Public Safety Committee on Oct. 31st, 2022

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

So that call never happened.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

—ever offered any kind of an apology, because, quite frankly, none was required.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

To confirm, then, she was not telling the truth. She was not telling the truth on the audio recording. You never called her after.... You never spoke to her on April 28. You never spoke to her on that day.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I have no recollection at all of ever having a conversation with her on that date or about that issue.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Did she ever make any apologies to you at any time during this saga in April 2020?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

No.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

She never made a single apology to you.

In the audio recording, she said that would have been her fourth apology to you.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

She did not apologize.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

She's never apologized to you. So the commissioner really was telling a long tale in this audio recording.

Are you not concerned that the head of our RCMP is saying that many mistruths about you and your chief of staff, on MCC testimony, in this committee, and to her subordinates as she's.... You have no concern that she was making that all up.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

I can only come before this committee and tell the facts, which is the truth. She was not directed by me. The commissioner has not apologized to me. It wasn't necessary for her to apologize to me. She did not do or fail to do anything that I asked her, because I hadn't asked her to do that.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

I will just conclude, Mr. Chair, with my final 10 seconds.

Again, Minister, we're not asking about direction; we're asking you about political interference. Any request from your office would have been pressure. That would have been political interference into the worst mass-killing criminal investigation in Canadian history.

On the record, you've denied all of the words that she said to be true, and yet you have not fired her. I find that shocking.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Learn to live with the shock, Ms. Dancho. The reality is that the commissioner was not directed. She's been forthright and truthful in her testimony that there was no interference and that she received no direction from me or any member of this government.

That's, in fact, the truth.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Ms. Dancho.

Thank you, Minister.

We will go now to Mr. Sorbara.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here today. It's always great to be in your company, Minister.

I just wanted to put something on record with regard to July 25 and whether inquiries or asking for information is interference. I believe Commissioner Lucki stated—and I just want to make sure I have this correct from my notes—that, quote:

Keeping the government informed through timely and accurate information sharing is not interference. It's standard procedure, and these situational updates are provided without compromising the operational integrity of an investigation.

Those are the commissioner's words and—

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

The commissioner is absolutely correct. In fact, we receive very regular briefings on matters of law enforcement, of national security intelligence. We are frequently briefed and provided with information on their responsibilities.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

That would be standard practice of whichever government is in power.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Yes, and in fact, I've been involved in similar briefings, sitting on the other side of the table with previous governments.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Absolutely, and that would be also at the provincial level, say, or any other level of jurisdiction.

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

That's correct, sir.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

Moving on from that, I think it's very important to put that on the record, because we want to be able to separate fact from fiction.

Minister, given your long and extensive professional background, can you speak more, further, about police operational independence and why it's so important?

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

As I've said many times in the House, Mr. Sorbara, I think it's the principle that underpins the rule of law. In our Canadian criminal justice system, we have always respected the independence of the police. They can never be subject to political interference.

I'll just give you an example that I cited today in the House. Two years ago, a member from the Conservative caucus rose in the House and demanded to know why the government hadn't released information on search warrants and production orders and even a closed warrant. I had to explain to him at that time that it is never the responsibility or the authority of the government to make decisions with respect to the release of that information. It is solely the purview of the police.

Throughout my career as a police officer, I've dealt with a number of sensitive national security matters and serious criminal matters as well, and briefing government is a very different thing, if I may, from receiving direction from the government. There have been a number of occasions in the past where perhaps a politician, not understanding that principle very clearly, made an attempt to recommend a certain course of action, but I think it is a principle always vigorously defended, and now well understood, that there are no circumstances in which there should be a political interference in operational or investigative decisions of the RCMP. It's an allegation made in the past, one we've learned from.

If I may, I would also cite Justice Linden's public inquiry into Ipperwash. I think there was a very clear articulation of where that line is and how it must never be crossed.

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Of course, and if I can follow up in my remaining time with the deputy minister, could you further elaborate on how Public Safety Canada works in conjunction or collaboration with the RCMP as an independent agency, especially for folks out there who may not be versed in terms of how agencies co-operate and how government works with an agency such as the RCMP?

[Shawn Tupper, Deputy Minister, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Ten days on the job.... I'll try to measure that out. But 38 years of public service....

Within a portfolio like the one that I now lead, I will work closely with all the heads of those agencies in the development of advice for the government. That would be a key part of my responsibilities: to engage with, in the instance of the RCMP, the commissioner, to make sure that as we are engaged in the development of advice that it would include the expertise that can be offered by any of the portfolio agencies in the formulation of that advice.

It would be a regular thing. Indeed, I have plans to meet regularly with all the heads of the agencies to ensure that we're pulling together the best advice for the government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ron McKinnon]

Thank you, Mr. Sorbara.

Mr. Chiang, can you get in a question for one minute?

[Paul Chiang, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and my apologies for not chiming in earlier.

Minister Blair, you have made it clear that you firmly believe in the operational independence of law enforcement in Canada. As a police officer for 39 years and chief of police for those last 10 years, could you elaborate on your perspective surrounding operational independence again? Why is it so important that elected officials can never influence the action of independent non-partisan public servants?