Debates of March 20th, 2023

Child Care

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Minister of Families]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her work and her support of our important work on child care.

In the Canada-wide agreement we have signed with all provinces and territories, the provinces and territories have committed to ensuring that they are able to recruit and retain ECEs. We know that ECEs and child care workers form the backbone of our child care system. Within those agreements, they can use some of that money to help with wage increases. In fact, we have seen that in many provinces and territories across the country. We will continue to work with PTs to make sure that we are supporting our ECEs right across the country.

Democratic Institutions

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it has been weeks and more than 20 hours of talking out the clock in the cover-up from the government. Liberal MPs will do anything possible to keep the Prime Minister's chief of staff from testifying at the House affairs committee on what she knew about Beijing's election interference. Instead of the NDP showing some courage and standing up against the cover-up, it is no surprise that it looks like they are going to support it.

Will the Prime Minister stop stonewalling to allow his chief of staff to testify before members of Parliament, yes or no?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, election interference is an attack against each and every one of us. The reality right now is that the presidents of China and Russia are meeting in Moscow, which should be concerning to all of us considering what type of efforts are being made to undermine Canadian democracy.

What has been offered is for the people who received the briefings, the national campaign directors in 2019 and 2021, to appear. The Conservatives, I would suggest, should do the same. I would also suggest that it should be including Russia and other foreign actors that are attempting to interfere in our democracy instead of having such a partisan focus.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I say to bring it on.

Testifying about sexual misconduct in the military was no problem for Ms. Telford, as was testifying about the WE Charity scandal. There were no worries there, but testifying about what the PM knew about Beijing's interference in our elections is off limits. The PM's chief of staff has appeared at parliamentary committees on numerous occasions to answer questions. She ran the campaign. She is campaign staff. What is the difference this time?

What is the Prime Minister hiding, and why is the NDP letting him get away with it?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, the Privy Council and the Leader of the Opposition would have been provided, and were provided the opportunity for, a full briefing. He has declined it. In fact, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, which would give an opportunity for the members opposite to be able to see every single document, is something that they are not willing to focus on or engage in.

We have offered this opportunity, and we have offered David Johnston, an independent, eminent Canadian, to look at this issue, so it begs this question: What is their interest? It would appear to me that their interest is partisan in nature and that they are using this opportunity to grind a partisan axe rather—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the official opposition brings one interest to this place, and that is the interest of Canadians to find out what the Prime Minister knew about foreign interference by the government in Beijing in our elections in 2019 and 2021.

However, the NDP, a party that twice voted to send Conservative staff to committee when we were in government, and that twice voted for Katie Telford to go to committee when their coalition partners were in government, are now unwilling or unable to send her this time. Is it a condition of the supply and confidence deal between these coalition partners that the NDP not send Katie Telford to committee?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I will tell everyone what obstruction looks like. When I was the critic, and I was trying to deal with the then Conservative government, Justice Iacobucci and Justice O'Connor critically called for the establishment of an independent oversight mechanism filled with parliamentarians that could look into every aspect of government.

What did the opposition leader do when he was minister of democratic reforms? He did nothing.

He did not take action on that. We did. This means that members of Parliament from every single party have the opportunity to look into every aspect of this matter. We have offered witnesses. We have had many ministers testify.

What is their interest? Partisan—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The hon. member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Mr. Speaker, what we have received is horrific partisanship from the government House leader and the Liberals. They appointed a family friend of the Prime Minister, a board member on the Beijing-funded Trudeau Foundation, to advise the Prime Minister on whether he maybe should, probably, might, could have a public inquiry.

We are looking for a public inquiry for Canadians, and we are looking for the Prime Minister's chief of staff to testify at committee.

Why will the Liberals and their NDP coalition partners not allow the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Katie Telford, to testify?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I believe the hon. member across from me to be an honourable member. I am absolutely certain of his commitment to Canadian democracy. I hope that he would share the belief that every member in the House is equally committed to our Canadian democracy and equally offended at the idea of foreign interference interrupting it.

What concerns me is that we have provided mechanisms for every party to be able to look at every aspect of this. We provided an eminent Canadian who is going to look at this independently and provide recommendations. We have offered multiple ministers, multiple witnesses.

Their interest continues to be a partisan interest, not a factual interest. That is inappropriate.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, by interfering in Canada's electoral system, Beijing's Communist Party is subverting our democracy. As parliamentarians, all of us should be seized with this unacceptable affront.

There is someone in Canada who knows full well what may have happened. She was in charge of the current Prime Minister's election campaign and is currently the Prime Minister's chief of staff. We want to hear from her in committee. We know that the government does not want her to testify.

My question is for one member of the government coalition, the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie. Will he rise in the House and tell his constituents that he will vote in favour of complete freedom and, above all, full transparency in this matter and allow Ms. Telford to appear before the committee?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, we share our colleague's interest in the importance of strengthening democracy. To use his own words, we do not want anyone subverting Canadian democracy. As I said, that is why we, as a government, put in place measures that did not exist before 2015, when his friends were in power.

We also asked the Right Hon. David Johnston to look at all the measures currently in place and to make recommendations that will be made public about what more we can do to reassure Canadians that essential measures are in place.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister is a seasoned parliamentarian and an honourable man.

What does he have to say about the fact that his government members talked non-stop, while saying nothing at all, for over 20 hours to prevent democracy from working?

The minister is a strong supporter of full and complete democracy, especially parliamentary democracy. The chief of staff, Ms. Telford, knows things that Canadians want to know about what happened with the regime in Beijing. Will the minister allow her to testify in parliamentary committee, yes or no?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague knows full well that our government has been aware of the importance of strengthening our democracy and democratic institutions from the very beginning.

He also knows full well that ministers are always available to give proper testimony before parliamentary committees. My hon. colleague may not have been here last week, but I am sure he watched the Minister of Foreign Affairs' extraordinary testimony in committee.

He knows very well that we will always be there to answer our colleagues' questions.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, China's interference is the greatest threat to democracy and national security. That was the blunt statement made by CSIS, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, last Friday.

The government's response should, at the very least, be on par with CSIS' fears, yet appointing a special rapporteur without a mandate or timeline does not rise to that level. At best, this is a case of wasting time until the special rapporteur comes to the only appropriate answer. At the end of the day, there is only one answer, one transparent and non-partisan solution, for combatting foreign interference.

Will the government finally launch a transparent and independent public inquiry?

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, we agree that foreign interference should never be a partisan issue. That is why we appointed someone who is independent, has an impeccable background and will be able to review everything available when it comes to foreign interference in our elections and make recommendations.

We value that independence. We know that David Johnston will be an outstanding individual to carry out this work and make recommendations to the government, which may include a public inquiry. Whatever the recommendations are, we will accept them.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, if they want to know what independence looks like, they should be asking us.

It would be easy to criticize Mr. Johnston's appointment as special rapporteur, but that would be letting the government off easy over its most significant ethical failure. CSIS is saying this is the greatest threat to national security, yet the government is choosing to cover it up. Seemingly unaware that foreign interference is spreading, it is choosing to buy time.

To put it bluntly, there are only two possible conclusions to the special rapporteur's review. The first is to sweep the whole business under the rug, and the second is to propose an independent public inquiry, which is what everyone is asking for.

Why not cut to the chase, be ethical for once and launch the inevitable inquiry?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc is obviously trying to make us believe that it is serious about protecting our institutions, but let us take a look at its record.

When measures were put in place to protect our elections, the Bloc voted against them. When we took steps to prevent foreign money from influencing our elections, the Bloc voted against them. When it came to strengthening the integrity of our voter lists, the Bloc voted against that too.

We take the job of protecting our democratic institutions very seriously. We will continue to do whatever it takes to strengthen and protect them, and we would appreciate the Bloc's help, for once.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is the wrong person and the wrong job. Irrespective of Mr. Johnston, the Prime Minister is the one who came up with the idea of a special rapporteur, which is the wrong job.

The Prime Minister is the one holding up the investigation into the Chinese police stations. He is the one holding up the investigation into the intimidation of the Chinese community. He is the one holding up the study into potentially illegal election financing. He is the one sowing doubt about our democracy.

The Prime Minister is the only person standing in the way of an independent public commission of inquiry. When will he get out of the way?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs]

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, our government has brought in important measures to counter foreign interference.

My colleague claims that the Prime Minister was not there to strengthen democratic institutions. She knows that we are the first government to form a committee of parliamentarians to monitor our national security institutions. We have brought in other measures that will enhance electoral transparency.

The Right Hon. David Johnston will continue this important work.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the motion in front of the House today orders the Prime Minister's chief of staff to testify about Beijing's foreign interference in front of committee.

It is clear the government will be voting against the motion, but the government and its party cannot carry the House alone. It is not clear whether its confidence and supply partner, the NDP, will be voting for or against the motion.

The public has a right to know before the vote. Could the government tell us if its confidence-and-supply partner will be voting for or against the motion?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that David Johnston was appointed by Stephen Harper as governor general. The Conservatives had confidence in him to be the governor general of this country. He is the individual who is charged, as an eminent Canadian, to oversee this entire process. The Conservatives are now calling that individual into question.

However, the idea that Mr. Johnston would not be committed to Canadian democracy and not look at every corner of this issue with the interest of Canadian democracy at heart is offensive.

In addition, the opposition knows through NSICOP that its members have the opportunity to see any and all information in committee. Unfortunately, they voted against creating that process.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Edmonton, AB]

Mr. Speaker, three times, the Liberals and their NDP coalition partner blocked the Prime Minister's chief of staff from testifying about Beijing's election interference. Now, at the direction of the Prime Minister, Liberal MPs have been filibustering my straightforward motion for Telford to appear for nearly 24 hours.

Why have the Liberals gone to such lengths to shield Telford? What does she know that the Prime Minister wants hidden from Canadians?

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, individuals who received briefings and would have had knowledge of the 2019 and 2021 campaigns as national campaign directors have offered to testify at committee. The ministers who were responsible have testified before committees. Other witnesses and experts are testifying before committee.

Why is the Conservative Party so solely and singularly focused on Katie Telford? I will tell the House why. It is a partisan interest, and it is deeply disturbing. The interest of Conservative members here is to wedge, divide and create a partisan advantage.

I would suggest that, when we are dealing with something as serious as foreign interference, our focus should be on protecting our democracy, not partisan advantage.