Debates of May 14th, 2019

Justice

[David Lametti, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I remind the hon. member that the government met all of its obligations with respect to the third party records applications. All documents in this case for priority individuals identified in February by the defence were provided to the court, over 8,000 documents from seven different departments. As the Prime Minister has just said, the decision to redact information was made by public servants in this case, and overseen by the court. We met all our obligations.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is still absurd that the defence is still waiting for documents from the government. The Liberals claim they did nothing wrong, yet the defence minister regrets the process Vice-Admiral Norman went through. What does he regret? Was it that the Liberals withheld documents from the RCMP? Was it that they withheld documents from the public prosecutor? Was it that they withheld documents from Norman's defence team?

When will the Prime Minister finally set the truth free, and will he testify at the national defence committee?

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is well aware that committees operate independently from the government. We will wait for the committee's deliberations.

Regarding 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 absurd and baseless.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals willingly withheld documents in the Asterix file. These documents would have given the RCMP and the prosecution a more complete picture of the situation for their investigation.

Furthermore, the Liberals knew that Mark Norman's defence counsel needed those documents to make its case, but the Liberals never agreed to provide them.

Why did the Prime Minister not give these documents to all those who needed them to mount Vice-Admiral Norman's defence?

[David Lametti, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the government met all of its obligations with respect to the third party records applications. All documents in this case for priority individuals identified in February by the defence were provided to the court as required.

During this case, more than 8,000 documents from this government organization were submitted to the court. The decision to redact information was made by public servants and overseen by the court.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, they always blame others.

The Prime Minister should be ashamed for having tarnished the reputation of Admiral Norman. Instead of showing remorse, the Liberals are trying to hide their plot against Admiral Norman by staying the charges against him.

If the Prime Minister had disclosed the documents the defence requested, the RCMP and the prosecutor never would have laid charges against Admiral Norman. Is that true or false?

The Prime Minister betrayed one of our best soldiers. Will the Prime Minister let us get to the bottom of this case and allow the Standing Committee on National Defence to investigate?

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, again, the committees operate independently from the government, and my colleague knows it. I am sure that is hard for him to grasp, considering who was controlling the committees under the Harper government.

Again, regarding the legal process involving Vice-Admiral Norman, the Public Prosecution Service of Canada noted that no other factors were considered in that 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 is completely absurd.

Canadians can have confidence in our justice system. They must not allow themselves to be misled by the Conservatives.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice has stood here in the House and indicated that the government handed over all the documents it was asked for. That is patently untrue, and I have proof.

The counsel for Vice-Admiral Norman said, “It took six months to get documents, and as we sit here today, and as we walked out of that courtroom, we still did not have all of them.” She said there were thousands of documents they had not received.

She went on to say, “I want to make it very clear that we, the defence, had to bring this motion, at great expense to Vice-Admiral Norman, to get at those records.” She said only the government had access, and that it was obviously the government that was “standing in the way of that full disclosure”.

[David Lametti, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, my department's only involvement was to provide government records in response to a request from the defence to help support the defence of Vice-Admiral Norman. The Department of Justice processed these 52 requests on behalf of seven departments.

The process of determining whether documents were relevant and whether any redactions were necessary was made and conducted by civil servants and then verified by the court. It was up to the court to make the final decision as to whether or not information would be redacted, not the government.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, all the minister does is bring up even more questions and answers we simply do not have. Perhaps we should go back to what the counsel for Vice-Admiral Norman said at the press conference:

No person in this country should ever walk into a courtroom and feel like they are fighting their elected government.

Vice-Admiral Norman himself said:

There are lots of questions that need to be asked and answered about this whole process. I think some people that have been involved in this need to reflect on what happened and why it happened, and their role in that.

What does the Minister of Justice think about his role in this cover-up?

[David Lametti, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, I have full confidence in our judicial and parliamentary institutions. The process was designed to make sure that the defendant had every opportunity to access the information relevant to his case and to challenge any decision not to disclose part or all of some document. Canadians can rest assured that this process worked and that the justice system is intact.

As Vice-Admiral Norman's own counsel said, “our justice system is truly unassailable.”

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in the last few months the Prime Minister has lost the confidence of his former attorney general and the former president of the Treasury Board over the government's unethical conduct and interference in judicial independence.

Last week, the case against Vice-Admiral Norman fell apart just as we learned that a former star general, the Liberal MP for Orléans, was about to testify against his own government.

My question is for the Prime Minister, and it is about his credibility. If he cannot hold the trust of respected Liberals, how is he going to hold the trust of the Canadian people?

[David Lametti, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, the case to which the hon. member referred was handled by the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, which is independent from the government and independent from the Department of Justice.

My office had no role whatsoever in the handling of this prosecution. That includes the decision to lay charges and the decision to stay charges, as well as the prosecution in-between.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I can see why the Prime Minister does not want to answer. He is becoming the political equivalent of Monty Python's Black Knight.

He speaks of independence, but it was the Prime Minister who stated that there would be a court case against Vice-Admiral Norman, and we have seen how that ended up. Last week he was defending his decision to vet judges through a Liberal donor base; the week before that he was shrugging off a political leak on a Supreme Court nominee, and the week before that, well, I am going to give him a pass today on SNC.

I have a simple question for the Prime Minister. When is he going to apologize to Vice-Admiral Norman and the taxpayers of Canada?

[Serge Cormier, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, based on last week's decision, the deputy minister has reviewed the policy in place regarding Vice-Admiral Norman's request to have his legal fees paid as they relate to this case. She gave us her opinion, and we agree with her, so that is how we will proceed.

In addition, General Vance will speak with Vice-Admiral Norman about the next steps at the appropriate time.

I repeat, no other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any outside contact or influence, political or otherwise, in relation to this charge. We will always respect the judicial process.

Intergovernmental Relations

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are being very disrespectful and condescending towards Quebec, which was completely ignored in yesterday's federal-provincial infrastructure announcement. Minister Bonnardel, the Quebec minister of transport, spoke with the Liberal government and tried to work in partnership with it. How did this Liberal government respond to Quebec's request? It said “no”.

Why do this Liberal Prime Minister and this Liberal government refuse to work in partnership with the provinces?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, only a Conservative member would be against a project to improve road travel in Montreal. People in the suburbs north of Montreal have been waiting for this project since 1970.

We are proud to have invested $345 million to reduce congestion in the suburbs north of Montreal. We are proud to have invested in the extension of Highway 19 between Highway 440 and Highway 640. We are proud to have invested in the rehabilitation of Pie-IX Bridge in Montreal. We are proud to have invested in the construction of a reserved lane for bus rapid transit, carpooling and electric vehicles.

We will continue to invest in all communities across Canada.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Mr. Speaker, all of that happened without inviting Quebec to be present. Meanwhile, the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development said he was shocked by statements made by the Premier of Quebec. The Prime Minister himself accused the Premier of Quebec of playing politics. This Prime Minister is accusing the Premier of Quebec of playing politics.

His comments are disrespectful, paternalistic and condescending, which is par for the course for the sanctimonious Liberals.

When will he co-operate with the provinces?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are certainly in no position to lecture us.

Respect means moving forward on files sent to us by the provinces. In the case of Highway 19, the Government of Quebec submitted the file in September 2018. Mr. Legault's government made it a priority on October 5, 2018. We approved it on March 26, 2019, and I made the announcement on May 13, 2019.

Respect means moving forward on files sent to us by the provinces in time for the construction season.

Natural Resources

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised a collaborative relationship with provinces and territories, but eight provinces and three territories opposed his “no more pipelines” Bill C-69, five provinces are fighting his carbon tax, and the majority of Canadians and indigenous communities all along the route support the Trans Mountain expansion and want it built. Liberals have spent billions, delayed the decision and not built an inch.

Instead of fighting the provinces and pitting Canadians against each other, will the Prime Minister do what he said he would do and release a plan to approve and build the Trans Mountain expansion?

[Amarjeet Sohi, Liberal, Minister of Natural Resources]

Mr. Speaker, ever since the Federal Court of Appeal decision of August 2018, we have been working hard to fix the process that was put in place by the previous government, which led to a number of projects being challenged in the courts.

We are engaged in a meaningful conversation and meaningful dialogue to offer accommodations to indigenous peoples to ensure that we move forward on this project in the right way.

We are scheduled to make a decision on this project, as long as we are fulfilling our duty to consult with indigenous communities, by June 18.

The Environment

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, maybe the government should actually listen to the premiers of the provinces.

Saskatchewan, Alberta, Ontario, Manitoba and New Brunswick are all fighting the Liberal carbon tax. They understand that meaningful action to safeguard the environment does not mean that life has to be unaffordable for Canadians. In fact, the carbon tax is not an environmental plan. It is a tax plan.

Instead of forcing provinces to fight him in court, when will the Prime Minister start working with them?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, when will the Conservative Party listen to the science on climate change?

We have a motion to debate the emerging climate emergency in Canada. Let us talk about the science. Scientists have shown that Canada is warming at twice the global average, and three times or more in the north. In the national capital region, people are still suffering from flooding. This is a flood that was supposed to happen once every 100 years, and it has now happened twice in two years.

We need to take action on climate change. Why does the Conservative Party not join us in taking serious action on climate change and also growing our economy? We are very proud that we have created a million jobs with Canadians.

[Anne Minh-Thu Quach, NDP, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, speaking of the climate emergency, I want to point out that the majority of young people realize that climate change is a serious issue. As part of the government's youth policy, a number of young people submitted briefs calling on the government to stop subsidizing oil companies. The government, however, continues to hand over millions of dollars to this industry.

The NDP recognizes that climate action is urgently needed. We are calling for ambitious GHG reduction targets and an end to the Trans Mountain project.

Does the government recognize that action is urgently needed? Will it support the NDP's motion and declare an environmental and climate emergency?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Minister of Environment and Climate Change]

Mr. Speaker, we certainly recognize the climate emergency, which is why we have a motion on the climate emergency.

On the one hand, there is the Conservative Party, which has no climate plan and no economic plan. The Conservatives are saying things that are not true about the price on pollution. On the other hand, there is the NDP, which is flip-flopping on the LNG project, the largest investment in Canadian history, which will help developing countries phase out carbon.

We must combat climate change and grow our economy at the same time. That is what we are doing.