House of Commons Hansard #415 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was area.
Serge Cormier LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, as my colleague is aware, since he sits on that committee, the committee operates independently—
JusticeOral Questions
The Deputy Speaker Bruce Stanton
Order. The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence.
Serge Cormier Liberal Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Mr. Speaker, as the member is aware, since he sits on that committee, the committee operates independently from the government and we will wait for the results of their deliberations.
As for the legal process involving Vice-Admiral Norman, the Public Prosecution Service of Canada noted when it stayed the charge, that no other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence, in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge. Any accusation to the contrary from the opposition is completely absurd.
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Speaker, what is absurd is the Prime Minister's own actions. While the Prime Minister claims the process was free from interference, Vice-Admiral Norman was vindicated in spite of the Liberals' attempt to obstruct justice and politically interfere in his case. The miscarriage of justice is yet another example of someone standing up to the Prime Minister and getting crushed for getting in his way.
Will the Prime Minister apologize to Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, show Canadians what they have been hiding and give Vice-Admiral Norman his old job back?
Serge Cormier LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, once again, the PPSC said that no other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any outside contact or influence, including political influence, in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge. Once again, any accusation to the contrary is absurd.
As we said, general Vance will sit down and speak with Vice-Admiral Norman about what comes next at the appropriate time.
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, do the terms “Kraken”, “C34” and “The Boss” mean anything to you? They are code names used to secretly identify Admiral Norman to prevent information about him from being released under access to information requests.
What is more, the Privy Council Office confirmed that at least 73 people were aware of the Liberal cabinet discussion about taking the Asterix contract away from the Davie shipyard. However, the Prime Minister only gave the RCMP the name of Vice-Admiral Norman for investigation. That is political interference.
When will the Liberals admit it and apologize?
David Lametti LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, the investigation in question was led by the RCMP, an institution that we, in Canada, are very proud of. The RCMP turned the evidence it collected over to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, another institution that we are very proud of. This was a criminal prosecution led by the director of the Public Prosecution Service and she was the one who decided to stay the charges. There was no interference.
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister did not have a grudge against Vice-Admiral Norman, he would have given the 73 names to the RCMP. He would not have prevented Mr. Norman's lawyers from getting the documents they requested. He ruined Vice-Admiral Norman's reputation and nearly succeeded in making Davie lose a large contract.
Will the Prime Minister allow the Standing Committee on National Defence to shed light on this affair, or will he continue with his political obstruction?
Serge Cormier LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, once again, my colleague knows that committees operate independently from the government. We will wait for the outcome of the deliberations. Once again, with respect to the legal process involving Vice-Admiral Norman, the Public Prosecution Service of Canada noted when it stayed the charge that no other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge. Once again, any accusations otherwise from the opposition are completely absurd.
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Public Services and Procurement says the government cannot be apologizing for the public prosecution doing its job in the Vice-Admiral Norman case. However, let us be clear. The public prosecution protected the rule of law and requires no apology. It is the Prime Minister and the Liberals who politically interfered to tip the scales of justice and punish Vice-Admiral Norman.
When will the Prime Minister admit to Canadians that what he did was wrong and apologize to Vice-Admiral Norman?
Carla Qualtrough LiberalMinister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility
Mr. Speaker, let me be very clear. The process that unfolded did so completely independent of our government. The investigation, the decision to stay proceedings and, in fact, the prosecution itself were handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada.
Canadians can be very confident in the independence of our judicial system.
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Mr. Speaker, Canadians are confident in the director of public prosecutions, but the Minister of Public Services and Procurement stated that the Prime Minister's saying Vice-Admiral Norman would be in court before he was even charged was “not the best framing of words”.
It was also not the best framing when the Prime Minister refused to provide court-ordered documents and tampered with witnesses, or when the Minister of National Defence refused to pay Norman's legal fees, stating he was guilty. Clearly, the only one being framed was Vice-Admiral Norman.
When will the Prime Minister apologize for what his government has done to Mark Norman?
David Lametti LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, there were requests from the court, and we provided the court with more than 8,000 documents from seven different government agencies. In fact, the court complimented us on our co-operation in this matter. The decision to redact those documents was made not by the government but by an apolitical agency.
Canadians can be assured that our judicial system, our prosecution system, operates completely independent of government, and we can be proud of this.
Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON
Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve a transparent and open legal system. The Norman case has been anything but.
We know that the Prime Minister's Office, the Department of Defence and the Privy Council Office withheld important documents in this case. How is it that Gerald Butts got his old texts and emails within days of quitting, but Vice-Admiral Norman has waited a year and a half?
Liberals have interfered with yet another judicial process. If they value the rule of law, why are Liberals blocking Canadians' access to this information?
David Lametti LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, all the various premises of that question are categorically false.
The Department of Justice co-operated with the court in order to provide the requested documents. The documents that were requested were given, more than 8,000 of them from seven different agencies. Of course that takes time. The redaction was done independently of political bodies.
The court itself cited the government and its co-operation in this matter.
Tracey Ramsey NDP Essex, ON
Mr. Speaker, the denial story is not working. The Liberal government does not get to decide to uphold the rule of law when it benefits only the Liberals.
The Prime Minister promised he would do things differently, but his office has now been involved in two different cases of potentially interfering in our independent justice system. Mark Norman's lawyer clearly said the PMO was “counselling witnesses as to what they could and could not say”.
Our independent justice system does not belong to the Liberals. When will they get out of the way and allow Canadians to know what happened?
David Lametti LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, it is a curious question with an accusation that is baseless.
In fact, in this particular case, the PPSC was acting independently of the federal government because the supervisory role in this case, under the Criminal Code, was actually held by the Attorney General for Ontario.
The director of public prosecutions and the prosecutor in question have said that there was no contact or government interference in this case.
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Mr. Speaker, after two months of inaction on the canola crisis with China, the Prime Minister is finally realizing that this is a political crisis. His reaction, however, is surprising: he is going to continue to do nothing and wait. He did not file a complaint with the WTO and he has not appointed a new ambassador. He is doing absolutely nothing.
The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food is returning from Japan after a two-day meeting of G20 agriculture ministers.
Did she stand up for Canada's canola farmers? Did she demand that her Chinese counterparts set a firm date for us to send a delegation of scientists to China? Yes or no?
Jim Carr LiberalMinister of International Trade Diversification
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that the hon. member has not been paying closer attention to the file. If he had been paying closer attention to the file, he would know that there has been continuous engagement and that we seek to be invited to China to talk to the scientists about the accusation that there is impurity in our canola.
Second, had he been paying attention to the generous support for producers, which has been called a very important—
International TradeOral Questions
The Deputy Speaker Bruce Stanton
Order. I will ask the hon. minister to finish up in the last 10 seconds or so, and then we will go to the next question. There is too much noise in the House.
Jim Carr Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
Mr. Speaker, the member is not paying attention to what the Premier of Saskatchewan has said, nor is he paying attention to the expansion of export markets, nor is he paying attention to the very interesting meeting that the Minister of Agriculture had in Japan with her counterpart. We will know more about that in a matter of days.
Earl Dreeshen Conservative Red Deer—Mountain View, AB
Mr. Speaker, a loan guarantee is no substitute for weak trade policy.
The Conservative leader has outlined three concrete steps to stand up for canola farmers: appoint an ambassador to China, launch a WTO trade complaint against China, and pull funds from the Chinese-run Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Instead of taking our advice, the Prime Minister sent the agriculture minister to the G20, where she could not even be bothered to raise this issue once with the Chinese.
Will the Liberals ever stand up to China and take action?
Jim Carr LiberalMinister of International Trade Diversification
Mr. Speaker, we are signing trade agreements, which means 1.5 billion customers in Canada's free trade zone. Canada is the only G7 nation to have a free trade agreement with the other six. That sounds like a strong trade policy to me.
How about an increase of 17% in Canadian exports to Japan after ratification of the CPTPP? I would call that a strong trade policy.
What is weak is the Conservative opposition's understanding of what strength means in trade policy.
Dean Allison Conservative Niagara West, ON
Mr. Speaker, our relations with China are at an all-time low, and all the Prime Minister is willing to do is to blame the Americans.
China has banned Canadian pork, banned Canadian canola and detained two Canadians.
While China is bullying Canada, the Prime Minister is giving over a quarter of a billion dollars to China's Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.
Will the Prime Minister quit blaming others for his failures, pull all funding to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, file a trade challenge at the WTO and immediately appoint a new ambassador?