Evidence of meeting #22 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was gaspé.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:35 a.m.
An hon. member
I said that civil servants may...[Inaudible—Editor]
9:35 a.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
We're getting into debate. I'm just reminding him.
Thank you.
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I raised P3 precisely because Mr. Poilievre asked us for the source of funding.
I do want to remind my good friend in the Liberal Party that a lot of the rail passenger service reductions occurred under the Liberal government. Maybe that's one of the reasons why they didn't get a lot of rural seats: because a lot of the service being reduced is in fact in some of the remote communities. You don't want me to list them, but I can tell you that there's one in northern Ontario where the people still remember that they used to have that rail line, and they lost it under the Liberal government, the former Liberal government.
Thank you.
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
9:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
We'll have a recorded vote on the question. All in favour? Opposed?
(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
The motion is defeated. We'll now move to the second motion. I think everybody has a copy of it, but we'll make sure.
We are going to deal with Ms. Chow's motion, so I'll give Ms. Chow the floor.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will speak about the Toronto Port Authority, with which I have some experience. My colleagues from Quebec will talk about the Quebec Port Authority.
I noticed recently that Colin Watson has been reappointed to the Toronto Port Authority. Mr. Watson was subject to two investigations—one by Davies, Ward and Beck, which is a Bay Street law firm—because of a conflict of interest.
This law firm was, I believe, hired by the Toronto Port Authority and identified that he did have a conflict. It said that:In our opinion, Mr. Watson would be in a conflict of interest...in participating in the discussions of the Board relating to Porter, or in voting on decisions of the Board relating to Porter because doing so would provide him with an opportunity to further the private interests of one of his friends.
There, they are talking about Mr. Robert Deluce, the CEO of Porter Airlines. It continued, saying that:
Therefore, in our opinion, Mr. Watson is precluded...from participating in discussions of the Board relating to contracts or other business dealings between TPA and Porter and from voting on decisions of the Board relating to such matters.
He has acknowledged that he is a friend.
As some of you may know, Porter Airlines has a monopoly, a closed monopoly, because it has some of the lands of the Toronto Port Authority, and the port authority code of conduct is found in its letters patent. It reads in part that : A director or officer shall not allow his or her personal interests...to conflict with or to give rise to the appearance of a conflict with the duties and responsibilities of the director or officer or the interests of [TPA].
That refers to the Toronto Port Authority. It continues, stating that:
...public confidence and trust in the integrity and impartiality of the Authority may be equally compromised by the appearance of a conflict as by the existence of an actual conflict.... A director or officer who is in conflict...shall not participate in discussions or vote on any decision of, or provide recommendations to, the Board on any matter related to the conflict....
Then the commissioner, in 2009, wrote a report. The Conflict of interest and Ethics Commissioner noted:
According to...Mr. Watson, he had made it clear on several occasions that he was a “good friend” of Mr. Deluce and that he had mentioned sharing various social occasions, including golf, with Mr. Deluce.
This appointment I believe contravened the Canada Marine Act because it said that a mandatory requirement for the appointment of directors is that there be a “consultation” process with port users that should be followed. In this case I don't believe that has taken place. Number two, aside from one nominee from each of the federal, provincial, and municipal governments, the rest of the directors must be appointed as a result of that consultation.
The reason why I want to have this in front of us and to invite Mr. Colin Watson is to ask him precisely about the appearance of the conflict of interest and the lack of consultation with the users and the City of Toronto. I have specifically said that it should be on February 28 of this year. I think it's important that the appointees.... Under this committee's mandate, we do have the right to invite appointees to come before this committee so we can become familiar with such appointees.
Thank you.
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
I am in favour of this motion, but I would like to know one thing. Bernard Généreux was formerly the member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup. Clearly, I find it a bit interesting that this former MP was appointed to the board of directors for the Port of Quebec. Was he the government's candidate?
9:45 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
I don't think it's appropriate for there to be political meddling in this process, the way this motion suggests.... There are appointments for port authorities, airport authorities, and organizations of this type all across the country on a regular basis. If we transform this committee into a vetting process for every single one of those appointments, we'll never be able to study anything else.
We make all of our appointments based on merit and we are always accountable at election time to the people in the respective communities where those appointments are made. Frankly, I think we've done a pretty good job. We have very successful port and airport authorities right across this country.
I look at Ottawa, for example, where we've made appointments now for six years, in partnership with the city, and at what an amazing success story it is. The Ottawa International Airport was just recognized as I think the best airport in the range of two million to five million passenger visits per year. Obviously we have to give credit to the CEO, Paul Benoit, to the employees who commit their days and nights to running the operation there, and to the users. But at the same time, you can't deny that the board of directors, which is partially appointed by the federal government, has had some role in bringing about that success.
So we have a good record of choosing qualified people who oversee these authorities and run them successfully, and, I might add, in most cases on a not-for-loss basis, so at little to no cost to taxpayers.
I think to distract the committee from its important work in order to become a vetting house—or worse yet, a witch hunt—to bring honourable and qualified Canadians before this committee would be a terrible distraction.
Thank you.
9:45 a.m.
NDP
Jamie Nicholls NDP Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
Well, by continually mentioning “at little cost to taxpayers” and whatnot, I think the government is engaged in playing politics here as well. We as a committee can act as oversight for decisions that are made that we have serious questions about.
Now, it's my understanding that Monsieur Généreux was not the candidate chosen by the conseil d'administration for the port, but rather was selected by the minister. Is this correct...?
The citizens of Rivière-du-Loup have serious misgivings. There are things we would like to question Monsieur Généreux about to ensure that he is indeed the most qualified candidate for this position. The fact that the government has meddled in the decision of the conseil d'administration of the port by choosing their own candidate—
9:45 a.m.
An hon. member
That's how it works—
9:45 a.m.
NDP
Jamie Nicholls NDP Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
—and not under the advisement of the conseil d'administration, not working with the council that administers this—
9:45 a.m.
An hon. member
That's the law.
9:45 a.m.
NDP
Jamie Nicholls NDP Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC
I understand that it might be law. I understand that, but the fact is that the government should work with its partners to find the best candidate. We have serious misgivings about this. We'd like to ask questions of Monsieur Généreux. We think that in our capacity as members of this committee, we should provide oversight to certain decisions.
9:50 a.m.
Conservative
Mark Adler Conservative York Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair.
When I sit on the finance committee, I see the same thing: how NDP members come and make wild accusations, totally unfounded. They're just not doing their research.
Here's another case of the NDP not only not doing its research but now sinking to new lows. Mr. Watson was cleared over two years ago by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Mary Dawson, of any allegation of impropriety and conflict of interest. The head of the Toronto Port Authority, Mark McQueen, said that it was time to put this matter to rest and move on with advancing Toronto's economy.
Now the NDP comes forward, using an allegation that was made over two years ago, and tries to assassinate someone's character. Have they no respect for human decency? Have they no respect for a person's reputation in the business community, in his community, and within his family?
I think this is a new low for the NDP, and I'm really shocked, especially since it comes from a member who claims to have a lot of experience in this field. I'm just shocked and appalled. I cannot support this. It's an outrage.
9:50 a.m.
NDP
Isabelle Morin NDP Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Thank you, Chair.
We are talking about experience, and the members opposite are asking whether we are aware of this because we have questions about Mr. Généreux's qualifications, as he has been appointed to the board of directors for the Port of Quebec. However, his career has never been connected to the maritime sector; he was the general manager of a printing shop.
How could the government say that this is the most qualified individual? He is the CEO of a print shop located in La Pocatière, and he is being appointed to the board of the Port of Quebec. If he is truly the best person for the job, we would like to be able to draw that conclusion ourselves.
We are members of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. At present, someone has been appointed to represent the government on the board of directors of the Port of Quebec. My colleagues and I do not understand why that individual has been appointed, other than the fact that he is a former Conservative MP. Furthermore, he lives 150 km from the port.
Thank you.