House of Commons Hansard #383 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was language.
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, every step of the way we take very seriously the responsibility of defending good jobs right across this country, while we stand up and protect the institutions that serve us all in this country. Those are the two things that are central tenets for this government and that we will always continue to do.
Of course, there are right now two ongoing court cases on this matter and it would be inappropriate for us to comment too much on that.
Andrew Scheer ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, the best way to respect the independence of Canada's judicial system is to not interfere with it.
This is a very simple yes or no question. This is not about speculation or about an ongoing investigation. This is a yes or no question. Was the Prime Minister aware of Canada's top prosecutor's decision when he had the meeting with the former attorney general, yes or no?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, this is a file that touches tens of thousands of Canadians right across the country, including 9,000 direct jobs, and communities right across the country. Of course we are going to be very careful about how we move forward in protecting those jobs, but we are also going to, at the same time, make sure that we are standing up for the independence of our judicial system and all the processes that keep our democratic institutions safe.
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, here is what we know. The director of public prosecutions formally rejected a remediation agreement with SNC-Lavalin on September 4. The Prime Minister met with the former justice minister two weeks later on September 17 to discuss the matter. The day after that meeting, SNC-Lavalin lobbyists met with no fewer than four ministers and senior officials. What a coincidence.
With a remediation agreement ruled out, why was that meeting between the Prime Minister and the former justice minister necessary? Can the Prime Minister explain the lobbying blitz that followed?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, as a government, we will consistently stand up for good jobs and find ways to create economic growth and good jobs for Canadians while making sure we respect the independence of our judicial system and the rule of law.
The member opposite seems unwilling to take my word for it, so I would like to share what the director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada said. Last week, she confirmed that prosecutors, in this and every other case, exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration—
Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Mr. Speaker, what we are trying to ascertain is whether there was political interference in a legal matter.
We have many questions but have been given few answers to date. What we do have are many versions of what happened. The Prime Minister gave not one, two or three versions, but five versions.
The former justice minister has not been able to give us her version because she is bound by client-solicitor privilege, which the Prime Minister refuses to waive. Members could not stop laughing yesterday when he stated with a straight face that the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, which is dominated by a Liberal majority, is non-partisan. It is obvious that only an independent inquiry will get to the bottom of this matter. When will they—
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, with respect to political considerations, I will repeat what the director of the Public Prosecution Service of Canada said last week. She confirmed that, in every case, prosecutors exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration.
Canada has an independent justice system and there will be due process. We will always defend jobs and always respect judicial independence.
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Mr. Speaker, what day is this? Oh, it is Wednesday. It is a new day, a new excuse, a new bombshell in the Gerry Butts-SNC scandal, and this one is a doozy.
It turns out that the Prime Minister met with the justice minister after they found out that the independent public prosecution would not give the free get-out-of-jail card to SNC. I wonder what happened in that meeting, because it would represent a major interference in the independence of Canada's justice system.
Therefore, will the Prime Minister give us a full airing, and agree to an independent inquiry where his staff will be forced to testify?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, unlike the member opposite, we will always stand up for jobs, always stand up for the Canadian economy, but we will do that in ways that respect judicial independence and the rule of law. If the member does not choose to take my word for it, let him to take it directly from the director of the Public Prosecution Service, who confirmed just last week that, in every case, prosecutors “exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration.”
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Fair enough; they do stand up for jobs, Mr. Speaker, the jobs of lobbyists. He is led around by the nose by lobbyists. The question is if he is willing to obstruct justice to help his lobbyist friends.
Oh, to live in the tawdry but very elite world of Gerry Butts and the Prime Minister.
Was it Gerry's idea to strong-arm the justice department to help their insider friends? No wonder he does not want Gerry Butts testifying at committee. Will the Prime Minister agree to allow Gerry Butts and his staff to testify under oath, so we can get to the bottom? By the way, is he willing to testify?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, once again, I have tremendous confidence in the members of the justice committee, who will be moving forward on the investigation of all sides; and indeed in the Ethics Commissioner, who has taken this matter under investigation.
At the same time, I want to, once again, thank Gerry Butts for his contributions to Canada. His letter of resignation speaks for itself. He continues to believe deeply in what this government, and this country, is doing to help everyone.
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
Order. There is far too much noise. I know members, of course, want to hear the questions and the answers, and ought to show respect for this institution.
The hon. member for Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies should remember that.
Andrew Scheer ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, we know that the former attorney general and Gerald Butts met at the Chateau Laurier on December 5, 2018, to discuss the SNC-Lavalin case.
When was the Prime Minister informed of that meeting?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, we take very seriously the responsibility of defending jobs, growing the economy and respecting the independence of our justice system. That is why I can very easily say that, yes, we have had many meetings with all cabinet members on many issues that are important to Canadians.
The work we need to do together is to manage things properly and deliver tangibly for Canadians across the country. That is what we will always do, while also respecting our institutions.
Andrew Scheer ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, we know that the Prime Minister told his caucus that any communication coming from Mr. Butts should be considered as coming from the Prime Minister himself.
Once again, when did the Prime Minister become aware of the December 5 meeting between Gerald Butts and the former attorney general?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I recognize perhaps that it is a legacy of the Harper years. The Conservatives do not seem to understand that a team that works together actually has lots of people having meetings about things that matter all the time. We continue to engage in a broad way that both protects and upholds jobs in this country and respects the independence of our system and its judiciary. That is something we expect from all members of cabinet and all my staff, and we work together to serve Canadians, day in and day out.
Andrew Scheer ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, there we are. First it was the former attorney general's fault, then it was the director of public prosecutions' fault, then it was The Globe and Mail's fault and then it was Scott Brison's fault. Now we know it was Stephen Harper's fault. That is why he did what he did in this scandal.
Nobody is buying what he is trying to sell.
Now, can the Prime Minister tell this House if at any point in time he ever expressed his support for a special deal for SNC-Lavalin to the former attorney general, yes or no?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, once again we see the Conservatives choosing to play political games with issues of deep importance. We remain focused, yes, on standing up for jobs and standing up for the independence of our judiciary in this country. This is something we are going to consistently do, and we will make no apologies for standing strong in our principles to both protect and promote jobs in this country and uphold the rule of law and the independence of our judicial system.
Andrew Scheer ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, again, that was not the question. This is key to this entire affair of allegations of interference in a criminal proceeding. The Prime Minister, through an omnibus bill, gave the top prosecutor the option of using a deferred prosecution agreement, and she ruled, in her independent manner, that SNC-Lavalin did not qualify.
At any point in time since that decision, has the Prime Minister expressed his support for this kind of deal for SNC-Lavalin, yes or no?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, the member opposite seems to be concerned about the independence of the director of the Public Prosecution Service. Let me speak directly to that by quoting her, who just last week confirmed that in every case prosecutors “exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration.” Canadians can know that, in this country, we continue to abide by the rule of law.
Andrew Scheer ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, nobody is questioning the director of public prosecutions exercising her authority. What we are questioning is whether the Prime Minister attempted to interfere in an ongoing criminal investigation.
However, that was not the question. The question was very simple. The top prosecutor of Canada ruled on September 4 that SNC-Lavalin did not qualify for this new kind of deal.
At any point in time since that decision was made, has the Prime Minister expressed his support for SNC-Lavalin getting a deal, yes or no?
Justin Trudeau LiberalPrime Minister
Mr. Speaker, I have been unequivocal over the fall, and I am unequivocal now, that we will always support Canadian jobs and the growth of our economy. We will always stand up to protect workers right across the country.
We will always do that in ways that respect the independence of our judiciary, the rule of law and the institutions that keep Canada one of the greatest democracies in the world.
Andrew Scheer ConservativeLeader of the Opposition
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister cannot have it both ways. He cannot hold up the independence of the office of the director of public prosecutions and, at the same time, interfere and attempt to get a reversal of a decision.
The decision on SNC-Lavalin was made on September 4. The Prime Minister had a meeting with the former attorney general on September 17. Gerald Butts had a meeting with the former attorney general on December 5.
Why would the Prime Minister have so many meetings with the former attorney general if it were not to try to reverse a decision that had already been made?