Peter MacKay

[Questions on the Order Paper, September 15th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, with regard to (a) and (c), the department respects the Government of Canada policy with regard to the undertaking of public opinion research and has delivered the results of this work and the related data to Library and Archives Canada for public release in accordance with the policy. The material is publicly available on the public opinion research reports website.

With regard to (b), the Minister of Justice does not rely on just one source of information as a basis for informing his decisions. The information collected from the telephone survey on prostitution was a single tool completed to provide the minister with information for use at his discretion.

With regard to (d), no organizations inside or outside of government received an advance copy of the survey results.

[Questions on the Order Paper, September 15th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, PPSC, was created on December 12, 2006, when the Director of Public Prosecutions Act, part 3 of the Federal Accountability Act, came into force.

The PPSC is an independent organization, reporting to Parliament through the Attorney General of Canada, and is responsible for prosecuting offences under more than 50 federal statutes and for providing prosecution-related legal advice to law enforcement agencies.

Correspondence between the PPSC and other government departments mainly comprises communications between crown counsel and various investigative agencies, and is protected by solicitor-client privilege and/or litigation privilege. As well, in order to identify all correspondence with other government departments, it would be necessary to conduct a manual search of the files and records of all PPSC employees and agents, which is not feasible given the operational and time demands required to do so.

[Justice, June 19th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, that is what I have just said. We are in fact seeing more qualified, capable women based on merit appointed to our courts. For example, four vacancies were just filled in Alberta by four highly qualified women. Two vacancies were filled by two highly qualified women in Ontario. In British Columbia, there were two out of four recently appointed in November, qualified excellent judicial appointments. Two from Quebec, highly qualified, merit based appointments and one, just one that was available last week in the member's home province of Nova Scotia, filled by a highly qualified excellent judicial appointment.

[Justice, June 19th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we are doing. We are encouraging more women to apply. We are encouraging more women to go through the judicial advisory council, which I am proud to say has resulted in 182 women at the superior court and appeal court level.

Further to that, I am extremely proud that our government appointed the first female Chief Justice of the Court of Appeal of Quebec and the first Haitian Canadian woman of the Quebec court. We are going to continue to appoint able women to the bench because they deserve to be there.

[Privacy, June 19th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I disagree and of course that is not what the Supreme Court said. The Supreme Court has stated and has supported the government's position that provisions regarding voluntary disclosure and immunity do not provide legal authority for access to information without a warrant.

While I am on my feet, I want to congratulate the police in Halifax, who today announced the results of Operation Snapshot III, which led to the rescue of five children from sexual exploitation and 150 people charged. Since 2012, the national child exploitation coordination centre has identified more than 45,000 instances of child exploitation.

[Privacy, June 19th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, we always do. We always respect the Supreme Court. We always respect the decisions. The reality here is the Supreme Court's decision clearly stated that the Criminal Code provisions dealing with voluntary disclosure and immunity do not provide legal authority for access to information without a warrant. As our government has continually said, those provisions regarding voluntary disclosure and immunity do not provide legal authority for access to information without a warrant. This is nothing new.

We respect the decision. It reinforces the position of the government and we will move forward with Bill C-13.

[Justice, June 19th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, all I can say is what I have already indicated, that that is of course a complete misrepresentation of what I said.

As a son, as a father, that is the last thing I would ever do. What I was doing was completely the opposite, in encouraging women to apply more readily to our judiciary.

That, of course, is done through a process, as the member knows. Appointments are made at the recommendation of the 17 judicial advisory committees across the country. Since 2006, I am extremely proud to inform the House that we have appointed 182 excellent women to the superior and appeal courts of this country.

[Justice, June 19th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, that, of course, is a complete mischaracterization of what I said, what I think, how I act, and who I am.

In fact, with respect to judicial appointments, they are based on one criterion and one criterion only, and that is merit and judicial excellence.

With respect to minorities and women being promoted to the judiciary, I think we can all agree that government of course plays an important role in that, but so too do law schools, so too do law societies. That is exactly the message I was bringing to the Ontario Bar Association.

[Prohibiting Cluster Munitions Act, June 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to questions on the order paper. They are questions nos. 489 and 490.

[Victims Bill of Rights Act, June 18th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I know that they are chirping over there.

I know that the member is from Western Arctic, and he will be very happy to know that we did a lot of consultation in his part of the country. We heard directly from victims and participants in the justice system.

When it comes to committee witnesses, I invite the member to rise in this place and walk over to talk to the committee chair, because it is the chair who decides on the witnesses and the sitting times. That work is done by those committees at arm's length from the Minister of Justice. He would be the first, I am sure, to rise in his place and decry any interference from the Minister of Justice if I in any way tried to influence those witnesses.