House of Commons Hansard #387 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was inmates.

Topics

JusticeOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, Canadians want to know the truth about the SNC-Lavalin case.

However, yesterday, the Prime Minister and the Liberal members refused the request for the Prime Minister to testify before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

Will he answer a simple question? Did anyone in the PMO or any of the ministers close to him assure SNC-Lavalin that there would not be a criminal trial, yes or no?

JusticeOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, they will continue to speculate, but we, on this side of the House, are interested in the facts.

The leader of the Conservative Party met with the company, as did the leader of the NDP. The Conservative deputy leader said in committee that she did not want to give the impression or go on the record as saying that there was anything wrong with meeting with SNC-Lavalin.

We, on this side of the House, respect the work of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We respect the work of all committees. That is exactly why we increased resources to committees. We will not take the Conservative approach.

JusticeOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Conservative

Alain Rayes Conservative Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, I asked a very simple and perfectly legitimate question. Did a cabinet minister, the Prime Minister's Office or anyone from the Prime Minister's inner circle tell SNC-Lavalin that it could avoid a criminal trial for the matter we are now all aware of that was brought to light over three weeks ago?

Why is the Prime Minister refusing to explain his actions to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights?

JusticeOral Questions

2:20 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives have no respect for committees. Those of us on this side of the House know that members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights have called witnesses to appear. The witnesses are appearing and answering questions from members on both sides.

We know this matter is currently before the Commissioner of Ethics and the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. We on this side of the House respect the work of the commissioner and the committee. Clearly the Conservatives do not.

JusticeOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Mr. Speaker, in 2006, SNC-Lavalin illegally donated nearly $110,000 to the Liberal Party of Canada and its associations. Today, SNC-Lavalin needs help because it is in big trouble.

The machinery was then set in motion. The company had more than 50 meetings with the government. Why?

Over those two years, the company had 14 meetings with the Prime Minister's Office, or one meeting every two months. Why?

The fact that the former justice minister will appear before the committee is something, and I look forward to hearing what she has to say. However, I would like to know why there were so many meetings with lobbyists.

JusticeOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, once again, the leader of the NDP met with SNC-Lavalin representatives. The leader of the Conservatives met with them also. The leaders of both parties met with them. Everyone knows this, and the leaders are not hiding it.

We know that the members of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights are doing their job. We, on this side of the House, firmly believe that they will do their job and ask questions, and that the witnesses will be able to respond.

JusticeOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Guy Caron NDP Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC

Mr. Speaker, there is a world of difference between one meeting and 50 meetings.

Here is what we know. The director of public prosecutions formally rejected a remediation agreement with SNC-Lavalin on September 4. Two weeks later, on September 17, the Prime Minister met with the former justice minister to discuss the matter. The day after that meeting, SNC-Lavalin lobbyists managed to get four meetings with senior officials and ministers.

Would the Minister of Finance or the Minister of International Trade Diversification, who each took one of those meetings, be willing to appear before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to explain what those conversations were about?

JusticeOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, clearly, the NDP and Conservative members are sharing talking points, but let us look at the facts.

The director of the Public Prosecution Service has confirmed that, in each and every case, prosecutors exercise their discretion independently.

The deputy minister of justice confirmed that there was no direct communication in any specific case between the Prime Minister's Office and the DPP. The Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that at every opportunity, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the Minister of Justice to take.

JusticeOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, yesterday's letter from the former justice minister shows the extraordinary steps she has had to take to force the Prime Minister's hand to lift the legal gag order so she can speak truth to a parliamentary committee.

However, she is not the only person we need to hear from in the SNC-Lavalin scandal. We notice that there were numerous attempts by the Prime Minister's staff to pressure her into intervening in an independent legal investigation after it was found out that SNC was not eligible and they used a manifestly illegal argument, which was the economic interest.

In the interests of fairness, will the Prime Minister agree that Katie Telford and Gerry Butts and the rest of his staff will also testify in this hearing?

JusticeOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, that is one of the many members who was denying that members of the justice committee could do their work and would be able to meet. Today, that committee is meeting. The member and his party as well as the Conservatives said the justice committee would not be calling forward witnesses. Witnesses are appearing. They are answering questions.

The member and his party as well as the Conservatives said the former attorney general would not be invited to speak. Members of the justice committee invited her to speak. She will be speaking. They need to stop undermining the work of committees and start respecting our institutions so that Canadians know that they can as well.

JusticeOral Questions

2:25 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, she is not going to get her honorary set of gold SNC cufflinks with excuses like that, because we are talking about illegal interventions by the Prime Minister's Office.

The Prime Minister and the clerk met with the former justice minister on September 17. She said no. The PMO official met her on December 5. She said no. The PMO staff met with her staff on December 18. They said no. Then the Clerk of the Privy Council met with her on December 19. She said no and was removed from her position soon after.

In the interest of corruption, I ask the Prime Minister this. When does no mean no for the Liberal Party?

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, once again let us look at the record. The director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan considerations. The Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed that, at every opportunity verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was a decision for the former minister of justice to take.

We on this side have lowered taxes on middle-class Canadians so that we could increase them on the wealthiest 1%. The NDP said no to that measure.

We on this side brought in the Canada child benefit. Today, Stats Canada confirmed that 278,000 kids have been lifted out of poverty and over 800,000 Canadians. The NDP—

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

The hon. member for Milton.

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON

Mr. Speaker, I feel like the hon. House leader is being paid by the word today.

I would say this. I have very few words on this matter. What I would like to know is this.

I am sorry. I cannot—

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

Order. I would ask members to come to order. I would encourage members to try to avoid things that provoke disorder in the House, and comments that are insulting do that.

The hon. member for Milton.

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON

I cannot blame her, Mr. Speaker. I would not want to answer my questions either.

I have one question, which is very simple. I would like to know if between September 4 and October 10 the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister's Office, any cabinet minister, any lobbyist or anyone associated with the Prime Minister's Office indicated to SNC-Lavalin or gave assurances that it would be able to get a deferred public—

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

The hon. government House leader.

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, the justice official backgrounder on remediation agreements states two of the main purposes for remediation agreements: one, to hold the organization accountable for wrongdoing; and, two, to reduce the harm a criminal conviction of an organization could have for employees, pensioners, shareholders and other third parties who did not take part in the offence.

The record shows that the leader of the Conservative Party met with the company. We know that the leader of the NDP met with the company. We know the deputy leader herself said on the record that she disagreed that there is anything wrong with meeting the company.

We on this side will focus on Canadians.

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON

Mr. Speaker, somebody is going to have to answer this question, because on September 4, the director of public prosecutions actually informed SNC-Lavalin that it would not be receiving a deferred public prosecution agreement. However, the audited financial statements of SNC-Lavalin indicate that the company was advised by the director of PPSC in October 2018 that it would not be invited by the PPSC.

Who in the Prime Minister's Office gave the assurance between September 4 and October 10 that there would not be a problem with the PPSC?

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Again, Mr. Speaker, let us look at the record. The director of the Public Prosecution Service confirmed that prosecutors in every case, “exercise their discretion independently and free from any political or partisan consideration.”

Last week, the deputy minister of justice confirmed that “there is no direct communication, in any specific case, between the PMO and the DPP.”

The Clerk of the Privy Council also confirmed, “At every opportunity verbally and in writing in December, the Prime Minister made it clear that this was the decision for the Minister of Justice to take.”

We on this side will not undermine the work of committees or the commissioner, like the Conservatives—

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan

The hon. member for Milton.

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am going to break it down super simple.

On September 4, the director of public prosecutions told SNC-Lavalin that there would be no agreement coming its way. They did not report it, and they did not think it was real until October, but miraculously, there were copious meetings between SNC-Lavalin lobbyists and the Prime Minister's Office and the Clerk of the Privy Council,

So let us try this again. Who told them that they were going to be able to get out of going to court?

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Waterloo Ontario

Liberal

Bardish Chagger LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, once again, it is not surprising that the Conservatives will undermine the work of committees. Once again, it is not surprising that the Conservatives will undermine the work of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. They did it for 10 years under Stephen Harper. Today they have chosen a new leader, but it still remains the same party as Stephen Harper's.

Canadians can have confidence in their institutions. We on this side will let them do their work. They are meeting. They are calling forward witnesses. Witnesses are appearing and answering those tough questions. Members from both sides are present.

JusticeOral Questions

2:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!