Interventions in Committee
RSS feed based on search criteria Export search results - CSV (plain text) Export search results - XML
Add search criteria
View Lisa Raitt Profile
View Lisa Raitt Profile
2019-07-25 12:38
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much for ruling this admissible. Through the questioning today something has become quite apparent to me, and it has been confirmed for me as well in the discussion I had with Ms. Campbell. It is that this is truly an important issue for us to study. The chair of the advisory committee for the Supreme Court of Canada nomination process has indicated that this is something she thinks MPs would be interested in getting to the bottom of. I agree with her and I appreciate that piece of advice.
I am also concerned that there seems to be a miscommunication, deliberate or not, with respect to what is actually being investigated now and who is being investigated. I understand that part of the defence, I guess, in saying no to a justice committee inquiry was that the Privacy Commissioner was doing his job.
As you may have noticed today, I brought up the fact that section 50 of the Privacy Act exempts any political staff or ministers or prime ministers from an investigation. Simply put, the Prime Minister will not be interviewed by the Privacy Commissioner. Minister Lametti will not be interviewed by the Privacy Commissioner. The cabinet ministers who were consulted as part of the previous process will not be interviewed by the Privacy Commissioner. Elder Marques will not be interviewed by the Privacy Commissioner. Mathieu Bouchard will not be interviewed by the Privacy Commissioner, and neither will Ben Chin be interviewed by the Privacy Commissioner.
The reason I'm concerned is that in response to my questions, the minister was very careful when I asked whether or not his political staff were going to be interviewed. He responded by by saying that his department would co-operate. That, I believe, is a deliberate attempt to split a hair. As a former minister, I don't appreciate it because I don't think it's being fair to Canadians, as it does not allow them to understand exactly what is being investigated now.
As a result, I'm proposing this motion so that there will be no gap in any investigation regarding this incredibly egregious leak of the personal information of Mr. Justice Glenn Joyal to the press, with the purpose, quite frankly, of delegitimizing whether or not Jody Wilson-Raybould was in favour of the charter. That's what it all comes back to.
As a result, I look forward to the comments by my colleagues around the table regarding the matter.
I would point out one last thing with respect to what Minister Lametti testified today. When I put it to Ms. Campbell whether or not she discussed the matter of the leak with Minister Lametti, she indicated that she had not discussed it with Minister Lametti as he went forward in the new process. That to me, as well, is of concern. At the very least, I think Minister Lametti should return to answer questions on the topic and, as I indicated before, anybody else who was involved in it.
This committee has the ability to call everybody. The Privacy Commissioner is barred by statute from calling the key people who politically had the information on a discussion between the former minister of justice, Jody Wilson-Raybould, and the Prime Minister of Canada. We're not going to get to the bottom of anything unless we have those people come forward and tell us what happened.
Thank you.
Result: 1 - 1 of 1