House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2021, with 43% of the vote.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, again, this is an extraordinarily complex case. The decisions to produce documents ultimately would lie with a judge for reasons of various kinds of confidentiality and privilege. This is a normal course of events for these kinds of documents.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, as I have said, there was a process that was put into place that would allow the documents to be identified and selected, and then they would go through to a judge as well as a civil servant to determine potential privileges that applied to the documents. This is extraordinarily complex, and I am confident that we met our obligation for third party documents.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, this was an extraordinarily complex case in which documents needed to be identified, and in which potential privilege could be claimed for solicitor-client privilege and for litigation privilege, as well as cabinet confidence.
Those decisions are, in the normal course of events, made by a judge. We set up a process that would allow that to happen, and I am confident that we met our obligations to the defence in this case.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, ultimately it is a judge who would order both the final manner in which the documents were redacted and the production of documents themselves. Ultimately these were decisions that were going to be made by the judge.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, this was an extraordinarily complex case with many documents. From beginning to end, over six months, my understanding is that only 246 potentially responsive documents had yet to be reviewed when the stay happened, which meant that we complied with virtually all of the document requests.
This is a far better time frame than in many other complex cases of a similar nature.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, the process that was set up was set up precisely so that defence counsel could inquire and get documents from the government.
The process that was set up allowed for the department of justice to receive applications for potentially responsive records. These are all kinds of records. Over 144,000 such records were identified, and eventually 8,000 documents were deemed to be potentially possible. It was ultimately the court that made that decision.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, I have received a breakdown of how the justice department dealt with the third party orders for documents. I am satisfied, and the court appeared to be satisfied, that we met our obligations in that regard.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, what I have been trying to say for the hon. member is that the act does not apply in this case.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, under section 13 of the act, the director of public prosecutions can, in this case and at her discretion, issue such a notice to the Attorney General of Canada when a case is in the national interest.
Business of Supply May 14th, 2019
Mr. Chair, that would be privileged information. It would be solicitor-client privilege. That is the way we have normally treated section 13 notices. What I can say for the hon. member, as I have stated in the House, and I know she was listening attentively, is that this case was prosecuted under the Criminal Code and the attorney general who was responsible for the prosecution was actually the attorney general for Ontario.