House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was process.

Last in Parliament January 2024, as Liberal MP for LaSalle—Émard—Verdun (Québec)

Won his last election, in 2021, with 43% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, any conversations that we would have had while my predecessor was still in cabinet would be matters of cabinet privilege.

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, I cannot speak in any informed manner to any of the basic premises of that question because I was not party to the various conversations and circumstances that are leading the hon. member to draw certain conclusions. I would say that the government has conducted itself in the best possible fashion in a variety of different cases across the past three and a half years. We have very high ethical standards and we do our best on a daily basis to meet the needs of Canadians and do things for the right reasons.

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, I thank the hon. member for his question and I thank him for shifting gears as well.

I will say that he is well aware, with respect to the first part of his intervention, that the powers that are held by the director of public prosecutions with respect to deferred prosecution agreements and then those powers that are ultimately held by the attorney general are all described in the law. I would just remind him of that.

With respect to the question on the procedures, I have outlined in great detail this evening that the Department of Justice had a role in the production of documents. We fulfilled that role. We set up a procedure in order to fulfill that role. As the member has hinted, it required a judge at the end of the process to make a final ruling on certain documentation, as well as on their redaction.

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, again, I will not agree or disagree in this kind of proceeding, because anything that I can say might be used in the course of litigation.

I will remind the hon. member that there were various interpretations of the Shawcross principle, and that was one of them.

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, again, I will not elaborate on either the powers in this particular instance of the DPP or the powers in this particular instance of the attorney general, as elaborated in the law, simply because anything I can say might be interpreted and used in the course of the appellate proceedings.

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, as I said in answer to an earlier question, I will not comment on the nature of the process with respect to SNC-Lavalin and DPAs because there is an ongoing appellate procedure, and anything I can say or do might be interpreted as having taken a stance in that matter.

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, I do not give advice to Parliament as such. I will note that there were different interpretations of the Shawcross principle that were given at committee, and he can read those opinions and form an opinion on his own.

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, the hon. member is a lawyer who will understand that when I say, as the Minister of Justice and Attorney General, that I will not make any pronouncement about my own interpretation in that regard, it is simply because there is ongoing litigation. There is an appeal process before the Federal Court. Anything that I say might be interpreted as having an impact on those proceedings and it has been my practice not to comment on that.

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, while what the hon. member said is true to an extent, the Ethics Commissioner does have significant powers to shed light on this matter. We had testimony before the justice committee that gave competing versions of events. As I said earlier this evening, it is quite possible that all of the deeply beliefs in those competing narratives are true in some way. I would add that at the end of the day, my predecessor stated quite clearly that she did not think anybody broke the law.

Business of Supply May 14th, 2019

Madam Chair, it is my understanding that the majority of members on the justice committee felt they had heard enough. There were competing narratives and competing interpretations of the Shawcross principle.

I know that the Ethics Commissioner is enquiring into the matter. We have every confidence that the Ethics Commissioner has a number of very important powers for investigating the matter and look forward to that report by an independent officer of Parliament.