Evidence of meeting #138 for Justice and Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was decision.
A video is available from Parliament.
2:55 p.m.
Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet, Privy Council Office
I respectfully disagree.
I never raised partisan considerations at any time. I reminded her repeatedly that she was the final decision-maker. I did not attempt to influence her decision. I was giving her relevant context about public interest considerations for a decision that was hers to take. I never suggested consequences for her.
March 6th, 2019 / 2:55 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses.
Ms. Drouin, according to the former attorney general, you refused to accept the section 13 note from her. You have confirmed that as well.
The former attorney general said she had been concerned, because it's not appropriate for public servants to get involved in political discussions.
Madame, why did you refuse the section 13 note?
2:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
As I said in my opening remarks, it is not my role to evaluate and to have access to specific evidence on specific prosecution cases. As I said, it was during that conversation with her staff—when we discussed the importance of her being convinced that she had received all the necessary information to make the decision—that some extract of the section 13 letter was read to me. Because it is not my role, I didn't ask, and I didn't want to review the letter.
2:55 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Would receiving the section 13 note have been in violation of your role as the deputy justice minister and deputy attorney general?
2:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
No, I won't say it's in violation, but it's not part of my role.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Was your refusing the note akin to your getting involved in political discussions, as the former attorney general has said?
3 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
I have trouble sometimes when we use the words “political” or “partisan” in...using the same thing. As I said, I had a conversation with some colleagues. I responded to a lot of questions about my role; the role of the DPP; the authorities of the minister under the act; what she can do; what she cannot do; why taking a decision in a prosecution is not the same thing, as an AG, as taking a decision in a civil matter, for example; and the fact that she wears a quasi-judicial or judicial hat when she takes a decision. That was the type of conversation I had with my colleagues.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Thank you.
Do you believe that the former attorney general tried to exclude you from discussions on this specific issue because she disagreed with your views?
3 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
No, I didn't feel that she excluded me for that.
The former minister has a strength of character. She possesses a strength of character and integrity. She upholds her independence. She has a very solid view of her independence, and I think this is why she was not comfortable to enter into discussions that can interfere with the decision she had to take.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Thank you.
That leads perfectly into my next question. The former attorney general had said that she raised concerns with you about the appropriateness of communication that she was receiving from outside the department, and that she raised concerns about some of the options that you had been suggesting. What does she mean by this and which options were you suggesting that she felt concerned about?
3 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
First, as I said in my opening remarks, she told me that she was not comfortable and she didn't appreciate her conversation, first, with the Prime Minister. Then she asked me not to talk anymore about the SNC-Lavalin case and also the authorities under the DPP. I think this is what she means, that she talked to me several times about the fact that she didn't want to have those conversations.
What was the other part of your question? Sorry.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
We were talking about which options, what were they, that you were suggesting that she felt concerned about.
3 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
As I said previously, we didn't recommend any specific options. We just presented all the options she had in front of her. She didn't want to exercise any of those options, and that was her decision.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
There were a lot of options before the former attorney general. Do you think and do you believe that she had an open mind to those options that were in front of her?
3 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
In all my discussions on any files with the minister, she was always open to receive information, to seek advice, and then it was for her to take decisions.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
We understand that from September 4 to September 16 or 17 was when the majority of the options were put in front of her. We had those discussions. For a majority of that time period, she was not physically in the country. Do you think that is a reasonable time frame for her to have come to the final decision that she came to?
3 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
I think it's not for me to assess, as I said. She did say in her testimony that she did her due diligence. I was not part of that due diligence exercise. As I said, in order to make a decision, yes, she had to take into account the context, but she also had to take into account the evidence and the information she got from the DPP.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
The evidence and the information that is ever-evolving in a live case like this one?
3 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
It's the role of any public prosecutor to continuously assess the public interest on whether or not to continue a specific case. Of course, this continuum, if I may say...obligation, depends on new facts or new evidence that can be submitted to the prosecutor.
3 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Ms. Drouin, did the former attorney general ever share with you her view on remediation agreements in principle? If so, what was it?
3:05 p.m.
Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Department of Justice
The remediation agreement was developed, and it has been discussed in this country for many years. We did a consultation in the fall of 2017. We received many many submissions—I'm sorry, I don't have the specific numbers. We issued a document to summarize all the submissions we received.
The remediation agreement—I think we have said this many times—is another tool in the enforcement tool box, in particular regarding financial crimes or white-collar crimes. Again, it's not because you have a tool in the tool box that the tool is available for any task.
3:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Thank you very much.
We'll now move to the second round of questioning, which is six minutes to the Liberals, six to the Conservatives, six to the Liberals, five to the Conservatives and three to the NDP.
Mr. Rankin.
3:05 p.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
Just on a point of order, is this going to be the last round, or are we going to be able to ask these witnesses to continue?