House of Commons Hansard #115 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was report.
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Mr. Speaker, our justice system and its processes must be impartial, unbiased and, above all, non-partisan.
However, the use of the “Liberalist” partisan tool in the appointment process is seriously troubling. According to the CBC, a former Liberal political aide said himself in 2019 that there was the potential for a scandal. For once, it seems that a Liberal was right.
How can Canadians continue to have any confidence in our justice system?
Arif Virani LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, when our government was elected in 2015, we created a more rigorous, open and accountable system that better reflects Canada's diversity when appointing top-notch judges to our institutions.
Our appointments are always based on merit. They are also based on developmental needs, the expertise of the various candidates and the recommendations of the independent judicial advisory committees.
We are proud of all those who have been appointed since the implementation of our system. They come from diverse backgrounds and political affiliations.
Richard Martel Conservative Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Mr. Speaker, again, the Liberals only fix their mistakes once they have been exposed. With their partisan “Liberalist” tool, the government could promote judicial candidates who support the Liberal Party.
The Minister of Justice said that he was the only one who made recommendations. We know that the Prime Minister's Office helped screen the candidates before they were presented to cabinet.
Why did the minister insist on the fact that he was the only one making recommendations when that is just not true?
Arif Virani LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I talked about our rigorous and transparent process that led to the appointment of 400 jurists. I also want to point out the diversity of these appointments, because it is also unprecedented.
Among the judges appointed through the new process since 2015, 55% are women, 11% are visible minorities, 6% identify as LGBTQ2, 3% are indigenous and 1% have a disability. This clearly shows the effectiveness of our process, and we will continue to ensure that it remains rigorous, transparent and merit-based.
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary gave a lot of statistics there. How about this one: 25% of the judges the Liberals have appointed are Liberal donors. They keep parroting the same tired talking points, but we know the higher one's donations the better one's chances of finding themselves on the bench with the Liberal government. Now Liberals are saying they will only use public databases to vet these appointments where, surprise, Liberal donation records can still be found.
When will the Liberal justice minister start appointing judges based on merit and merit alone?
Arif Virani LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, we have taken significant steps to create a better process for appointing judges. It is one that ensures our judiciary reflects the country it serves. Let us be clear: All judicial appointments are made by merit. There are no partisan considerations in the decision-making process. In fact, when we formed government, we removed the partisanship that was in place under the Harper government and brought in a more independent and a more rigorous process.
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary must be talking about how rigorously the Liberals checked their Liberal donation database, because that is what reports are telling us today. They have to stop using Liberalist, because that is how they have been making their selections.
The justice minister said, “There is no partisanship in my decision-making process.” Well, an internal Liberal donation database seems to be quite partisan. When the PMO is vetting and approving and top Liberals have their fingers on the scale, we have a problem.
Did the justice minister willingly mislead the House when he decided to cover up the Liberals' partisan appointment process?
Arif Virani LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, I will reiterate that the process we have in place is rigorous and transparent, and has resulted in the nomination of more than 400 jurists. Let us talk about holding the administration of justice in high repute. That comes when we have a set of jurists who reflect the litigants who come before it.
Who have we appointed? Since 2016, we have appointed 55% female candidates and 11% racialized candidates. As well, 6% of the candidates who have been appointed are LGBTQ2, 3% are indigenous and 1% are persons with a disability. That reflects the Canada that we hope all jurists will serve.
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Mr. Speaker, 100% of them were put through the Liberals' partisan database and checked for how much they donated.
Today we see that, after months of filibustering, blocking of witness and sealing of documents, the ethics committee was finally able to table its report on the WE scandal. The report clearly outlines the depth of corruption and cronyism within the Liberal government. Liberal insiders have unfettered access to government, which will always help its friends jump the queue and get the inside track.
Canadians deserve a government that will serve them instead of the Liberal elite. Will this corrupt government start putting the interests of Canadians first and implement the recommendations outlined in that report?
Pablo Rodriguez LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, we respect the work of committees. We also respect the role of the independent officers of Parliament, who do their work independently and free from partisan political consideration.
While the Conservatives remain focused on the WE Charity, our focus remains on delivering important bills for Canadians, including those bills we were to discuss today. However, what did the Conservatives try to do? They tried to shut down Parliament. They said that it was over. They did not want to work anymore. If they do not want to work, they should get out of here and let us work for Canadians.
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would like to number all of the hours the minister's Liberals have filibustered at committee, including dozens of hours at the ethics committee.
This report shows widespread Liberal insider access and corruption. It is undeniable. The Liberals used the pandemic to line the pockets of Liberals and their well-connected friends. They tried to cover it up. They tried to block investigations. They tried to tamper with witnesses.
Corruption and these Liberals go hand in hand. What will it take for the government to stop the corruption and commit to good ethical governance? The minister said he respects the work of committees. Will he commit right now to implementing their recommendations?
Pablo Rodriguez LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, that is a bit rich coming from a member who does not respect the work of Parliament. We are meeting here today to discuss a very important bill, and what did this member and his friends on the other side do? They tried to shut down Parliament.
They said they were finished working for the day and were going home. That is unacceptable. We need to keep Parliament open to debate important bills such as Bill C-6, Bill C-12 and Bill C-30. We have to do that for Canadians.
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Mr. Speaker, when the leader of the Bloc Québécois spoke about the tragic events in London, he called for an end to the hate and violence. He called for more solidarity, love and friendship.
By contrast, the Prime Minister seems to want to sow division. He made a vile connection between intolerance, Islamophobia and Quebec's secularism law, comments that were particularly shameful in light of recent events. Will the Prime Minister retract his comments, which do more to divide us than to bring us together?
Arif Virani LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, Quebeckers are standing up for their rights in court. We are following the situation closely. We have been open and clear about our position on this matter. It is worth noting that the Government of Canada is not involved in the litigation.
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in response to a question from the member for Lac-Saint-Jean, the Prime Minister said, “I urge the Bloc Québécois to listen to members of the Muslim community, who have expressed concerns about what they are experiencing right now in Quebec.”
In a context where we must all pull together, this comes alarmingly close to conflating these issues. There is no connection between Bill 21 and the London tragedy, and to try to make one is irresponsible. Will the Prime Minister retract his comments?
Arif Virani LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, Quebeckers are defending their rights before the courts. We continue to monitor the situation closely. Our position on this matter is clear and well known. It is important to note that the Government of Canada is not a party to this dispute.
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Mr. Speaker, we are not the only ones to have noted this conflation.
This morning, the Quebec National Assembly unanimously passed a motion that the National Assembly strongly condemn all forms of hate and violent crimes, and that it condemn the fact that certain politicians and media outside Quebec are conflating the tragedy in London, Ontario, and a Quebec law.
Speaking of intolerance and Islamophobia in the same breath as Bill 21, in this context, is conflating the issues.
Will the Prime Minister retract his comments?
Arif Virani LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Speaker, as I have already stated, Quebeckers are defending their rights before the courts. We continue to monitor the situation closely. Our position on this matter is clear and well known. It is important to note that the Government of Canada is not a party to this dispute.
Pierre Paul-Hus Conservative Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
Mr. Speaker, three years ago, the government turned a blind eye to a complaint alleging that some members of the Iraqi forces, trained by Canadian troops, had committed war crimes. The Iraqi soldiers allegedly raped women, tortured and executed prisoners, and proudly showed videos of their victims to Canadian soldiers.
Lieutenant-General Michael Rouleau, the former commander of the Canadian Joint Operations Command informed General Vance about this on two occasions, but the matter was never resolved. The Minister of National Defence must have been informed of this. Can he confirm that?
Anita Vandenbeld LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to respecting and defending human rights during all Canadian Armed Forces deployments and operations.
As the minister said, these allegations are extremely troubling, and we will ensure that they are thoroughly investigated. We take every incident involving human rights during armed conflict very seriously and we take the appropriate actions to resolve every problem that arises.
James Bezan Conservative Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB
Mr. Speaker, in 2018, Canadian soldiers reported to commanders that they had seen videos of horrible atrocities being committed on the phones of the very Iraqi soldiers they were training, but our troops were ordered to look the other way and keep training these alleged war criminals.
Now, we know that a secret memo was given to the former chief of defence staff in 2020, which clearly demonstrates that top defence officials in National Defence knew there were serious problems with the security screening of Iraqi recruits.
Why did these Liberals extend Operation Impact not once but twice after learning we were training war criminals in Iraq?
Anita Vandenbeld LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, Canada is contributing to greater peace and security in the world and remains a strong partner in the fight against Daesh. We are committed to meeting our obligations under international and domestic law.
The Canadian Armed Forces is no longer operating with the Iraqi security forces related to these allegations. Our government takes this very seriously. We are actively looking into these troubling allegations.
Leona Alleslev Conservative Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON
Mr. Speaker, Canadian soldiers are entrusted to embody the highest moral doctrine and uphold international humanitarian law, but in 2018, when Canadian soldiers training Iraqi troops witnessed horrific war crimes, they were told to ignore the evidence and carry on. The NATO training mission commander knew. The Canadian joint operations commander knew, and General Vance knew, but they all failed to act.
How could the defence minister do nothing in the face of something so serious?
Anita Vandenbeld LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned, our government is committed to respecting and upholding human rights during all Canadian Armed Forces deployments and operations.
As the minister has said, these allegations are extremely troubling, and we are ensuring that they are thoroughly investigated. We take all incidents regarding compliance with the law of armed conflict seriously, and we take proper actions to address any issues that arise.
Lindsay Mathyssen NDP London—Fanshawe, ON
Mr. Speaker, another graduating class of students is finishing its school year, and yet again, students are struggling to find work over the summer due to the pandemic, work that will help to pay for their overwhelming education costs. Many students will have to make some tough decisions about whether they can even afford school in the fall. The government continues to insist it is helping, when the reality is it has only helped itself, its friends and those at the top.
When will the government commit to permanently ending interest fees on federal student loans, and when will the government see education as more than just a money-maker for their federal coffers?