Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
It was an honour and a pleasure to be here at this meeting today. I learned a lot, but I unfortunately feel it wasn't enough.
Today we heard from Mr. Butts. The Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights agreed to convene during a parliamentary break week to hear Mr. Butts' testimony. However, we've just learned that an amendment will be introduced to bring us back just before the parliamentary session. In other words, we are choosing which witnesses we're going to hear before the committee and when we're going to hear them. I find that entirely unacceptable.
I remember Ms. Wilson-Raybould's testimony very clearly. She said on several occasions that she had experienced sustained pressure and veiled threats. I listened carefully to today's testimony. The witnesses said they weren't threats but merely requests for outside opinions. So there are two completely different perceptions here.
In a situation of conflict, one very rarely asks the person who made veiled threats to another person to criticize himself. Then he'll say he was making threats. In actual interpersonal relations, we should ask the person who was put under inappropriate pressure what actually happened. We should believe that person's perception of the situation and not that of the people who continually harassed her or who constantly asked her to be accountable for the way she managed something, whether it was inappropriate or not. I think we should believe the person who says she was put under inappropriate pressure.
Today we heard Mr. Butts say that Ms. Wilson-Raybould's demotion had absolutely nothing to do with the SNC-Lavalin affair. However, that's not what we understand from everything that has happened. Unfortunately, we were unable to hear Ms. Wilson-Raybould discuss that same situation because she wasn't authorized to talk about it. It's unacceptable to allow Mr. Butts tell us today that the demotion of the former Minister of Justice and the Attorney General had nothing to do with the SNC-Lavalin affair without letting Ms. Wilson-Raybould come and tell us whether she in fact perceived it as being directly related to that affair.
In her testimony, Ms. Wilson-Raybould frequently mentioned veiled threats. However, what is the biggest threat for a cabinet member if not the threat of losing her current position and being demoted? If we look solely at the facts, we can see that Ms. Wilson-Raybould lost her position. The veiled threats were acted upon.
It's important to hear Ms. Wilson-Raybould, and it's important to hear her as soon as possible instead of relying on the Liberals political program to determine the when, who, how and why. We owe it to Canadians to shed light on this matter as quickly as possible. We owe it to Canadians to learn the entire truth and to hear all the witnesses as soon as possible.