Francis Drouin

[Rural Economic Development, March 22nd, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, my constituents often tell me how important it is to have good Internet access and connectivity. We know that this is an important issue that contributes to development in rural regions. It is an important concern for the people of Glengarry—Prescott—Russell and all Canadians in rural areas across the country.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Rural Economic Development give the House an update?

[Interim Estimates, March 21st, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I hope you find my tie acceptable.

I would like to ask my colleague through which door I came in. He may not have noticed, but I was in the left-hand corner of the room at the beginning of the reading of the motion, and I was seated when the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons rose on a point of order. I was in the room when the motion was read out.

[Alleged Interference in Justice System, February 28th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

The police in Canada are independent.

[Alleged Interference in Justice System, February 28th, 2019]

Politicians do not run the police.

[Alleged Interference in Justice System, February 28th, 2019]

My hon. colleague spoke about political interference, but yesterday his own party leader engaged in political interference when he asked the RCMP to intervene in a matter for which it should be completely independent.

My colleague was a journalist in Quebec, and I want to ask him whether we should wait for all of the testimony to be heard before making a decision. Does he truly believe that a politician should intervene and call on the police to investigate?

[Alleged Interference in Justice System, February 28th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my hon. colleague's speech.

As a member of Parliament, I must say that I am surprised by what I heard today and what I have been hearing this evening. My hon. colleague says that he would not be prepared to fight tooth and nail if jobs were at stake in his riding. The Conservatives understand that, since they are not prepared to fight tooth and nail for jobs.

I must say that I am a little bit—

[Alleged Interference in Justice System, February 28th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I would agree if we were talking about former Prime Minister Harper, because he never spoke to the media. Our Prime Minister always talks to the media and has always answered the media's question.

I do not want to tell the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights what it should do. My colleague sits with me on the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food. He surely would not agree with my telling the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights what it should do. We should let the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights do its job. If, at some point, there are other questions, we will see what happens.

[Alleged Interference in Justice System, February 28th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I will wait for the justice committee, which is looking at that idea. I know that it is going to come out with recommendations.

The U.K. has a system that completely separates the Attorney General and the justice minister. I do not think it is a terrible idea, but I will let the justice committee come out with some particular recommendations. Perhaps, yes, it is something we should look at.

[Alleged Interference in Justice System, February 28th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for calling me pure and innocent. My mother would beg to differ.

Let me come back to the important matters. I will not comment on what a colleague said in a tweet. I will comment on the process that allows us to get to the truth. The opposition members often say that they want to get to the truth, but they immediately start pointing fingers before even hearing all the testimony of the people concerned.

Today, we heard the former principal secretary say that he wants to appear before the justice committee. Before commenting on this story and pointing the finger at everyone, I would like to know if we are ready to hear the truth. Before we can get to the truth, we have to hear all the testimony. That is how things work in a parliamentary system.

[Alleged Interference in Justice System, February 28th, 2019]

Madam Speaker, I also want to talk about transparency.

Before the 2011 election, the government had several ministers who are still here on the other side of the House. The Conservative government told Canadians not to worry because the fighter jets would cost $10 billion. What did the previous government do to be transparent on that issue? It did not do anything special in terms of waiving cabinet confidentiality. It never waived solicitor-client privilege. It never did those things. Canadians had to wait for the Auditor General to table a report to learn the truth.

The Prime Minister has done something unprecedented, in recent history, by waiving cabinet confidentiality to allow the former attorney general to testify before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. Opposition members are still refusing to recognize that.

Last week, they wanted to hear from the former attorney general. She had the opportunity to speak before the committee, and that is what is important. That is the difference between us and the official opposition.

I want to get into the issue of the integrity framework, because it is an important issue. We have been attacked again by the opposition, which is saying that somehow we are conspiring with one company to change the integrity framework.

I have worked on the integrity framework, and we often talked about the 10-year ban on companies being allowed to bid for government contracts. I know this policy has continuously changed since 2012. I recall when the government of the day was the Harper government, and now a lot of MPs, including former cabinet ministers, now sit on the other side. At the time, the government of the day recognized that if affiliates were caught because of corrupt practices in other countries, employees in Canada should not pay the price because of that.

This is exactly what is at issue. The issue is whether employees, pensioners and shareholders pay the price because of a few corrupt individuals in a company.

I go back to my role as an MP. I would fight for those jobs any day.

Finally, I want to talk about the testimony yesterday.

This was not a question asked by members on this side of the House and it was not a question asked by the official opposition; it was a question asked by the member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley. He asked the former attorney general whether there was any illegal activity conducted in this activity, and she said no, absolutely not.

The Leader of the Opposition stood up yesterday at seven o'clock and did a big press release. He talked about interfering in the judicial process, while at the same time directing the police to investigate this particular issue, knowing full well that the former attorney general said that there was no criminal activity.

I will end my speech here, but any MP should fight for jobs. If those MPs on the other side will not fight for jobs, people can rest assured that on this side of the House, this Prime Minister and government will always fight for jobs.