decisions that Canadians expect him to make in the right manner.

Mr. Lametti, can you please answer the question?

[David Lametti]

Let me answer this another way.

As a teacher, as a mentor and as a scholar, I have conducted my life to the highest ethical standards. I have studied the law. I have lived the law, if you will. I have debated the law. I have debated what is right and wrong in the context of one of Canada's and the world's greatest law faculties. That is a privilege that I undertook quite seriously.

Let me add that one of the reasons I got into politics is that the previous government's attacks on the Supreme Court—