Justice Committee on Nov. 7th, 2024

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley—Aldergrove, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Mr. Drouin, you can take that to the public accounts committee, I guess. If there's anything else for next time, I would certainly love to entertain a lot more on that, because I think it might be helpful to keep things a bit more in order and make things go a bit more quickly.

Thank you for that.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I look forward to Mr. Brock's support at public accounts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

I'm sure he will support you.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

I'll back you 100%, my friend.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Mr. Van Popta, go ahead, please.

[Tako Van Popta, Conservative, Langley—Aldergrove, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

To that point about reading documents or not, I was reading quotes from testimony. I thought it was important to get the words in, as the witnesses had testified in their own words. I was not reading from any other documents. I did read two paragraphs out of the ethics committee report, which I think was important to get on the record to frame what we're talking about today.

I want to just highlight what one other witness said to the committee. She actually had a name, Serena. I won't read it, but I will just summarize very quickly.

She was a young girl in elementary school, maybe middle school. At her new school, she had a boyfriend who put her under a lot of pressure to film herself undressing. She gave consent at the time. She wasn't old enough to give consent, but she did give consent—but not for what he did with it. For a few dollars, he sold it to a porn site. The story goes on how, for several years, she fought and fought for her dignity and her protection. She was an A student until this happened, and she almost failed going through high school. She transferred to a different school. By the time she got there, she thought she might be safe, but no: Everybody at the new school already knew what had happened. That was the nature of the Internet.

There's no protection for victims like her, and that is why this bill is so important. This bill would prohibit the posting and the commercialization without prior consent in writing from the person depicted in the videos. I think it is a good bill. I think that everybody should support it.

We know that there has been criticism of this bill from the Liberals. Once we get into the debate of the bill itself, I'm sure we'll hear more of that. They voted yes at second reading, intending to gut it; “serious reservations” is what they're saying they have. I believe what they want is a watered-down bill to come back to the House, one that they can vote for but that won't have any teeth. The last thing they want is for this bill to come back to the House unamended, because I believe they will vote against it, which politically is going to be very difficult for them to do.

The way I see it, there are three options.

Number one is that we get their 30-day extension, which we're saying is not necessary. The Liberals have mismanaged the legislative agenda, not only here but also in the House, and now they're trying to buy extra time. I'm saying that we could have had witnesses in the last couple of meetings already. We could certainly have them right now.

They can let the 60-day deadline pass, but then the bill will go back to the House unamended. They don't want that.

They can prorogue Parliament to get rid of this problem and some other problems that have been caused by their inability to manage the legislative agenda, both in committees and in the House.

There's a fourth option, and that's the one I would recommend, which is that the Prime Minister takes a walk over to the Governor General's mansion and asks for her to dissolve this Parliament so we can go ahead and have an election and let the people decide who is right.

With that, Madam Chair, I'm going to cede the floor. I will have more to say later on, but I know that some of my colleagues also want to speak.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Thank you very much, Mr. Van Popta.

I've taken MP Jivani's name off the list. He's not in the room. If he enters again, we can put it back on subsequently.

We will now go to MP Brock.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I think I will start my intervention by recapping some of the important points and areas that I've heard from my colleagues yesterday and today.

The most important point that I wish to reiterate is for what I trust to be thousands of Canadians who are following this and watching this particular committee. I'll give them advance notice that this committee will potentially sit until 11:30 this evening.

The important point that I wish to make—this is following up on my colleague Mr. Van Popta's earlier interventions—is that there is an overriding theme that is being developed here. It's not being propagated and established by any party other than the Liberal Party of Canada, supported by their coalition partners, the NDP.

If they truly cared about victims—I intend to go through some legislative history over my three-plus years as a parliamentarian that demonstrates the complete opposite of empathy towards victims in this country—they would not be engaging in this particular position that they are taking. This is nothing more than political gamesmanship. It is partisanship and, quite frankly, it's petty politics, which I find extremely disgusting.

As Mr. Van Popta pointed out, this particular bill reached our committee before we recessed this past summer, in June 2024. We returned to Parliament in mid-September, and committees resumed toward the end of September. While the justice committee was studying two important reports regarding the rise of both anti-Semitism and Islamophobia, Bill C-270 was always waiting in the wings. You, Madam Chair, would bring it up from time to time.

I'm also mindful of the fact that we had many meetings over the course of two-plus months that ended early. Some meetings didn't actually happen at all. I can't say with any degree of confidence that all the meetings that have been scheduled for the justice committee since we returned this past fall have been utilized effectively in terms of utilizing all the resources that we had available to us. Here we are now, with a looming deadline that we were all made aware of weeks ago.

Not to put too fine a point on it, Madam Chair, but the Conservative Party of Canada submitted a significant list of witnesses—subject matter experts in this particular area. That was last Friday. In that interim, we had a meeting on Monday. We had a meeting yesterday. We're meeting today. Perhaps we're meeting again next week, but there is absolutely no sense, no urgency and no direction from this committee that this committee is prioritizing the hearing of witnesses.

When I listen to some Liberal members—

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

I have a point of order, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Yes, I have two on the line with points of order, so please proceed.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just have a correction. Mr. Brock was the one who denied unanimous consent to have us hear witnesses yesterday, starting with Mr. Viersen, so I hope he corrects that in his lengthy commentary that's about to follow about us being the ones blocking things, since he denied unanimous consent.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Thank you.

I will now hear MP Maloney.

[James Maloney, Liberal, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I was going to make the same point as Mr. Bittle, but I will add to it.

It's inaccurate to say that there's been no sense of urgency on the part of the Liberal members of this committee. We've been trying to move this bill forward on the agenda for some months. If there's any lack of urgency, it's on the other side. Now there's total obstruction, because they're just refusing to proceed because they do not want Mr. Viersen to speak at this committee.

Mr. Van Popta addressed the issue of having an election, which raises the question, are they going to hide Mr. Viersen and prevent him from running in that election, whenever it may take place?

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

I wish to speak on that point of order, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Mr. Lawrence.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Inaccuracies are not a point of order. They are a point of debate, because if they were, in fact, a point of order, I would be constantly raising points of order whenever a Liberal spoke. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

On those points, I think it's a matter of factual information. A number of times, it's incumbent on me as the chair, with the help of the clerk, to ensure that members have the accurate dates of when things have happened and how they happened. If I need to, over the course of the testimony, repeat them, I will do that, to make sure everybody understands the dates.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Chair, I have a point of order. Could you please provide me with the rule on that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

I'm sorry, Mr. Lawrence?

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

That the chair has the obligation to correct inaccuracies, could you please provide me with a rule on that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Absolutely. The chair has to keep order and decorum and ensure, with the clerk's help and the analysts' help, as may be, that the information that stems out of sending notices of meetings and asking for witnesses and whatnot...that the committee members have that information.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

I understand that order and decorum are completely necessary, but it does not say anything nor did you quote anything with respect to inaccuracies or perceived inaccuracies.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

Certainly. Let's suspend for a few minutes. I'm happy to do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Lena Metlege Diab]

We're back.

I will simply say, for the members who are here with us on this committee, that they are very well aware that the members were consulted back in the fall as to the agenda and as to what we study next and what we do. Certainly the chair was at the whim of the committee and the members who were either on the subcommittee or on the committee.

Having said that, I'm going to ask Mr. Brock to continue with his intervention.