//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1310)[Translation]Thank you, Mr. Chair.It’s simple: no one is above the law. It’s a fundamental principle in Canada. The obligation to ensure ethical standards for all parliamentarians is the role of this committee. Mr. Dion’s report is clear: Mr. Trudeau broke Canadian law. He set up a plan to undermine the role of the former attorney general of Canada to help his friends at SNC-Lavalin. It’s not acceptable in Canada for the Prime Minister's Office to be an open bar for lobbyists. We have an obligation to abide by the codes and ethics of the Parliament of Canada.[English]Mr. Chair, it is my understanding that Mr. Dion is ready to speak. Is that correct?Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1310)[English]He reports to our committee. He's an officer of Parliament and, as an officer of Parliament, his job is to ensure that every parliamentarian meets the highest ethical code. When you are the Prime Minister of this country you are expected to meet the highest ethical code. We have the commissioner ready to speak and to respond to the report, as his normal function is to come to our committee and present that report.We need to hear from Mr. Dion because to have the Prime Minister of the country found guilty of breaking the law to aid very powerful people by writing a piece of legislation that existed only for that company—it was written for one purpose, to give them a “get out of jail” card—and then by having a campaign involving so many key people in the Liberal government to put pressure on the Attorney General and the independent prosecutor, this is not acceptable. Either we have the rule of law in this country or we don't. That is the fundamental question. For the Prime Minister to invoke the Mark Zuckerberg defence, which is “Hey, thanks a lot for finding me guilty. I'm just going to blow you off....” Mark Zuckerberg may get away with that because he lives in another jurisdiction and he is a gazillionaire, but Justin Trudeau cannot blow off the Ethics Commissioner of Canada. If he wants to do that, then he needs to come back and bring in a law that says he's no longer bound by any laws. However, right now he is bound by the Conflict of Interest Act and he's been found guilty. We see there is a pattern of interference by his office and the Privy Council, which prevented nine potential witnesses from giving testimony. We need to know who those nine witnesses were. We need to know how extensive the interference in and the obstruction of the work of the Ethics Commissioner was, because the Ethics Commissioner reports to us. It is our job to go back to Parliament whenever there is a problem with lobbying, with the work of the Privacy Commissioner, the work of the Information Commissioner or the work of the Ethics Commissioner. When their work is being interfered with for political purposes, it is our job to put our partisanship aside and say that we have to have a standard that all parliamentarians meet and the Prime Minister has failed to meet this.Mr. Chair, you have the power to ask the commissioner to report to us. I'd like to see you exercise that. He has to report to us. This is his job. Any attempt by the Liberals to stop that will be continuing a pattern of interference in and obstruction of the fundamental principles of the parliamentary system. Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (1330)[English] Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the committee members for having me at the committee today.I am having some serious déjà vu. Having sat on the justice committee along with some of my other colleagues here on the other side, this experience right now feels very familiar to me, with silence from the Liberal members and opposition members laying out the reasons why we'd like to hear the truth. I am certainly appreciative of Mr. Dion's report, but it leaves many questions. There are still questions to be answered that are incredibly important to democracy in our country, as my colleague mentioned. My son is 18 and will be voting for the first time this year. I can't imagine a country where the Prime Minister can break the law and not admit it and not apologize for it, but thinks that, quite frankly, somehow Canadians are going to accept it. Is this Canada's future now? Is this the bar we're setting, that the individual in the highest office in the land can break the law and nothing happens in response? He doesn't have any accountability for that. The players who are involved have no accountability for that. Mr. Morneau has been mentioned at this table. There are many questions surrounding his involvement, which he now in some way tries to say he can't recall, which seems incredibly unbelievable to Canadians.This matters. This is about the Prime Minister trying to corrupt the Attorney General's office. This report is incredibly important to Canadians. I think it's a mistake if there are those sitting around this table who think this does not matter to Canadians, that they don't understand enough about it, and there are members who want to get stuck talking about the McLellan report, or different things, such as the DPA, that surround this. The Prime Minister of Canada has broken the law. We have questions for the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner that need to be answered and that Canadians deserve the truth about. The pursuit of the truth and getting answers to questions that people have in this entire thing has constantly been blocked by the Liberals. All of us walked in through the press today and were asked questions because this report leaves things hanging, and we can't leave those questions hanging because this is an incredibly serious thing, regardless of who will be Prime Minister of Canada come this fall. We need to know who was involved and to have other people come forward, and we can't accept that it is now okay for the Prime Minister to break the law in Canada.I implore the Liberal members of this ethics committee, as I have done many, many times at the justice committee, to allow the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to speak before us.I understand, Mr. Chair, that he is waiting, so I move that we go to a vote so we can allow his testimony to begin and ask questions of him. I move for a vote, please. Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1355)[English]Mr. Chair, I have a point of order. The justice committee shut down their study. If the Liberal members want to have Anne McLellan, they can go back to the justice committee. This is about the ethics committee. To bring in the report of Anne McLellan, a former Liberal, go back to the justice committee that you shut down. This is about the ethics committee and Mr. Dion's report.Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinStevenMacKinnonGatineauBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1355)[English]I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.This is all fine, but we're talking about a specific report. The only job that is referenced as being at risk in the report is where the Prime Minister said he was speaking as the MP for Papineau. Since Mr. Morneau had no evidence of job losses, I would ask my colleague why he's making up facts now when we're talking about a factual finding of guilt against a Prime Minister who improperly used his position to further the interests of a very powerful corporation. That is the issue before us, not this spin and falsehood about jobs that has been proven to be false by the Ethics Commissioner. If the member has evidence that wasn't supplied to the Ethics Commissioner—perhaps from one of the nine witnesses who were not allowed to testify, who might know all about these jobs—I'd ask him to put it on the table, or spare us these Liberal talking points that have been proven to be false and that continue the falsehoods of the Prime Minister. Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinStevenMacKinnonGatineauBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1410)[English]I have a point of clarification. I have great respect for my honourable colleague. I worked with him for four years. He's very complex. I just need to hear whether he is voting against or voting for having Mr. Dion speak to our committee. I just need to clarify that.Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1410)[English]Thank you, my friend.NathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East YorkBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1415)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.I left home at 5 a.m. yesterday morning to catch my flight here. Ms. May comes from a little farther west than Thunder Bay. I know you come from some place out in the far west.This has been a fascinating discussion, but it has taken 81 minutes of our meeting. I am here to hear from Mr. Dion and we have good arguments. If Mr. Erskine-Smith puts his arguments, I'd rather they be put to Mr. Dion than to me, and I'd rather that Mr. Poilievre put his questions to Mr. Dion than to the Liberals, so I would ask that we get down to the business at hand and have Mr. Dion speak because we're running out of time.Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1420)[English]Thank you.I just wanted to get it on the record so we could stop beating around the bush, because we knew with the appearance of our friend, the former head of the Liberal Party, at our committee for the first time in four years, this was going to be a whipped vote, and they were going to let our friend Erskine-Smith off the hook because he's from Beaches and he's a nice guy. They did the math. He had to explain why he was more than willing to shadow box with the Ethics Commissioner. I'm glad that at least we have it clear now.I'd like to bring my motion forward because there are a lot of witnesses that I think need to be heard.Do you want me to read out the motion?Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1420)[English]It reads, first, that the committee invite the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion to present his findings of the “Trudeau II Report”, which I think has been cancelled out by the committee vote. Therefore, I move:That the Committee invite Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Minister of Finance Bill Morneau, and senior adviser to the Prime Minister and former Chief of Staff to the Minister of Finance, Ben Chin, on account of their intimate connection to the matters at the heart of the report; And that the Committee invite the Clerk of the Privy Council to appear to explain his decision to not share critical Cabinet confidences with the Commissioner, who felt that his investigation was hampered by the refusal.Why is this important? It's because we saw throughout this whole scandal the Liberals shut down the justice committee and not hear from other witnesses. They shut down the ethics committee and the Prime Minister stood in the House day after day and stated that they were going to work with and trust the Ethics Commissioner. What we've learned from this report is very disturbing because we actually now know that this plan to tailor-make a law.... Now, Mr. Erskine-Smith is a lawyer and I didn't go to law school, but from watching all of my law shows on TV, can you write your own laws if you're the defendant? Well, apparently if you're really powerful, yes, you can. Who fixes it for you? According to the evidence Mr. Dion has brought forward, very early on in the new government the Prime Minister met with the CEO of SNC-Lavalin and they discussed writing a law to get them a get-out-of-jail card. It was the Prime Minister who began the direction. That's one of the reasons we need to hear from Prime Minister Trudeau. Why is that important? It is because the Liberal line out there is, “Hey, it hasn't hurt us in the polls, so who cares?” Well, I hear from people all the time about this, people who are appalled that the Prime Minister could break his word so easily to Canadians. The Prime Minister said he was going to be open and transparent. I think of the promise the Prime Minister made to the people of Grassy Narrows. I've been in Grassy Narrows. I've seen children suffering from Minamata disease and I saw the Prime Minister say that his government would clean that up once and for all—and he did squat. Actually, he did something else. He made fun of Grassy Narrows at a gathering of his rich, elite friends. Now if only Grassy Narrows had lobbyists, they could say, “We want this fixed”. How much would fixing the health centre at Grassy Narrows cost a government that is this powerful? It's chump change, it's peanuts, yet in four years he couldn't move to help children suffering from mercury contamination. However, after the CEO of SNC-Lavalin said, “Hey, we want a get-out-of-jail card”, the Liberals over there now have the gall to tell us that he only ever cared about the public interest, that he only cared about jobs, that there were 9,000 jobs at stake. When we look at the report, we would think that it was the responsibility of the finance minister of this country, Bill Morneau from the famous Morneau Shepell. If they cared about jobs, they would have cared about Sears workers, but no, the Sears workers are now being looked after by the family company Morneau Shepell.If it were 9,000 jobs, you would have thought they would have done due diligence. This is what shocked me. With Bill Morneau, I thought, “Okay, the guy wears very expensive suits and surely to God he knows how to run a business if he's really concerned about 9,000 jobs.” They wouldn't pull that number out of thin air, and yet the report shows that they had done nothing to prove this. My Liberal colleagues say it is actually the role of the justice department, that it should have been Jody Wilson-Raybould who undertook an assessment of the impacts.Again, I didn't go to law school so I ask, when you're the defendant, do you expect the prosecutor to have the responsibility of figuring out what it's going to cost if you get charged and convicted? What's the cost to the economy? Say you're a businessman and you're a corrupt businessman, is it the responsibility of the Attorney General to do a cost analysis? Well, I guess it only is if you're powerful enough to have the law written for you. Let's just go through some of the questions that were really concerning.(1425) Why do we need Bill Morneau here? I know I've been sort of picking on Bill, but what really shocks me is that Bill Morneau flies to Davos, Switzerland to meet with the head of SNC-Lavalin—a week after the so-called public consultation period on the SNC deferred prosecution agreement, a specific get out of jail card is given—and Bill Morneau tells the Ethics Commissioner he doesn't remember what they talked about. He doesn't remember that he flew to Davos, Switzerland to see the head of SNC-Lavalin and doesn't remember what they talked about. That's a month before this get out of jail card was slipped into an omnibus piece of legislation, and Bill Morneau doesn't remember that. This is what we're talking about here—the fact that they were able to write a law, a specific law, to help SNC in a specific case to get off its charges.Now, we learn from this report that once this law was put in, Ms. Wilson-Raybould was very concerned as the Attorney General that this law had been rushed because it was a law for one company for one case. She tried to distance herself from it. Why? She felt it would compromise her. I would love to have heard from Mr. Dion about this, but obviously we're not going to be allowed. The fact is that the Attorney General had raised concerns that a law was being implemented without proper due regard for the fact that a law must represent the interests of all Canadians. It cannot be written tailor-made for the defendant.Mr. Morneau again appears to interfere in this process when Ben Chin starts calling the Attorney General's office. Ben Chin says that the company's perception is that the process of negotiating a remediation agreement is taking too long. Oh my God, it must be really hard to be so powerful as to be able to write your own laws and then say, hey, how come we're not off the hook yet? So they phone the Attorney General's office to say, speed it up. Jessica Prince responds to Ben Chin that he is really close to being far over the line on the improper interference in the independence of the judiciary. That report is made available to Bill Morneau, and Bill Morneau tells the Ethics Commissioner that he doesn't remember seeing it. I mean, poor Bill. How could you have such a dodgy memory if you have to have so many facts and numbers and jobs? You can't remember that you've been told by your chief of staff that you are improperly interfering in an independent prosecution investigation. You know, when you speak to the Ethics Commissioner, you are under oath.Is Bill Morneau truthful that he doesn't remember the key meeting in Davos, Switzerland, that he doesn't remember what they talked about, that he doesn't remember receiving that email from his chief of staff that he was improperly advising? I can't believe that Bill Morneau didn't know that this concern had been raised. I would like to ask Bill Morneau why he told the Ethics Commissioner he never read it. It says one of two things: either Mr. Morneau is incompetent, or Mr. Morneau is not telling the truth to the Ethics Commissioner. Each of those is very troubling.We know the Liberals have told us that they got a report from Anne McLellan and everything would be rosy if we just followed that. Well, everything would be rosy as is, because you don't have to change the rules to stop interference in the independent prosecution; you just have to respect the rules. That's what the Liberals don't understand. Justin Trudeau doesn't believe the law of the land applies to him. We don't need a new report to say anything about the independence of the prosecutorial system in our country. It is established. It is based on a principle, and that principle is that you don't cross that line. I'm amazed at how many people were involved in this. This is where Ben Chin needs to talk. Why in God's name was Ben Chin calling the Attorney General's office demanding that they start to move more quickly on getting their pals at SNC-Lavalin off the hook? Who gave him that authority? They were discussing this agreement with industry, the Treasury Board, procurement, and not once with the Attorney General's office, so when Ms. Wilson-Raybould read the report, she said she was very surprised at the extent of the interference. There was a whole pattern, of everybody. It was all hands on deck in the Liberal Party. They all knew. They were all involved, and they were all breaking the law of Canada because Justin Trudeau told them to break the law, because Justin Trudeau said, “Hey, I'm the MP for Papineau and there's going to be an election soon.” Bouchard said, “Yeah, laws are great, but we have to get re-elected.”(1430) We have my Liberal colleagues putting the falsehood out that he was concerned about jobs. I think Mr. Erskine-Smith, whom I have great respect for—I don't like his shoes, but everything else I have great respect for—just told us that it was perfectly okay for the MP for Papineau to stand up for his region, just like Mr. Erskine-Smith would stand up for issues in his region and just like I stand up for jobs in my region. The difference is that I am a single member of Parliament, a backbencher. I am not the Prime Minister of this country, so I can stand up and say, hey, I need to help jobs in my riding. That's part of my job. That's part of Mr. Erskine-Smith's job, but the Prime Minister can't say, “I have an election up ahead. I have to get re-elected, and you have to rewrite me a law.” Correct me if I'm wrong, but when Jim Flaherty was the finance minister, I think I was the one who went after him over the fact that he had written a letter in support of a business while he was finance minister. Mr. Flaherty said he was acting as a local MP and that was his job. They ruled that you cannot do that as a finance minister, because you have so much extra power, a power that Mr. Erskine-Smith or Madame Fortier or I don't have. That's the difference.That's what the Conflict of Interest Act is based on. The higher up you are in terms of political power, the more responsibilities you have. So when Justin Trudeau says that he is the MP for Papineau and has to defend his patch, he is already breaking the Conflict of Interest Act and furthering someone else's interest. Having been on this committee for a number of years, I note Mr. Erskine-Smith's belief that you can only claim that financial interest is a personal financial interest—that if someone gives you money, you are advancing their interest. This has been a long-standing debate in terms of the role of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner—what defines interest. Mary Dawson, our previous one, was much more vague about this, and certainly when there were issues of people paying money into a riding association, she was saying, is that direct or indirect?Mr. Dion has given us a ruling, and that ruling is that the Prime Minister was furthering the financial interest of SNC-Lavalin, not furthering the interest of thousands of jobs and not furthering the interest of the Canadian people. If the Liberals believed he was wrong, they would have let him speak, but they're not letting him speak. They have shut him down. They have shut down our committee. They've obstructed the work of our committee, so we have to go to other witnesses, which is another reason why Mr. Trudeau is very essential to this. One of the most staggering statements I found in Mr. Dion's report is that we have an SNC lawyer, Mr. Prichard, talking to the former president of the Treasury Board about the case that Ms. Wilson-Raybould was overseeing. Mr. Prichard states:We are also considering other ways to make it easier for the Minister to engage and reverse the [Director of Public Prosecutions'] decision. In the end, however, it will take a deliberate decision from the center....That there, my friends, is collusion. That there is conspiracy, and that there is the lawyer for SNC-Lavalin phoning the head of the Treasury Board and saying they are going to corrupt the decision of the Attorney General and “make it easier” for them to overturn this, but it's going to come from the centre. Who is the centre? The centre is the Prime Minister of this country, Justin Trudeau, who in that moment is involved in the collusion and conspiracy to undermine the rule of law in this country. That's why the Liberals voted against Mr. Dion presenting his report, because once that's on the record, all other questions become much less important.Then out of this is that Ms. Wilson-Raybould seems to have done her job. She was told that it would be extraordinary, unprecedented for her to bring other people in. The idea that Beverley McLachlin should be brought in was cooked up by SNC's lawyer, who is a former Supreme Court justice, who then reached out to another former Supreme Court justice to get an opinion.(1435) In Canada, we trust the independence of the Supreme Court. We believe these people are representing our interests, but when you're SNC-Lavalin, you can hire someone from the Supreme Court and he'll phone one of his buddies on the Supreme Court and they'll get you a tailor-made opinion, and then they'll go to Beverley McLachlin. Did anyone tell Beverley McLachlin, “Listen, Jody Wilson's not playing ball here. We need you to give us something so that we can put pressure on her”? As I said, this lady was not for turning. She did not give into it because, knowing that the law had been written specifically for SNC, she was concerned that if she acted, it would have compromised her role as the Attorney General of this country. That was what she said, which leads me to the other reason we need to hear from Justin Trudeau.Mr. Dion's report states that when Mr. Trudeau's attempt was thwarted, he set out to professionally discredit the Attorney General of Canada. We know this from seeing how, when this became public, one story after another was leaked by the Liberal war machine painting Ms. Wilson-Raybould as troublesome and as taking orders from her father. What a diminution of the role of a woman attorney general. There was one attack after another. They actually lined up a whole bunch of the Liberal caucus to go out to the cameras and trash Jody Wilson's reputation, to blame her, to say that she was a troublemaker, that she didn't play well with others, that she wasn't good enough because she wouldn't go along. The Prime Minister has said it's really important to be open and to be feminist, but you have to play ball. She didn't play ball, and it says here in the report that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau attempted to discredit her. I think it's staggering that if you're standing up for the rule of law in this country, they will orchestrate a campaign to trash your reputation. That needs accountability. I would have preferred to ask Mr. Dion about this directly, because Mr. Dion is not making these statements out of thin air. He's making them on the evidence he found, and we don't have access to him to hear him speak because the Liberals are obstructing this, just as they obstructed everything else. That is what got them into trouble, but we could ask Mr. Trudeau.Finally, Mr. Chair, I just want to end on the issue of obstruction, which we've seen today and which has been the pattern, as everybody in the media has been saying would happen because you can see the pattern of obstruction. What's very shocking is that nine witnesses were blocked from giving testimony, nine witnesses were denied having access to speak to the Ethics Commissioner. The Ethics Commissioner should have been allowed to come to our committee because it is our job to be the oversight committee for the Ethics Commissioner, and if someone is interfering with the work of an ethics investigation, that needs to be reported to Parliament. The problem is that it's the Prime Minister of the country who is being investigated. As I said earlier, the principle of the Conflict of Interest Act and the code and the lobbying code is that the more powerful you are, the higher your standard of ethical accountability must be. You can be a newbie MP and make a mistake and you can get into trouble, but there's a difference when you're the Prime Minister of this country. Why did they interfere? They claim cabinet confidence. Well, obviously cabinet confidence didn't mean all that much when Jody Wilson-Raybould was meeting Gerry Butts and SNC was pretty much sitting under the table and listening in. They didn't seem to think cabinet confidence meant diddly-squat then. They silenced Ms. Wilson-Raybould. They silenced Jane Philpott's ability to speak. They've attempted to use cabinet confidence to interfere with the work of the Ethics Commissioner. If this stands, then what the Prime Minister's Office is saying is that he is above the law of the land because the only law that applies to the Prime Minister is the Conflict of Interest Act. If you're going to use the power of the Prime Minister's Office to forbid the Ethics Commissioner from gathering evidence, then he can't do his job. We need to find out. I would like to ask Justin Trudeau what he meant when he said, well, we don't want to create any “troublesome” precedents. Well, yeah, I bet. When you're under investigation, it's troublesome. It's the same when you're the defendant—and my colleague Mr. Erskine-Smith can correct me if I'm wrong because I did not go to law school—because my understanding is that generally the defendant doesn't get to write the law. The defendant doesn't get to call the prosecutor's office and say, “Hey, speed it up and get me off the hook. I'm important”. That's not how it works.(1440) SNC, as the defendant, should not be allowed to write its own laws. And the Prime Minister, as the person under investigation, does not and should not have the right to obstruct the investigation because he finds it troublesome. Since they're so concerned about Mr. Dion being able to testify about what he found, I would say that if we are not allowed to hear from the commissioner who reports to our committee and we're being obstructed on this, then the reasonable thing would be to have Mr. Chin come, because he got promoted, didn't he? For all his interference with the independence of the prosecution, he got promoted. Gerry Butts is back on the campaign bus, so obviously they're all laughing and slapping each other on the back, because breaking laws is what Liberals are doing and they're getting away with it.The Prime Minister needs to come because he's the one who said, “Yes, thanks for the report finding me guilty, but whatever, I'm carrying on”, as should Bill Morneau, the man with the amazing disappearing memory. On that, I do remember that Bill Morneau forgot he owned a villa in the south of France, so I guess it's possible. Who among us has not forgotten that we own a villa in the south of France?Frank, I know, a couple of times you just dropped it and never even mentioned it, and then it was like, “Oh yes, geez, I can't remember where I put my keys.” So maybe he flew to Davos to meet with the head of SNC-Lavalin just prior to this omnibus legislation and maybe he forgot. But maybe he didn't, and that's why Mr. Morneau needs to testify before our committee. Chin, BenClerk of the Privy CouncilCommittee businessCommittee witnessesCriminal prosecutionsEthics and ethical issuesMorneau, BillMotionsPolitical influenceReferences to membersSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Trudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1445)[English]On a point of clarification, he just attacked me. Tell him to stop.NathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East YorkNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1450)[English] I just want to pick up on a lot of things said by my colleagues here, many of which I agree with. I would like to talk a little bit about the importance of having Minister Morneau and Ben Chin appear before the committee. This is something that we attempted to do at the justice committee. Of course, we were unable to, and I really reject Mr. MacKinnon's characterization of those meetings as being comprehensive or that we had enough testimony at the justice committee. Nothing could be further from the truth. There were multiple attempts made to have many other people come before the committee, because, quite frankly, we still have only a part of the story. I believe I even heard a reference made on the other side today to Ms. Wilson-Raybould saying she didn't have anything else to say. That was because what she had said was within the scope of what she was allowed to say. She certainly has more to say, and I think we all accept that now.I would also like to echo my colleague and say that the Prime Minister owes an apology to Ms. Wilson-Raybould, to Ms. Philpott and to Canadians. The Prime Minister has repeatedly stood up and said he's never understood this as being some type of political interference, yet when we look at the report by the Ethics Commissioner, we see that starting back in mid-August 2018. Ben Chin was going to Jessica Prince, and right away she was saying to him that it could be perceived as improper political interference. Therefore, at the very beginning of this, someone was laying out that this could be perceived as political interference. Now, I don't believe that Mr. Chin was operating on his own behalf, that he just decided to go over to speak to the Attorney General's staff. I believe he was under the direction of the minister he works for, Mr. Morneau. If we could hear from Mr. Chin, I anticipate that being one of the questions. What was the direction given to him in those conversations that happened with Jessica Prince? In mid-August 2018, we already have two staff people having a conversation about potential political interference. Then we move on and as we go through the story, we see that on September 19 Jody Wilson-Raybould went to Mr. Morneau in the House and told him quite clearly that his staff needed to stop contacting her office on the matter because they were undermining the fundamental tenets of democracy and prosecutorial independence.Here's Minister Morneau again involved in the story, who, again, was being told directly about political interference. Are you telling me that the Minister of Finance, when being told by the Attorney General and Minister of Justice that he is potentially even touching that line, does not go to talk to the Prime Minister? This is what we need to know. We need to know and understand what was said at that cabinet table, because clearly there are a lot of players, and potentially they did notify the Prime Minister and say, “Listen, you're getting very close to something dangerous here; you have to stop what you're doing.” Are you telling me that no one at that cabinet table, including Mr. Morneau, whose fingerprints and those of his staff are all over this report, notified the Prime Minister that what he was doing was wrong? I cannot comprehend that happening. For the Prime Minister to repeatedly stand up and say that he doesn't believe he did this, that he doesn't know what this would be interpreted as, whatever it is he's trying to say, is incomprehensible. Quite frankly, it is incomprehensible for him to say that he accepts the report and some kind of responsibility but doesn't understand this, when clearly there were many people within the circle who were aware of this and had an obligation and responsibility to go to the Prime Minister and tell him.Then we get to November 2018. On November 20, the PCO sent a memo telling him not to meet with Mr. Bruce or any representative from SNC to discuss the case in order to avoid public perception of political interference. Again, he's notified, this time by the PCO. It appears as though there were people trying to inform him. I hope they were, because it's their obligation and they should be doing that, and yet he's ignoring that. There's another reference to it on November 22. Again, PMO staffers were involved—Bouchard and Marques. Are you telling me they were all just out there operating independently and not reporting back to the Prime Minister, not reporting back to the minister, and that the Minister of Finance isn't reporting back to the Prime Minister of Canada? These are some serious systemic problems. (1455) I know we don't have the answer, because now we're not going to be able to have the Ethics Commissioner come before us. I would implore us to listen to and hear from all of these players. We need to hear from Minister Morneau.I'll leave my comments at that.I think there's such a strong argument. I don't understand how the Minister of Finance in our country is pretending that he doesn't remember. He's directing his staff to do things that they're apparently not telling him about or having conversations with him about. There are many questions.One of the questions we have for the Ethics Commissioner is whether or not he thinks Mr. Morneau acted improperly. Canadians have a right to know, and this committee should pursue that effort.I'll leave my comments at that.Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1500)[English] Thank you.I want to address a few things. First, I want to remind my colleague Mr. Erskine-Smith that actually we are an investigative body here. We have subpoenaed evidence, we've issued summonses, and we've seized documents. We have been more than willing at this committee to use the force we have, but the fundamental job we have is to have the officers of Parliament report to us, and today the Liberals voted not to allow the Ethics Commissioner to present his report.One of the other officers of Parliament who report to us is the lobbying commissioner. We've had very little relationship with Madame Bélanger, the new commissioner, but the previous commissioner, Karen Shepherd, was an extraordinary force for accountability, and I'm hoping Madame Bélanger will do the same thing. I have written to her because I am very concerned.Something we've raised numerous times as the New Democratic Party is the problem with the difference between the conflict of interest obligations and the Lobbying Act. How is it possible that the Prime Minister can be found to be privately furthering the interests of a corporation, yet that corporation is not found to have been improperly lobbying or vice versa? We've had situations where the Lobbying Act has been ruled against individual lobbyists but not against the public office holder. I really think it's important for Madame Bélanger to investigate, given that we have not been able to get answers from Mr. Dion because the Liberals have obstructed his speaking. However, the pattern of intense lobbying that involved writing an actual law while they were the defendant is very concerning. The Lobbying Act is clear. You cannot put a public office holder in a conflict of interest or in a compromised position, and that's what was being done, right down to the statement that they needed the power “from the center” to put that pressure on to force Ms. Wilson-Raybould to change her mind. The issue of lobbying is something that we really need to deal with.I want to go to Ms. May's point about the international implications. I think this is very important, and I'm really glad that she framed it in this manner. The idea that this was about Canadian jobs and Canadian pensions is ridiculous when we see the pattern of corruption and bribery charges that have been brought against SNC-Lavalin in jurisdiction after jurisdiction. To be barred by the World Bank, you have to be pretty bad. We're dealing with a lot of jurisdictions where the rule of law is very tepid, to say the least. The allegations that have come out of Libya are shocking, and Canada has to have international credibility that we believe in the rule of law. To that end, we now know that the OECD anti-bribery unit is putting the Trudeau government on watch because they've seen how this government has attempted to shut down the SNC-Lavalin investigation. I agree with Ms. May that what we're looking at here is not about the jobs of individual Canadians, because the construction work has to be done. They are bidding on projects that many companies are bidding on in Canada. This is certainly going to be about some very powerful people, going back 20 years at least, who are very tied to both the Liberals and the previous Conservative government. Do I mention Arthur Porter here? Here was a man who ended his days in a Panamanian jail. He was given a position by former prime minister Harper to oversee CSIS. That's the power of these people. In terms of Arthur Porter's involvement with the McGill hospital scandal, those court cases still have to come, but the international implications of Canada's shutting down an investigation into one of their own companies, which has been found to be involved in corruption and bribery internationally, make Canada a country that is not credible on the international rule of law. That is what the OECD anti-bribery unit has announced. It's why they are investigating.What we are witnessing today is the obstruction of a committee, forbidding an officer of Parliament from doing his job, which is to report to a committee on a finding of guilt against a prime minister of Canada for furthering the interests of a corporation facing corruption and bribery charges. This is a company that has been barred around the world because of its repeated violations. This is very serious, and we can see the power they have.(1505) It is the corrosive power of the one per cent to be able to call the Prime Minister's Office to say, “We want you to write us a law.” It is the corrosive power of the one per cent to get a former Supreme Court justice as their lawyer, and then to have him call another Supreme Court justice to say, “We need your help. Give us legal advice.” They were undermining the Attorney General of this country. I don't know if I need to point it out, but Mr. Iacobucci, of whom I think Mr. Wernick said that he was no shrinking violet.... They wanted to please him. They wanted to keep him happy, yet he is representing a defendant against the Government of Canada and he has also been chosen by the Liberal government to be the key point person on the Trans Mountain consultations. How can you be so incestuous with the powerful and the rich that you could have someone who is fighting Canada in court also calling the Prime Minister's Office saying, “Hey, I want you to change the law so I don't have to go to court, and by the way, I will be your voice in negotiations with one of the most important factors”, which is the first nation consultations on the pipeline expansion.Clearly, if this goes to court, a lot of very politically powerful people are implicated. That's what the Prime Minister was concerned about, because if the Prime Minister was concerned about people's jobs, he would have done something for the Sears workers. He did nothing. He would have done something for the auto workers in Oshawa. He did nothing. However, when it came to the rich and powerful who were connected to SNC, who have been found in many jurisdictions to be involved in some reprehensible behaviour.... Building torture prisons for Gadhafi and making money out of that is not acceptable. There are international implications. This is why I want the Prime Minister to come to explain why he was so apprised, from the get-go, of passing this law. It is not just something that's going to get shut down in the short term because the Liberals have to get to an election. This is going to be a stench that hangs over Canada's international reputation if SNC is allowed to have that much power to interfere in the independence of the prosecution system of this country. We have to have the rule of law. We have to be able to show it because we are a country that is involved around the world and we cannot be seen, in any manner, to be favouring our own corporations over the rule of law and their obligations to meet the highest standards of ethics and legality around the world, whether it's in Montreal at the McGill hospital, in Bangladesh or in Libya. All corporations must have respect for the rule of law, and the Prime Minister must have respect for the rule of law. What we've seen here, and what we are seeing today, is that they don't have respect for the rule of law. To them, it's about helping the rich and powerful. That is the corrosive power of the one per cent, and that's what has to be called out. Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1515)[English]No.Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1515)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. You've been an excellent chair these past four years. I want to thank you for being non-partisan and keeping everybody on the straight and narrow. I have enormous respect for your work.I have enormous respect for Ms. Raitt, but I have to vote against this in the strongest terms.We cannot use our power as parliamentarians to target journalists. We cannot demand that journalists turn over evidence. We cannot demand that journalists testify before us. That is not the role of our committee. The role of our committee is to hold parliamentarians to account, not journalists. Sometimes they don't write the nicest things about me. I can't bring them forward and ask them why; that's their role. There has to be a strong separation between the role of journalism and the role of parliamentarians, and that's our committee's role.Committee businessEthics and ethical issuesPolitical influenceReferences to membersTrudeau, JustinBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1300)[English]Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you, everyone, for your intriguing testimony on this issue. I'm going to ask you about a couple of things that haven't been talked about here yet, but I'm thinking that this is extremely germane now and is a modern problem that we have. I know that it was brought up in terms of the rise of nationalism with Hinduism. I guess it's for all of you. I want to start with you, Ms. Kuo. Can you talk a bit about how social media is contributing to how those narratives are set up? On the misinformation campaigns and mob violence, is there something there that we should be contemplating as a government? It is something that we're thinking about here in our country and in our legislative environment in terms of where social media fits in. I'd just like to understand how social media is actually a factor in these phenomena.Could we start with you, Ms. Kuo? Then I'll give everyone chance to comment in my time allocation. Go ahead.Christianity and ChristiansCivil and human rightsSocial networking sitesAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanLilyKuo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1305)[English]Okay. Ms. Michels, do you want to...?LilyKuoMindyMichels//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1305)[English]Okay.Mr. Brobbel.MindyMichelsFloydBrobbel//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1305)[English]Okay.Ms. Stangl, do you want to add anything?FloydBrobbelAnna LeeStangl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1305)[English]Are any of you aware of any situations in which one Christian community that is sanctioned by the state helps or reaches out to another Christian community that isn't? None of you...?Christianity and ChristiansCivil and human rightsCommunity organizationsAnna LeeStanglMindyMichels//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1305)[English]Is that it?FloydBrobbelFloydBrobbel//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1305)[English]Okay. That's very interesting. Thank you.FloydBrobbelAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1325)[English]Thank you.I have listened to all of your comments. You have mentioned private and public diplomacy, and where the future hot spots will be. China and India are the two most populous nations in the world. Where does what's happening there fit in with Canadian diplomacy, when you look at issues as a matter of a state's capacity to deliver on human rights, such as religious freedom, and with the persecution of Christians as something that people need training and education on or as a matter of will?I don't know if that's too much for my five minutes, but aside from targeting sanctions at specific people, what can we be doing in terms of the public diplomacy? Do you see some opportunities there that we haven't maximized yet or that we could be doing a little better on?Do you want to start, Ms. Michels? Go ahead.Christianity and ChristiansCivil and human rightsInternational relationsAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanMindyMichels//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1325)[English]Thank you.Ms. Stangl, do you want to add anything to that?MindyMichelsAnna LeeStangl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1325)[English] Thank you.Ms. Kuo.Anna LeeStanglLilyKuo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1330)[English]Mr. Brobbel, quickly.LilyKuoFloydBrobbel//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1330)[English]Okay.FloydBrobbelFloydBrobbel//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1330)[English]Thank you.FloydBrobbelAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]Thank you, Madam Chair.I want to go back to where there are some clear opportunities for Canada. If we are looking at the issue of targeted sanctions, are there areas or places where, in your studies of the situation, they probably would have the most ripple effect? Sometimes these individual actors are part of something larger. Strategically, what places would you see where this is better suited, where there are certain state actors that are enticing or where there is impunity with some non-state actors? How do you think that fits in?Christianity and ChristiansCivil and human rightsEconomic sanctionsAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanMindyMichels//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]Yes, I'll go to you, just because you're the.... It's hard to tell when you're looking at people on a monitor. It's very satisfying when you have actual interaction with people. That's why. It's not that I'm trying to put more pressure on you.Voices: Oh, oh!MindyMichelsMindyMichels//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English]Okay.MindyMichelsMindyMichels//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English]Ms. Kuo, on the issue of targeted sanctions, looking at the areas that you've studied and at state actors and non-state actors, where do you think we need to go? Is there an area in China or a specific person who you think would be a start?Christianity and ChristiansCivil and human rightsEconomic sanctionsMindyMichelsLilyKuo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English]It's someone who would be strategic and would have a ripple effect, not just for the sake of getting them out of circulation. That's what I am getting at. Impunity is one issue, but if you're looking at strategy as to how we can help turn certain things around, sometimes there are people who are more involved or influential. That's the point I was trying to make.Ms. Stangl, do you want to add to that?Christianity and ChristiansCivil and human rightsEconomic sanctionsLilyKuoAnna LeeStangl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English]Yes.We will wrap up with you, Mr. Brobbel, if you would like to add something. Anna LeeStanglFloydBrobbel//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English]I'll differentiate now, because I agree with that statement. We're talking about targeted sanctions on individuals, not necessarily....Okay. Thank you. Christianity and ChristiansCivil and human rightsEconomic sanctionsFloydBrobbelAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English] Thank you very much, Madam Chair, for this opportunity at the last of our meetings and the mandate of this subcommittee of the foreign affairs committee in the 42nd Parliament.It's been an honour to serve with everyone on this committee. Each of us has our own way of coming at the passion and the desire of this committee, and it's really touched me and helped me to grow as a social justice activist and somebody who wants to see Canada's place in the global meaning of human rights and the well-being of all of the planet's citizens. I think this committee's doing tremendous work on that.It is also for that reason that I think it's important to go on record to say here today that we had a turning point, I believe, on this committee. When I first came here, there was great pride in the operation of this consensus model. I would like to differentiate, because there are people who follow this committee who do take a scholarly approach, and I think it's important in our public sphere to differentiate what is actually happening now. It's not a consensus model. We're operating on unanimous consent, and there is a big difference in that. It started with the Uighur study, and then some of the tremendous latitude, as other members of the committee who have more history here have discussed, didn't happen towards the end. That is a concern to me, because I feel that this committee has a role and a responsibility that's higher than each of us. Even though we think we're magnanimous and our views are broad, we're always challenging ourselves to be broader. I think we do a disservice if we continue to call this consensus. I certainly hope that those who are returning for the next Parliament will take up that mantle and really truly consider what consensus versus unanimous consent means. The dissenting voices are not always evil and bad, or just people who don't want to get along. It's challenging us, which is why the consensus model was held up with such pride at one time.The other thing I want to add is that we do have a little bit of unfinished business. I wonder if the rest of the committee has also thought about the recommendation from Dafina Savic to do a unanimous motion and a recommendation for the government with regard to having August 2 as an official day of commemoration for the Romani genocide.I don't know if anyone else here had planned to do this, so if I may, Madam Chair, I will just read this motion, as per the request of our witness at the last meeting, to the committee. It is that the committee issue a recommendation for the government to adopt a unanimous motion declaring August 2 as the official day of commemoration of the Romani genocide and commit to combatting anti-Roma racism, discrimination and violence.Committee businessAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (0905)[English]Thank you so much.Thank you to our witnesses. It's a diverse panel, and it's nice to see different interests being represented, because there are certainly different sides to the CUSMA and the way that Canadians are feeling about it. I will start with the egg farmers. If I understand you correctly, you said the amount of market share that's going to be open would represent the entire annual egg production from the Atlantic provinces.C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementEgg industryGovernment billsTrade agreementsMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaRogerPelissero//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0905)[English]Wow. That would be the elimination of all egg production essentially in four of our provinces, which is quite stunning.RogerPelisseroRogerPelissero//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0905)[English]People in rural ridings like mine wouldn't have farms to go back to, and those farms that support the local economies would suffer as well in small towns like the ones I represent. Also the vintners, I have vintners in my riding as well.I want to talk to you a little bit about the TRQ. This provision that has now been included in the agreement for eggs says that 30% of the import licences for shell egg imports will be made available to new importers. I know this was a big issue previously, under the cheese quota in the CETA. I wonder if you can speak to the importance of that coming to actual egg farmers and those who are being impacted versus being dispersed across retailers and everyone else in that space.C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementEgg industryGovernment billsTrade agreementsRogerPelisseroRogerPelissero//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0910)[English] One of the other things that's concerning around supply management is regulatory oversight that the U.S. is seeking and has achieved in dairy. I'm wondering if the same is true in terms of your egg producers. Really, this is woven throughout this whole chapter 28, when we're talking about regulatory co-operation. The fear is that not just corporations but the U.S. will have a say over any changes that could be made to our supply-managed system.Have you looked at that in more detail and is that a concern of yours? If Canada tries to change our system or look at our system differently, will the U.S. have the oversight to change that?C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementEgg industryGovernment billsTrade agreementsJudiBundrockJudiBundrock//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0910)[English]Right. This speaks to our sovereignty, which is what we've been hearing from farmers. It's the concern around sovereignty and our ability to manage our supply management system.My next question is for the vintners. Dan, you've painted a picture here of a lot of losses that were incurred by vintners in signing the original NAFTA. The amount of imports now that come in, the percentage of those imports.... Could you talk about the importance of dropping this escalator and supporting our vintners?C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementGovernment billsTrade agreementsWine industryJudiBundrockDanPaszkowski//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0940)[English]It's so difficult to do something in three minutes. This renegotiation is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. In my neck of the woods, in southwestern Ontario, we saw over 400,000 manufacturing jobs bleed out of our country over the course of NAFTA. It has had a very real impact on people, on my community, on people who work in the auto sector, as well as in other manufacturing. There's a lot of anxiety right now about what is happening around this deal, and the things that, quite frankly, the Liberal government won't even discuss with people are what's causing a lot of it.I want to talk a bit about enforceability and the work that's being done in the States around the Democrats. We need effective enforcement tools, not just for labour and the environment, which are certainly incredibly important, but across the entire agreement.If we don't have enforceability, which we have seen has been very poor in the original NAFTA, has not worked well, has resulted in a lot of both job and economic losses, we really put ourselves at great jeopardy. I applaud the work the Democrats are doing in Congress to address this critical issue for the entire agreement.My question is whether you think there's value in waiting for the Democrats to achieve improvement in enforceability, and then Canada being a party to that?C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementDemocratic PartyGovernment billsTrade agreementsMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaBrianKingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0940)[English]However, I think the issue, which the Democrats have raised as well, and so have New Democrats here in Canada, is the fact that the enforceability of side agreements, the eligibility of those, is quite weak. We saw that in the original NAFTA, that when things are in side agreements, we haven't been able to enforce those provisions. That's the fear, that if we add on, after the fact, in side agreements, we won't be able to actually enforce them at all.C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementGovernment billsTrade agreementsBrianKingstonBrianKingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1030)[English]Thank you so much. Thank you to all of our witnesses here today. My first question is for Ms. Dey because she's the first person to raise chapter 20, the intellectual property provisions around the cost of pharmaceuticals. New Democrats have been raising this. Quite frankly, this impacts all Canadians. You raised the types of drugs, biologics, that are being looked at or that the extension is for, such as insulin, things for Crohn's, rheumatoid arthritis. These are extremely expensive drugs for Canadians. Even if they have some sort of pharmaceutical or drug plan from an employer, typically it won't cover the cost of these drugs. They're so incredibly effective. A lot of people say they will be the future of drugs. I want to ask you about that and the concerns that not just the New Democrats have, but as you said, the PBO has as well. My colleague Don Davies is our health critic. He asked the Parliamentary Budget Officer to study the impact of pharmaceutical costs in the new CUSMA and the PBO came back with the stunning number of $169 million per year. I wonder if you can speak to that. To me, this is a TPP hangover. The U.S. wanted this in the original TPP. It was removed in the new CPTPP, but here it is back again because—no surprise—big pharma in the U.S. and Canada is pushing hard for this. Can you comment on the implications of this for Canadians?C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementGovernment billsPharmaceutical industryTrade agreementsUnited States of AmericaMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaSujataDey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1035)[English]Thank you.SujataDeyMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1035)[English]That went by so quickly. I would just add a comment, then, that no Canadians believe the cost of drugs should be raised through a trade agreement. If there's an opportunity to join the U.S. right now to remove this provision, it's something that Canadians would strongly support the Liberal government doing, and I would encourage my colleagues to do the same.MarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1105)[English]Good luck trying.ColinCarrieOshawaMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1105)[English]Thank you.I'll pick up on that theme of my colleague. You know, 400,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost in Canada. It's so significant, and without government at the table in a real way to attract that investment, I don't know that anything we put in any agreement will be able to address this really serious fundamental challenge that we have.For my question, I want to go to Ms. Dey. We talked about regulations, about regulatory co-operation and practices, which is chapter 28. Trade deals routinely limit the ability of countries to regulate and limit how we regulate in certain areas, such as public health, food safety, rail safety, and workers' health and safety. There are a lot of rules in trade agreements on how governments can make policy and regulations. The new NAFTA, the CUSMA, has been criticized for going even further.I wonder if you could comment on this, please.Automotive industryC-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementGovernment billsTrade agreementsMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaSujataDey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1200)[English]Thank you so much, and thank you to another very diverse panel on this massive and important agreement.Mr. DiCaro, to me, as a former Unifor member, it's been interesting to see the government attempt to paint everyone in labour with one brush and say that they fully support this deal. I think what you brought today was a balance, along with some of the concerns that labour has with portions of this deal.One of those things that I'd like to have you weigh in on a little further is what you alluded to in your remarks. For all of these efforts—and I do thank labour for the efforts, certainly, that were put forward to see some movement in labour—it's a bit of a best guess as to whether or not in practical terms this will play out in a way that benefits working people. I say that because I know that the enforcement is very much up in the air as to whether or not there will be any ability to enforce any of the labour provisions that have been sought. I wonder if you would comment on the precariousness, perhaps, of that, and the risk in it when we've seen so many jobs lost under the previous NAFTA.Also, could you comment a bit on the efforts in the U.S. by Congress and whether there is any attempt to improve labour provisions, the ones that you weren't able to achieve when you were at the table? Does Unifor believe that we should be a partner in that, in trying to achieve even further than what we were able to in the original negotiation?C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementGovernment billsLabour relationsTrade agreementsDeanAllisonNiagara WestAngeloDiCaro//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1205)[English]The words on gender obligations in the original text have disappeared in the scrub. Can you comment on that?C-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementEqual opportunitiesGovernment billsLabour relationsTrade agreementsAngeloDiCaroAngeloDiCaro//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1235)[English]Thank you so much.My questions are for Chief Bellegarde. I take your point that this was the most inclusive deal to date, but certainly we'd like to see a true, nation-to-nation.... We would like to see indigenous peoples at the table as full partners in the negotiations.Well, first of all, I want to say thank you for your push on those important pieces of legislation, including Bill C-262, Romeo Saganash's bill. It's very important that this bill pass.When you were here previously on the TPP in June 2016, you brought the issue of a development of a human rights impact assessment for all trade agreements. You talked about the recommendation from Olivier De Schutter, the UN special rapporteur, to use the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a basis for assessing the impact of all trade agreements. I wonder if you can speak to whether that was a consideration in this agreement, or if there was any movement made in this agreement towards that important step.Also, I look at your document here, and the first item of article 19 states that indigenous peoples must have free, informed and prior consent. I'm wondering if that's been obtained around this agreement. If not, were there conversations towards how that would be implemented in further trade agreements?Aboriginal peoplesC-100, An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United Mexican StatesC-262, An Act to ensure that the laws of Canada are in harmony with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous PeoplesCanada-United States-Mexico AgreementGovernment billsPublic consultationTrade agreementsUnited Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous PeoplesMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaPerryBellegarde//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1240)[English]It's going to be gone by the time I say another sentence.MarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1230)[English]Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you very much, gentlemen, for your work and for your insights here today.I want to go back and talk a little about moving forward and how Canada can be more vocal, more impactful, in the international community. It was suggested that we need to stand up and we need to raise voices and as an international community we have to leverage certain things better. One thing that intrigued me was that you talked about the mobile clinics and about this issue of medical supplies. Has Canada or has the international community spoken out effectively so far on ceasefires or humanitarian corridors or identifying the support that's needed specifically to get, let's say, medical supplies to a specific area, or have we just been speaking in generalities thus far? I'd like both of you to explore and talk a little about how we can be moving the needle, so to speak, or advancing, if we look at specific issues or specific areas. Another one would be whether there are areas where we could be concentrating on deactivating landmines or other specific work. I'll leave it at that. Maybe we can start with you, Doctor, and I'll give you both the remainder of my time to comment on ways that we can specifically work towards providing that access.Civil and human rightsHumanitarian assistance and workersInternational relationsSyriaAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanAnasAl-Kassem//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1235)[English]Thank you very much.Mr. Windsor.AnasAl-KassemMilesWindsor//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1235)[English]Thank you.MilesWindsorAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1245)[English]Thank you.Doctor, maybe you can just expand on that a little. I don't know if we'll have time for Mr. Windsor to chime in. Just talk to us about these rebel groups that are in Idlib and what the potential is. You discussed a political solution earlier. Are there opportunities there that we should be looking at if we look at these groups?Civil and human rightsInternational relationsSyriaAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanAnasAl-Kassem//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1245)[English]Mr. Windsor.AnasAl-KassemMilesWindsor//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1350)[English] Thank you very much, Madam Chair. My question will be for the both of you. I'll set it up and then you can use the remainder of my time. We'll split it up. We can start with Ms. Agbahey, and then I'll let you know when your time is up.I'd like to ask you about the human rights commissioner's view that there is a window of opportunity for de-escalation of the conflict. Where do you think we should be going? Cameroon is a member of the Commonwealth. Has anyone been vocal? Is there something Canada should be doing to follow suit or should we be engaging that community specifically, and how can we basically de-escalate?Part of what we're doing here in hearing different testimony on the issue is preparing to make recommendations, and the recommendations would have to be about what we think Canada's role should be. Thinking about that, how would you like to contribute?We'll start with you, Madam.CameroonCivil and human rightsInternational relationsAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanTityAgbahey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1350)[English]Mr. Morgan.TityAgbaheyScottMorgan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1355)[English]Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a point of order. I would like to submit a copy of written testimony from the study that we had on Iran accountability for someone who wasn't able to be at the committee. That was Dr. Pars. I have the English and the French translation of a written submission that I'd like to submit to the committee.AnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1100)[English]That is amazing. Who arranged for that? Thank you so much.An hon. member: You're famous.An hon. member: Is it bilingual?The Chair: Oh, yes, we can't present this: It's not bilingual.An hon. member: It should be in braille too.An hon. member: Hey, David, if you want to share that cake, it has to be in two languages.Mr. David Christopherson: I wonder how much sugar is in it.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLindaLapointeRivière-des-Mille-Îles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1100)[English]You're very kind.Listen, thank you to whoever did this. I'm blown away. LindaLapointeRivière-des-Mille-ÎlesLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1105)[English]Thanks, John. I know that.JohnNaterPerth—WellingtonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1115)[Translation]Thank you.LindaLapointeRivière-des-Mille-ÎlesLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1115)[English]It's not the Senate.Some hon. members: Oh, oh!Mr. David Christopherson: When I speak, I'll discuss that.David de BurghGrahamLaurentides—LabelleLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1120)[English]“Goodbye” would be the end of the sentence.You almost have me speechless, which is quite the accomplishment. I'm blown away. I just confess that, for all the passion I bring to the issues, I don't handle emotional issues real good. This just overwhelms me. Nothing means more to me than words like you've given today, words from colleagues who walk in the same shoes. No matter how close you are, it's not until you've walked in those shoes and know what it's like to be a parliamentarian that you fully understand, when fellow parliamentarians compliment you, what it means, especially when they're people you respect.I've been blessed, especially this last Parliament, with being on two committees whose mandates I thoroughly enjoy: public accounts and PROC. It's also given me an opportunity to spend time with some of the finest parliamentarians that I've met. The hardest thing for us to do is to climb past partisanship, yet it's the critical part where we actually make a difference, where we find a way to move forward for the country—that ability to set that aside. I'm guilty of not doing it all the time, too, because our passions do drive us, but at the end of the day, that ability means everything.With the people I've been able to serve with, the two chairs that I've served under—you, Mr. Larry Bagnell, and Mr. Kevin Sorenson.... I've been blessed with fantastic chairs who were only interested in the best for Parliament and Canada.I thank all of you.I thank my fellow Hamiltonian, David Sweet. We know that nobody gets up every day and says, “What can I do for Hamilton”, unless they're Hamiltonians themselves. I've always believed that when we're on home turf, it's important for those of us from different parties to make their city the priority and that we, as much as possible, come here and have a united front on the issues that matter. When we disagree, we do it respectfully. If we're going to have a knock-down, drag-'em-out fight, we do it here in the context of Parliament. However, when we go home, we're home, and we treat each other with respect. That means a lot.I can't address everyone individually, as I know that I don't have enough time, but, Mr. Reid, definitely you'll be the first invitation to that dock, and I'll have a cold one ready for you, sir.There are a number of people who I'm looking forward to continuing to work with.I'll just also mention that on the issue of parliament's security that matters to us, Mr. Blaney today, who was the minister at the time, just stopped by me after our public accounts committee—I don't think I'm telling tales out of school; I hope not—and said to me, “Look, you need to understand that, at the time, we were under a lot of pressure. There were a lot of crises. I think we made the wrong decision. I think we made a mistake. I want you to know that if I'm here in the next Parliament, I'm committed to changing that and putting it back to the way it should be.”I know that people like Mr. Graham and others care about that, and that's a good sign. It means a lot because it's the way Parliament should run.Just to end, I was asked if I'm going to still be around. Yes. It turns out that sitting around on the public accounts committee for 15 years suddenly qualifies you as an expert. There are people around the world who would like me to come and do some work with their public accounts committees and their auditor general systems, and I'm now on the board of directors of the Canadian Audit and Accountability Foundation. It's the main non-profit NGO that we use at the public accounts committee for their expertise and assistance. I'll be joining their team and travelling. So, I'll be continuing to do that. Hopefully it's not more than half time. I still want to put my feet up for the other half. I'm tired: I've been working for 50 years, and that's sufficient.Those are my plans going forward. However, I'm also aware that plans, like war plans, change. The first thing that goes out the window when the war starts is the plan, so we'll see what actually happens.What I would like to do, if you'll allow me, is.... This is very difficult. You guys have really, really thrown me for a loop. What's interesting is.... You mentioned the filibuster, and a lot of you have commented on the non-partisanship. I have a present that speaks to both those issues. It speaks to the filibuster, but it also speaks to non-partisanship and extends beyond us as parliamentarians.You all know Tyler Crosby, who is without question, in my view, the most amazing staff person on the Hill, bar none. You often see me talking to him. He's my right hand. I couldn't do this job without him, at least not the way I'd like to. However, he's not always there. Sometimes he nips out to get something, and then I have nobody else. It's just me here, right?(1125) Yet, when we were in a filibuster, when it was time to unite and fight the good fight, those lines didn't matter, and the partisanship didn't matter. The Hill Times actually had a picture. I'll just read the cutline that goes with it. It says, “NDP MP David Christopherson consults with an opposition staffer ahead of resuming the filibuster at the House Affairs Committee on April 5. He alone spoke eight hours in all that day, and for another four hours on April 6.” The other person in that picture is Kelly Williams.Some hon. members: Oh, oh!Mr. David Christopherson: I want to present to Kelly a frame of that picture as an indication of the way that we can be non-partisan not only as politicians but as staffers. I thank you for the unpaid work that you did for me. You assisted me to do what I did.With that, colleagues, there aren't enough words to properly say what this has meant to me. This will stay with me forever. You really touched me in a way that I can't express, and I thank you very much. It means everything to me.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]No, I didn't. No.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]Oh, wow. I've now achieved it. There's the phone call.ScottReidLanark—Frontenac—KingstonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (0920)[English]Did we not get unanimous consent in the House for this?CensorshipCommittee businessCooper, MichaelMembers' remarksReferences to membersAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0920)[English]Oh, I thought we did.CensorshipCommittee businessCooper, MichaelMembers' remarksReferences to membersAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0920)[English]I strongly support this motion. I would like to see this removed from the record as well, and I think that being specific in this case would be helpful. We can name the date, the time—CensorshipCommittee businessCooper, MichaelMembers' remarksReferences to membersAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0920)[English]That's all I'm saying. I think we should add that in here to be specific, and absolutely the NDP supports the removal from the public record. It should never have been on the public record. It certainly wasn't a name that I knew or any of us knew until it was read into the record here, because there have been great efforts in New Zealand and elsewhere to not share the name of this person. I think if we could be more specific about the things that need to be removed, then absolutely that's something that we should do.CensorshipCommittee businessCooper, MichaelMembers' remarksReferences to membersRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton CentreRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0925)[English]I couldn't disagree more with my Conservative colleague. I think we have an obligation to remove this. Given the fact that Mr. Cooper is no longer sitting at this committee, obviously the Conservatives have recognized that this should not have happened at this committee. I don't imagine he was removed for anything but those particular comments and the fallout.This is an opportunity for the Conservatives to stand and say that we do not support the sharing of a manifesto of someone who murdered Muslim people in New Zealand. That never should have been read into the record. It was completely inappropriate. It was very shocking to have that read into the record in the middle of a study trying to prevent online hate.Regardless, Mr. MacKenzie, I believe it's beneath you to involve the witness personally and talk about what he personally was doing. If you want to talk about his testimony, I think that's fair, but you're now saying something about his being some sort of campaign manager for a member of Parliament. That has nothing to do with the fact that Mr. Cooper read into the record something he should not have read. I believe your leader has even said so. I believe he has publicly said that it shouldn't have happened, and that's why Mr. Cooper is no longer sitting at this committee.To sit here and say we shouldn't strike this from the record.... This is extremely serious. Canadians are talking about it. They are paying attention to it. I believe if the Conservative Party of Canada wants to stand up for people, this is your opportunity to do it. If you're going to say you don't want this to be struck from the record, that speaks volumes to Muslims and to Canadians about what you're willing to do in order to create controversy on the backs of vulnerable people.CensorshipCommittee businessCooper, MichaelMembers' remarksReferences to membersAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]It's not a stunt.CensorshipCommittee businessCooper, MichaelMembers' remarksReferences to membersMichaelBarrettLeeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau LakesMichaelBarrettLeeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]It is not, and I take issue with that.CensorshipCommittee businessCooper, MichaelMembers' remarksReferences to membersMichaelBarrettLeeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau LakesMichaelBarrettLeeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]I have a point of order. A point of order.MichaelBarrettLeeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau LakesMichaelBarrettLeeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0935)[English]Mr. Chair, throughout this study we've been talking to a lot of groups who feel that they're not safe online, that they're not safe because online hate is turning into real-world hate, violence and murders. In Christchurch, that's exactly what happened.I don't know what the intention of Mr. Cooper was in bringing this into the public record initially, but what I haven't heard from my Conservative colleagues today are the reasons they think it should still be part of the record. For the life of me, I can't imagine what those could be. Why should this manifesto of hate, with this person's name attached, be part of the public record? Why is it so important to Conservatives that we leave this on the record?I can tell you that Muslims in my community are horrified and frightened, and legitimately so, because of what happened in Quebec City and Christchurch.What I have yet to hear from the Conservatives in this very baffling “this is a stunt” type of rhetoric is what the argument is to leave it on the public record. How does this help the safety of Canadians, online or anyplace else, or as a witness at this committee?For the life of me, I can't imagine or fathom what that reason would be. I encourage you to dig into your conscience to say that this should be stricken from the record, because this individual's name should not have been brought into Canadian media. It's shameful that the Conservatives did that. They have apologized. Mr. Cooper and your leader have apologized, and now you're going to sit here at this committee and try to still keep this on the public record.That's shameful. It really is.CensorshipCommittee businessCooper, MichaelMembers' remarksReferences to membersAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1115)[English]Thank you so much.I want to echo my colleagues' comments and certainly some comments made by you all as well. For the NDP, alleviating the stress and suffering for victims and families is of paramount importance. Progressive crime and justice legislation is something that we would like to see pursued here, but we do have concerns similar to the ones that have been laid out by Mr. Goldstein and Mr. Bebbington.I want to ask if any of you believe that this bill could be applied retroactively to offences that were committed before the legislation comes into force?C-266, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (increasing parole ineligibility)Conditional releaseLegislation retroactivityLife sentencesPrivate Members' BillsAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalJosephWamback//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1115)[English]I think it's unclear.C-266, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (increasing parole ineligibility)Conditional releaseLegislation retroactivityLife sentencesPrivate Members' BillsJosephWambackHowardBebbington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1115)[English]My other question is this. Do you believe that allowing judges to increase the parole ineligibility in the cases that are set out here encroaches on the function on the Parole Board of Canada? How would that work, when that currently falls with the Parole Board of Canada?C-266, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (increasing parole ineligibility)Conditional releaseLife sentencesParole Board of CanadaPrivate Members' BillsHowardBebbingtonLorneGoldstein//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1115)[English]Mr. Bebbington, would you comment?LorneGoldsteinHowardBebbington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1115)[English]Can you speak a little bit about how this would apply to a youth, to someone who is 18 years of age or under?C-266, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (increasing parole ineligibility)Conditional releaseLife sentencesPrivate Members' BillsYoung offendersHowardBebbingtonJosephWamback//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1115)[English]It wouldn't apply. Okay.JosephWambackHowardBebbington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1115)[English]Okay.HowardBebbingtonJosephWamback//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1120)[English]Thank you so much.HowardBebbingtonAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (0850)[English]Thanks, Chair.To follow up what you said, I want to give my thanks and appreciation.Colleagues will remember that in the beginning, we were dealing with the previous government's audits. We were doing great stuff, but it's a lot easier to do that when it's the former government.I said to the government members at the time that the day would come when it would not be easy for us to do the right thing as the public accounts committee and to be non-partisan and only look at the issue of government spending and efficiencies and waste, etc. They were going to get a lot of pressure from their government not to give anyone a wedge.What happens is—and you know it ahead of time—that the issue of voting unanimously on something that's in any way critical or not supportive of the government becomes weaponized in question period, and the parliamentarians know that. The job here is difficult. It's one that's different from any other committee, and we have to be non-partisan. When we're partisan instead of non-partisan, Canadians aren't getting the oversight that we are mandated to provide.I want to give a special shout-out and thanks and appreciation and respect to the government members who, in spite of the politics outside this room, grew to the full parliamentary responsibility of this committee. They were fully prepared, and weeks before an election set aside their partisan membership and said that in the interests of Parliament and the work of the Auditor General and this committee, they thought this was the right thing to do and that they would deal with the politics outside. That's exactly what they did, and I have the greatest respect and admiration for them.Anyone who wants to use that as a clip or to give their material some oomph, you're welcome to it—Some hon. members: Oh, oh!Mr. David Christopherson:—because the government members, in particular, on this issue of the underfunding of the Auditor General rose to the occasion and deserve the respect of all of Parliament for doing the job that's expected of them, in spite of the fact that, politically, it was going to cause them a problem.Thank you, Chair.Government expendituresOffice of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]Thank you, Chair.Thank you all for being here. I particularly want to thank you, Mr. Leswick. I don't know whether you drew the short straw or you did something wrong and somebody's punishing you, but they sure threw you to the wolves—potentially. Thank you for being here.Government expendituresOffice of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootNicholasLeswick//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]—in light of the fact that others aren't, but here you are facing the fire. But also, I thank you for your tone, your approach and your acknowledgement of the legitimacy, at least, of the issue here. I appreciate the way you're defending the job you did, and I compliment you. This could have gone sideways really quickly. I think you've done an excellent job, and I want to personally commend you. I hope you continue to provide the kind of contribution that you do.Chair, I think the Auditor General has outlined the case as well as can be expected. What I'd like to do in my first round is just provide some context, and I'll reserve my right to shore up any arguments later, if that should be necessary. I'd like to put this in context.Let's understand that in the world of democracies, and particularly accountability, Canada is a world leader. We fight for that in as many categories as we can. Given our size, we don't normally make number one or two in too many things; we're usually in the top six or 10 on things that matter. But I have to tell you, in terms of auditing and our Auditor General process and the work of the public accounts committee, we are world renowned. Particularly, this committee, in this Parliament, stands out so much. Again, I compliment the government members. It's a much more difficult decision for them than for us in opposition, yet you rose to the occasion. I can't praise and respect you enough for doing that, because without that, we're nowhere. Thank you.Conversely, something like this jars the international community when they go, “Wait a minute. I'm hearing something about the Liberals. Trudeau, in Canada, is not giving the Auditor General the money they need. What's this all about?” It'll have an effect—a negative one. It breaks my heart. We're down to the last couple of meetings. I leave here so proud of the work we've done, yet here's this great big stain on the work of the public accounts committee.Mr. Leswick went out of his way to point out the processes involved. Again, I have great respect for what he said, and particularly how he said it. But understand, that's the problem. It shouldn't be looked at the way every other department is. Right now part of the argument being put forward by the government is that they didn't treat the Auditor General any differently from other departments. Well, that's a red light; there's a problem and a flag on the field. It isn't other departments, regardless of how we structured it. Keep in mind, this was recognized by the government and personally by the Prime Minister, who gave a mandate to his House leader to stop this way of funding it because this is how you end up in crisis—exactly this.Had the House leader done her job and put that mechanism in place, we wouldn't be here. In fact, I would be complimenting the government on making a significant advancement in protecting the independence of Parliament's officers. Let's remember, these are not just any bureaucrats. They answer to Parliament. Parliament hires the Auditor General. Parliament fires the Auditor General—not the government. Yet it's the government process that decides funding.To get into a little bit of the politics of this, I am, very much like my friend, Mr. Davidson, at a complete loss— and have been from the beginning—as to why the heck this is happening at all, given that it's never happened before. I can come up with only three potential motivating reasons, and I haven't heard a single one from the government. I don't mean the government members here; I mean the government in the House of Commons. You've done your job, and now it's for us to put the pressure on the government through the House. That's how this works.If the Auditor General had a process, an independent way of getting its funding, I wouldn't need to raise this. But we don't, even though they were supposed to do it.First, it was specifically to avoid the cybersecurity issue. The political calculation is that it's better to take the hit now for underfunding the Auditor General, especially when nobody in the media's paying any attention—except Andrew Coyne and Postmedia. I give them full marks.(0930) I wish it were somebody else driving this than I, because for us it often looks like we're trying to generate a headline. I'm trying to do the opposite: to fade away and disappear. This is not the way I wanted things to be. But I have to tell you, I just wish the national media would pay a little more attention to this. With the greatest of respect, this bloody well matters.Anyway, was the political calculation to avoid the cybersecurity issue because it would be so devastating? I was here for the first cybersecurity audit and it was devastating. It shook me to the core. Is that why they're underfunding the office? Is it to make sure that that particular audit doesn't come forward because they're arrogant enough to believe they're going to get re-elected and they know the damage this might do to them in the second mandate? That's one possibility. Is another—and with the greatest of respect, I don't you mean you personally, Mr. Leswick—that it is retaliation and revenge on the part of the bureaucracy who ended up having a rather negative audit?The Auditor General audited the very people who help decide whether or not they get full funding. So was it revenge or retaliation? I want to say that I find it hard to believe it's either one of those two, particularly given that I know the individual members of this government. I find that really hard to believe.But I'm at a loss. The last one seems to me to be the most likely, and it's also the one that we can fix the quickest. It looks to me like there was a mistake, that this slipped through and now they've doubled down because they don't want the embarrassment of having to change their mind. If anyone can offer me any motivation beyond that, I'm willing to listen, because I really can't think of any other reason why the government would do this except for those three reasons.Thanks, Chair.Government expendituresOffice of the Auditor GeneralNicholasLeswickKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0945)[English]It depends on how your questioning goes.Government expendituresOffice of the Auditor GeneralNickWhalenSt. John's EastNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]Thank you, Chair.First of all, I just want to mention to Mr. Whalen who used a sort of common-sense approach—and I appreciate that—in the comments to say, hey, maybe politicians should decide what gets studied. I appreciate where that's coming from, but I can assure you that one of the golden rules of public accounts is the independence of the Office of the Auditor General to choose what it goes into. Otherwise we're into a whole other nightmare scenario in which it is being guided by politics. That independence is crucial, and I think that's what the chair was emphasizing, but I understand where you're coming from. I just needed to make that point. That's a golden rule with us: we can recommend, and when it's unanimous that office pays serious attention to it, but, at the end of the day the law says the office is independent and decides where to go, not us.I had, I think, actually criticized the media—which is really stupid if you're running again, but I'm not. However, when I am trying to get something, doing that is just as stupid, and I don't want to do that. I'm imploring—that is more the tone I should have taken—the national media to please help us and pay attention to this. We need the public to focus on Parliament's plight here.I want to give a shout-out. I mentioned Andrew Coyne, and he was good enough to tweet it, but Marie-Danielle Smith was the one at Postmedia who did a story immediately afterwards and then a follow-up one. I could have lived without the hook that created the story, but it got the story out there. That's what matters, and it's much appreciated.I can tell you that within the auditing, accountability, oversight and transparency of government community, it was noted and appreciated. So, hopefully, we can get others to understand the importance of this.Government expendituresOffice of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]I appreciate that very much, Chair. I was talking about justification. The only justification we're getting in the House of Commons is from the government minister, who is standing up and going back to 2011 and condemning the Conservatives and using that as justification for what they did. First, even if it were true, it's not justification to underfund the Auditor General. Secondly, it's not true. We've got it in writing; we've heard it from our Auditor General. It was voluntary. I can tell you that it was my friend Tony Clement who was the president of Treasury Board. I know that he was actively working the phones and talking to the Auditor General's office because he knew that if they said no, they would have a bit of a problem. He was showing respect and doing what he could to avoid that. That is not what the government is saying that the previous government did. I don't belong to either party and I was here for both Parliaments. It is absolutely unfair and unjustifiable that the government would make up stories about the previous government to create a phony fig leaf to hide behind. Next, I want to point out again that while we have a majority government, we often lose track of the fact that Parliament is supreme—not the government. Parliament decides who is the government. Parliament decides who is the Prime Minister by a majority vote. Whoever can get 50% plus one in the House of Commons is the Prime Minister, but at the end of the day, the executive council—the Cabinet—has no legal right to spend one penny that Parliament hasn't approved. Parliament controls the purse strings, but because we have a majority government and the government wins every vote and when they put the budget forward it carries, it looks like the finance minister is calling the shots. At then end of the day, though, structurally.... You really see this play out when you're in a minority government. You and I have been there, Chair. The reality is that here we are going, cap in hand, to a subordinate body to ask them to match the funding that we recommend and yet we control the purse strings. That's the absurdity of where we are.I also want to point out the following, because it just jumped in my head, and I thought it was a good point. We asked the question—I think it was Mr. Arseneault who asked the really good question—whether there are any other jurisdictions that do that. Nine times out of ten, Mr. Arseneault, when other jurisdictions around the world ask that question of their auditor general, guess who gets held up as one of the one or two best in the world? The answer you heard was New Zealand and the U.K., because when you remove us from the equation.... We like to fight with the U.K. about whether we're one or two. It's a lovely fight to have, but I just want to point out to you that that's the respect we have in the world and that's what's at stake, too. Internationally, this government had a mandate to reposition Canada on the international stage and here you are damaging our reputation in an area where we already are seen as world leaders. I just wanted to put that on the record.With the greatest of respect, if the government would change its mind and acknowledge and say that it was going to respect the agents of Parliament and it said it was going to respect the standing committees of Parliament and now the agent of Parliament and a standing committee by unanimous vote have called for this $10.8 million to be put back in. As much as it was question period yesterday and I was full of rhetoric and everything else, I do beg the question: Where is the respect?I have one absolute last point I want to make and then I will be completely finished on this subject.Government expendituresOffice of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]I don't have it right in front of me, so it can't be that important. All right, thanks.Government expendituresOffice of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1330)[English]Ms. Savic, I'd actually like you to continue to elaborate on that, because I have to be honest with you that if we're going to educate people and be candid and be respectful of Roma, I want to understand more about using terminology like “gypsy” and what we can do on social media. Go ahead.Civil and human rightsRomaSocial networking sitesAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanDafinaSavic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]That's really interesting. I was just signalling, because I think the members of Parliament who are from the Montreal area need to have this explained to them. Even a best-case scenario would have the restaurant change its name, but you understand a small business person's perspective; they put a lot of investment into the name. They can also use social media to talk about what they're embracing and what they're denouncing. They can do that.Civil and human rightsRomaSocial networking sitesDafinaSavicDafinaSavic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]That's so intriguing. I'm so glad you spoke to us about that, because there is a lot we can do.Civil and human rightsImmigration and immigrantsRefugeesRomaDafinaSavicCherylHardcastleWindsor—Tecumseh//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: Can you tell us what we should be taking away in terms of this issue of the designated country of origin list and removing the countries? Where do you think we should be going with that moving forward?Civil and human rightsImmigration and immigrantsRefugeesRomaCherylHardcastleWindsor—TecumsehDafinaSavic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English]I need to clarify that in May of this year, all the countries were removed from the list.Civil and human rightsImmigration and immigrantsRefugeesRomaDafinaSavicDafinaSavic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English]Thank you.DafinaSavicAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1350)[English]Thank you.This is really interesting. Just in continuation of that, you talked a bit about what some of these groups are doing in talking about the elimination of gypsy crime. Can you give us some examples of the structural racism that you've talked about? I know that would be in Europe, but how is that a ripple effect and what is structural even here in western countries, including Canada?Civil and human rightsPrejudiceRomaAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanDafinaSavic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1350)[English] How problematic is it when you think of the goal of your organization and the goal of achieving recognition not just of the genocide but also of human rights for the Roma? You mentioned that your family changed its name. How common is that? Also, do you see that being a problem in the future or as something we're going to have to make better known—I'm speaking hypothetically now—if we think this has affected 200 people when, in fact, it's affected 200,000 in a community? Civil and human rightsIdentityRomaDafinaSavicDafinaSavic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (0935)[English]Thank you, Chair.Again, I want to thank my colleagues and you too, Chair. These things can't happen without leadership, and you continue to provide excellent leadership right to the finish line.I just want to say that it's based on trust and respect, because a lot of what the chair.... Having done that job, I know you're in suspended animation, trying to make things happen and not happen all at the same time, and a lot of it comes down to trust. Do you trust the chair? We do. It has made a big difference having you in the chair, so thank you again, sir, for your role. Where we are, in my understanding, as affirmed by our actions so far, is that I would withdraw my motion at the conclusion of the components of the package deal being met as a result of the vote we just had, with the letter going forward and a public hearing on Thursday. My understanding is that the Auditor General has confirmed, and my further understanding is that Finance will be there. Is that correct?8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresMotionsKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]Okay, but it's understood by everyone that if for some reason Finance doesn't come, the deal is off, and we're back where we were. 8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresAngelaCrandallRenéArseneaultMadawaska—Restigouche//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]What do you mean, no? It was part of a package deal. There was—8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresRenéArseneaultMadawaska—RestigoucheKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]I'm not blaming anyone. I'm just saying that if they don't come, then I didn't get the deal I agreed to, and I will start talking again.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English] Okay. With respect, Mr. Arseneault, I direct you back to the Hansard from last week. It was put forward to me as a package. At the end of the day, we agreed that there would be a letter that we could hopefully all agree on, and that's what we set out to negotiate. And...because I threw it on the table. In fact, I think it was Mr. Kelly who mentioned it first, or Mr. Davidson, and then I sort of made that part of the package.If you look at the Hansard, you'll see it's clear that there were two pieces to my relinquishing the filibuster. One was that we would agree on a letter; we're there. The other—and this was important to me—was that we would have a public hearing with the Auditor General and the finance department so that we could ask some questions that we all have about this and have a baseline of fact, rather than just—and I'll say it—the rhetoric that comes from a filibuster. It's not the content; it's the action, in that case.To me, if we don't have that piece, we have only half a deal. I didn't think it was a problem. I'm not raising it as a concern. Everything I've heard privately is that we're good to go, and I'm hearing that again publicly. I'm just saying that it has to happen. On that, Chair, I was I thinking that if the deputy's not available, I would accept an associate deputy. I would even accept a director, to be fair. What I would not accept is anybody answering a question saying, “I'm not the deputy, and I can't answer that.” They need to make sure there are people in the room...maybe the chief of staff to the deputy.... As long as there's an assurance that we're....I've been around a long time. I remember the days before the legislation, and it would be all, “not my job, not my job”, in which case we may as well not have had a meeting. We need people who are going to be accountable, which is what the deputy is. I'm saying if the deputy can't make it, I would accept an ADM, but I would not accept an answer from that ADM saying, “I'm not the deputy, and I can't answer that.”8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0940)[English]My expectation is exactly the same for the very same reasons.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0940)[English]Quite frankly, if it doesn't happen, it's sending a pretty bad message, because it would look like they're afraid, and I don't think that's the case.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0940)[English] Hopefully, everything will go as....I just wanted to mention to Mr. Arseneault that “deal” is not a bad word. I mean, “backroom deal” sounds bad, but when my friend Alexandra came in and said—we were still in camera, so I hope I'm okay saying this—that we had “white smoke”, it meant that we had come to a meeting of the minds. It meant that we had a deal, just like they do it at the Sistine Chapel when they have a deal. So the word itself is not necessarily negative; it depends on what kind of deal you're cutting.The letter is done now. That piece is good. I appreciate that. I thank my colleagues for the good-faith bargaining. Hopefully, we'll go on the optimistic note that Thursday will happen. There are two last things for me. One is to say my final bit. There are a couple of things I want to put on the record. You've acknowledged that I'll have the time to do that. I will not take long. You have my word. The very last thing would be to formally withdraw my motion, in which case, then, we're moving on. Hopefully, this gets picked up and the fight continues in the House, where it needs to be.The main reason, Chair, that I wanted to have a couple of minutes for closing remarks is that it's incredibly frustrating to consistently see the President of the Treasury Board, every time...and I don't think there's been an exception. Every time she's been asked a question about this $10.8 million, we get a side discussion about what happened in 2011. That was eight years ago. The essence of the message from the President of the Treasury Board to the Conservatives—and to the NDP, suggesting that we sort of went along with this and didn't care—about why the government is denying the AG's office the $10.8 million it needs to do all of its chapters, including cybersecurity, is that what they did was so awful, they need to put it in comparison. To me, that's an argument that says, at best, that, yes, what we're doing is awful, but it's not as awful as what they did. It's very frustrating, because that's all the minister has to say. The minister has not given one substantive reason why there isn't the $10.8 million that the Auditor General office needs to finish off the chapters they want to do, including on cybersecurity. They've given not one solid answer. We as Parliament deserve better than that, especially since the Auditor General is our employee. It's our staff person. It's Parliament's staff person, not the executive council's. They're not part of the broader public service. They work for, are accountable to, and are hired and fired by Parliament. If the executive council, the cabinet, is going to deny that funding, then at the very, very least they should give a reason why. Just saying that the other guys did it too doesn't cut it, especially for a government that went out of their way to say four years ago, when they wanted power and got it, that, oh, we're going to be different; we're going to treat committees different; we're going to respect Parliament; we're going to be the most amazing thing you've ever seen; and we've had our last first-past-the-post election. There were all these great enunciations. I'm not running again, so I don't need to do much more of that. I have competent colleagues and a successor—I see Kent is applauding that I'm not going there—but it doesn't change the fact that it is really frustrating for a parliamentarian who has no interest in partisan politics right now. I have zero interest in that. It does nothing for me. I don't need a headline. As I already mentioned, I wanted this to be nice and quiet. This is the opposite of what I was looking for, but it does need to be underscored. As someone who has been around here for a while and who has some strong feelings about these matters, I do know a little bit about it. It is just unacceptable what is happening here—that the executive council, the very group that has to answer for the Auditor General's reports, is saying that his office can't have the money.(0945) I had a delegation come in. I won't say what country it was from. It was maybe before your time, Chair. It might even have been when I was chair but about six or eight years ago. What was interesting is that they had the legislation independent of the Auditor General. They had the independent legislation, just what you would hope for, as good as Britain's and as good as ours. It was good. The committee was structured—8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0945)[English]Yes.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0945)[English]I'm getting my dander up here.Don't you people understand deals? Don't you know how to negotiate? There was an agreement that I would be given a short period of time. I'm nowhere near using up what would be classified as short. Does it bother you that much that I'm saying something I might have said the other day, when I only have one real message? This government said it was going to do things differently, and it has been the most draconian against the Auditor General that I've ever seen.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English]Out of respect for you—8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English]—and not necessarily the position of my honourable colleague, I will get to the one point that I have not made and that I want to make.It says—8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English]I said your “position”. I wouldn't do that.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootRenéArseneaultMadawaska—Restigouche//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English] That's okay. I understand your sensitivity, but I did try to be careful to say it was your position, not you personally.All I want to do is read into the record, Chair, from the Hansard of May 21, 2013, and I have not had a chance to do this yet. I was in the chair, and it was the 41st Parliament. We had Mr. Ferguson here. I want to read this. The reason I was doing the ramp-up, which my honourable colleague didn't much care for, was that this is key. This is Mr. John Williamson taking the floor:I don't have too many questions, just a couple. The budget reductions are optional for your office; you could opt in. That's my understanding, that for your office and for the offices of all the officers of Parliament, it was a request from the government that you undertook. It that correct?Ms. Lyn Sachs: Yes. We received a letter from Minister Flaherty, I guess, at the time encouraging us to do as the other departments have, but it was definitely our decision to proceed.Mr. John Williamson: Right.My follow-up question is this. Do you feel the budget is adequate for you to discharge your duties as required?Mr. Michael Ferguson: Again, Mr. Chair, a certain amount of the work we do is required—financial audits, special exams. There are specific legislated requirements for us to do those. Certainly our budget is sufficient to do those things.Then we have a certain amount of our budget for performance audits. The performance audits are really where we have discretion in terms of how many we do.There was a decision taken a few years ago, because part of the consideration of the office in performance audits is also the ability of this committee—and maybe other committees, but this committee in particular—to deal with the volume of work we produce. I think a few years ago there was a determination of the right number of audits we should be doing, and we have more or less adjusted to that.Right now we feel we will be able to continue to do the number of performance audits we have planned.And that is why, Chair, it is accurate for the opposition to rise on the floor of the House of Commons and say that for the first time in the history of Canada, the Auditor General's office has advised Parliament that they do not have sufficient funds to carry out their work plan. And that's why I wanted to read this in here. That's Mr. Ferguson acknowledging that he could have said “no”, and also acknowledging that in saying “yes”, there would be no reduction in the performance audits, and as somebody who was there, I can tell you that we did not miss a beat.That's why I find it so appalling that the only answer we get from the minister responsible for not giving the Auditor General's office money they need—$10.8 million—is that it's because of a decision that happened in 2011. That's their only answer, and it's not even true. At the very least, I would hope the government members and the staff would take back to the minister that she has an obligation, first of all, to tell the truth, and secondly, to give us a real reason why that money is not there, or pony it up. But do not keep pointing to some false dialogue about what happened with the Conservatives the last time. Everybody here knows that if there were even a little bit of guilt on the part of the Conservatives, I'd be making sure that during my comments, they'd be wearing it. On this one, they're innocent of the charge that in 2011, they did exactly what the Liberals are doing now. No, they didn't. And the Auditor General's statement that he could do the work is consistent with what we've heard over the years I've been here until this time. That's why it's so disheartening that it would happen under a government that ran on a platform of respecting Parliament and parliamentary committees.(0955) Chair, that was what I wanted to put on the record. I appreciate the opportunity, assuming that we will have the hearing on Thursday, and, if not, it won't be that hard for me to get the floor back one way or another. I'm prepared to withdraw my motion and allow the letter, as we agreed unanimously today, to go forward. I'm going to remain optimistic that the Thursday meeting will happen the way we hope and it won't be a problem, otherwise we're into a whole other thing that we don't want to be in and we don't need to and I don't think we will be. Other than that, I think for the purposes of this committee and this subject, I'm done.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Do you want to lobby?8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Auditor General of CanadaGovernment expendituresAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1350)[English]I'll be really quick. I know that we're pressed for time. I'm just going to quote Teresita and say thank you for fuelling this fire in our bellies. AnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanDavidSweetFlamborough—Glanbrook//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP): (0945)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for being here.Under testimony at another committee, the new Minister of Rural Economic Development has said that none of this motion will be made through either legislation or regulation. That was clarified. I was quite surprised by that, but they are important discussions that we're having. Some of these matters still have time to be done, but unfortunately, the government doesn't seem prepared to support that.Having said that, I want to clarify something. The CRTC, with regard to your submissions today, talked about download speeds of at least 50 megabits per second, Mbps, and upload speeds of 10 Mbps. The original investment is 25 and five. Can you clarify that? You presented here today the overall of 50 and 10, but my understanding is that you've allowed 25 and five. Is this not correct?Broadband FundBroadband Internet servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeChristopherSeidl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]That's going to create quite a problem, though, because obviously that service requirement of 25/5 is a lot less and has technical problems. Is that to rural and remote communities? Are they communities that are identified, for example, as more indigenous areas? Are they more remote? What are the sacrificed areas? Quite frankly, if you're not willing to live up to your own objectives, why would the private sector actually have any incentive to do that? Broadband FundBroadband Internet servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryChristopherSeidlChristopherSeidl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]If you do, at 25/5 it'll have unlimited buffering. That's what's going to be happening with the users. Quite frankly, if $750 million was announced with regard to the 2016 decision to reorient the money that's being collected, I find it hard to believe that we'd build a second-class-citizen system in place right now. What's the duration of time that an applicant will get if they can actually have their speeds right now? What's going to be the timeline to meet what the rest of Canadians are going to be delivered in terms of the 50/10? Broadband FundBroadband Internet servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryChristopherSeidlChristopherSeidl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]How long will they have from the 25/5 to the 50/10?Broadband FundBroadband Internet servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryChristopherSeidlChristopherSeidl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]This is completely outrageous. You don't even have a deadline for that. We're building a second-class-citizen system here. I want to move to the spectrum auction coming on. Both the Conservative and Liberal governments have $20 billion of play money with regard to actually getting...and no actual cost. They have direct revenue from spectrum auction out there, and now we're going to actually build a second-class-citizen system.I would like to move to Mr. Ghiz, with regard to the facilities-based auction. Can you outline that a little bit more? Part of this is that we've had a cash grab for the spectrum auction as a primary element, and you're suggesting a different type of auction.I'd like you to detail that with regard to infrastructure being included as part of the bidding process.Advanced wireless servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryChristopherSeidlRobertGhiz//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]In other words, it affects your price.Advanced wireless servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryRobertGhizRobertGhiz//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]I think that is the missing part of the equation that Canadians fail to understand—the $20 billion that we've received, really, for basically selling the skies and creating toll roads in the skies for consumers versus that of actually getting the infrastructure out there. The $750 million—let's be clear on this—is going to be collected from the companies as well, so that additionally will be rolled into prices for Canadians. Basically, $21 billion is out there as a public policy to collect for government revenue and for services versus actually achieving those objectives. I find, quite frankly, the CRTC's decision to do this quite offensive, given the fact that we have these opportunities.I do want to return to the 10%. What 10% of the country is going to be left out? You said 90% by 2021. What 10% has been identified? What are those regions? We should know specifically those regions. I want to know where that 10% is located.Broadband FundBroadband Internet servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryRobertGhizChristopherSeidl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]I don't want the website. Tell Canadians, right now, what 10% of the country. Some of them can't even go on the website since they don't have service, so tell the country right now. What's that 10% that is going to be, basically, forsaken?Broadband FundBroadband Internet servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryChristopherSeidlChristopherSeidl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]How can you address that, then? Is the mandate you have not strong enough? What was the decision for basically carving off the 10%? It seems ridiculous to not finish the last 10% if we're actually saying that we're going to have it for everybody. What are you missing as a mandate, then, to get the whole country under this type of an umbrella?Broadband FundBroadband Internet servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryChristopherSeidlChristopherSeidl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0955)[English]Has there been an economic analysis done to say basically what you need for that 10%? I think it's a fair question. I mean, if we want to have this goal, and we say we're going to have it as a country, what do you need to get it done?Broadband FundBroadband Internet servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryChristopherSeidlChristopherSeidl//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0955)[English]Well, investing in obsolescence isn't necessarily a strategy.Broadband FundBroadband Internet servicesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryChristopherSeidlDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (0850)[English] Thank you very much, Chair. I appreciate that and I applaud your optimism about getting to reports.If I recall correctly, when I left off I was trying to figure out, and think out loud, reasons the government would do what they've done. As a reminder, what they've done is unique in Canadian history in that we have never, ever had an Auditor General say to Parliament, “I do not have sufficient funds to carry out my work plan.” Those words have never been uttered before in Canadian history. It's heartbreaking to see the minister try to make this about 2011, when 2011 at best is a talking point. At best, the argument the minister has is, “Wait a minute. You're accusing us of an awful thing, cutting the budget of the Auditor General. The Conservatives, when they were in power in 2011, were much worse.” That's their best argument, that “they did it too”, which, first of all, is not true and if I have any credibility in this place I'm willing to spend some of it, believe it or not, defending the Conservatives to the extent that what is going on now is completely apples and oranges from what went on in 2011. I know because, not only was I here, I was the chair of the committee.It really is heartbreaking when you think about what's at stake here. This is not games. This is not bean counting. This is not boring accounting stuff that really doesn't matter to anybody or have any relevancy to the real world. We're talking about, for instance, an audit that the Auditor General planned for next year on cybersecurity and has had to rip it out of the work plan because they don't have enough money. That has never happened in Canadian history.For the minister to stand up and say that what this is really all about is whether the Liberals are as bad and evil from an auditing point of view as the Conservatives were, that's not the issue. Since I happen to have a bit of time, I thought what I might do is to help put this to bed, because again, it's heartbreaking, but we need to wrestle this false argument to the ground and get it out of the way so that we're actually talking about what matters, which is the Auditor General's work plan for next year, not what the previous government did eight years ago. Since the Liberals seem to want to spend time there, I'll gladly spend some time explaining why I'm prepared to put my credibility on the line to say they are not comparable. I'll say again how much I absolutely resent the minister, a federal minister of the Crown, standing up and attacking a member of the House. I stand here totally vulnerable and ready to be challenged, but I do not attack people personally. I didn't do it for the 15 years I was here, I didn't do it the 13 years I was at Queen's Park, and I didn't do it the five years I was sitting on city and regional councils in Hamilton. However, there I was, sitting listening to a minister attack me, and not only attack me on something that was made up out of thin air but attack me on my job, questioning my integrity on this committee when I was the chair. Nothing matters more to me, other than my constituents, than the work of the Auditor General and proper oversight in this Parliament. That is where my passion is. That is where my heart is. It's really disappointing to see that the best the minister can do to defend against the indefensible is to attack another member of Parliament.(0855) Quite frankly, I'm surprised because I know Joyce well. You and I have travelled with her, Chair. We have broken bread together. We've fought. We've had our arguments, but we've always kept it in the context of parliamentary collegiality, respect and an understanding that we're all here to do the same job. I thought that was the relationship that we had, so even on a personal level....What it points to is the scarcity of a legitimate response. When you don't have an argument, you do two things. You get louder, which I know because I've done that—A voice: I totally believe it.Mr. David Christopherson: My colleagues can believe that. It's not hard to believe that I would be like that.Listen. What I want to do is read into the record a letter addressed to me, as the chair, from Mr. Wiersema, who at the time was the interim Auditor General. That was between the era of Sheila Fraser and Michael Ferguson. Mr. Wiersema was the interim Auditor General. He was a great auditor and a great guy too, just for the record. He was just a real prince of an individual.It's from the Auditor General. It's on the office's letterhead. It's dated October 26, 2011, and addressed to me, as chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. It reads:Dear Mr. Christopherson,In July 2011, Officers of Parliament received letters from their respective Ministers strongly encouraging them to adhere to the spirit and intent of the government's Strategic and Operating Review—one of the steps in the government's efforts to achieve fiscal savings of at least $4 billion by the 2014-15 fiscal year. My Office recognizes the seriousness of the current economic circumstances facing Canada and all Canadians. In my response to Minister Flaherty dated 2 August 2011, I committed to undertake a review of my Office and present my results to the Parliamentary Panel on the Funding and Oversight of Officers of Parliament and to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. I am writing to you in your capacity as the Chair of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts to advise you of our proposal that is the result of our Strategic and Operating Review, and to request a meeting with the Committee to discuss it at your earliest convenience. I am writing to the Chair of the Parliamentary Panel on the Funding and Oversight of Officers of Parliament with a similar request.We have undertaken a thorough and comprehensive review of the Office of the Auditor General. The starting point of our review was strategic. We have analyzed all of our legislative audit practices with a view to concentrating our efforts where they will best serve Parliament and territorial legislatures. While we believe that all of our work is valuable, some is less critical than others. We have used this review as an opportunity to assess how our limited resources are best deployed, based on risk and value. We have also reviewed all of our internal processes and services to identify opportunities for operational efficiencies. Our proposal, outlined below, would result in a reduction of approximately 10 percent from our current workforce. The impact will be felt across all levels of our organization. We expect to incur expenses for redeployments and retraining, which we have allowed for. We are committed to making these reductions in the most responsible and caring way we can. In total, the reductions will approximate $6.7 million in 2014-15, or 8 percent of our 2011-12 Main Estimates of $84.4 million. We are able to implement about $5.3 million of these savings on our own, but will require legislative and executive action to realize about $1.4 million of the total. The proposed savings, including those arising from changes to our territorial work, are summarized in attachment 1 to this letter.The proposed reductions in our audit work predominantly affect our financial audit practice. This practice has experienced a number of independent, ad-hoc and special mandate requests over the years. The legislative and other changes we are proposing will focus our financial audits on what we believe to be the most important accounting information and the areas of greatest risk.(0900) Parenthetically, financial audits are the standard audits that most of us understand—where you go in and make sure that the bills are there and were paid on time, where the money is, just that basic auditing accounting function—versus performance audits, which used to be called “value for money” audits, which is the focus of our work. We do not review financial audits. We accept them because we're part of the mandate, but the actual work that we do and the hearings that we have are on performance audits, which are different. For example, a financial audit says, you said you were going to spend $10 million on schools, so let's see the bills and see the cheques and see the bank balances and make sure everything is square. A performance audit says, you had $10 million to build schools, so did you do it efficiently or not? The interim Auditor General is differentiating at this point in the letter between a financial audit and a performance audit. I'll just continue: The changes will also enable us to achieve greater consistency in our audit effort across federal organizations. For example, consistent with the government's decision not to proceed with audited departmental financial statements, we propose discontinuing our audits of the financial statements of department-like organizations. This will reduce the number of financial audits we conduct by 18. Those organizations with significant public funds would still be subject to examination as part of our annual audit of the Summary Financial Statements of the Government of Canada. In a few cases, the organizations may wish to continue receiving an audit. We would have no objection if they were to engage a private sector auditing firm to do so. We propose to continue our work as the financial auditor of the majority of Crown corporations and of Agents of Parliament, recognizing their unique responsibilities and accountability relationships. The one legislative change we propose outside our financial audit practice would discontinue our assessments of the performance reports of the Parks Canada Agency, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, and the Canadian Revenue Agency. When these agencies were created in the late 1990s-2003 as a new type of governmental organization, it was seen as valuable to have an independent review of the fairness and reliability of their performance information. Since then, however, we have not been asked to do similar work on performance reports of any other government organization, and we can see no reason to continue to single out the agencies for this type of assessment. We believe Parliament requires high-quality performance information from all federal organizations and therefore we will continue to include performance reporting as a topic for consideration in our performance audit practice. A list of the audits and review engagements that we are proposing to be discontinued is provided in attachment 2 to this letter. In our special examination of Crown corporations (a type of performance audit), the government implemented a significant change in 2009 when it extended the period between examinations from five to ten years. Following the governments change, our costs for this work decreased noticeably. We are now focused on distributing the workload more evenly and operating this practice as efficiently as possible. We see no further opportunity to change the nature or extent of our audit effort in this area. The majority of our interaction with Parliament is through our performance audit practice. We conduct audits that examine the efficiency, economy, and environmental impact of all major federal government departments, agencies, and other organizations, and annual government revenues of $237 billion and expenses of some $270 billion. In fiscal year 2008-09, we presented 32 performance audit reports to the House of Commons and territorial legislatures. This compares with the 26 performance audit reports we issued in our most recent fiscal year, after reducing our performance audit practice in response to previous funding pressures and Parliament's capacity to consider our work. (0905) Again, parenthetically, the Auditor General came forward on his own and asked if it could be reduced from three reports to two. The main argument was in part the pressure on the office to deliver it but quite frankly, back in those days, we were having a heck of a time on the committee keeping up with the reports. I won't get into the politics, but the dynamics of this committee at that time were not the healthiest in terms of good practice for a public accounts committee, so that led to some of it. I think history has shown, Chair, it was probably a wise decision because during this era I think, and I stand to be corrected by you, Chair, we've been able to do just about every chapter, certainly the overwhelming majority. I think on a number of reports, we did them all. That's night and day compared with the era we're talking about here when there were dysfunctional ingredients, let's just say, in the work of PACP. I'll leave it at that. I have enough political fights on my hands without opening up another one, especially on an old battle.Anyway, I just wanted to point out that did happen. Again, there have been contractions in the work of the Auditor General, but as you can see, often it's driven by their own review of their workload, what they need to do and what can be most effective. They're also looking at the ability of the committee. Quite frankly in my opinion, if this committee had been around at that time, that recommendation might not have been made. I have to tell you, and Tyler can tell you—he was with me the whole time—we had a heck of a time trying to play catch-up with two tracks going. We were trying to play catch-up on the one track, consistently falling behind, and on the other track, we were trying to do the new ones as they were coming out and we were falling behind. It gets bad because you're reviewing reports that reflect a hearing that you did 10 months ago, and that hearing was six months after the report was tabled. You're a veteran now of PACP, Chair. You can appreciate that a lot of the effectiveness of this committee is lost.I think the Auditor General of the day looked at that and, in combination with their own workload, made that recommendation. I think history has proven that, so far, this was a good decision, because what we've been doing is just about the right amount of workload.By the way, I remind this committee that this average amount of workload is anywhere between six and 14 chapters within one report, and right now the Auditor General, I think, has at most three or four audits planned. That's out of two reports. Where there should be upwards of 20, there are going to be four and one that's going to be cut is cybersecurity. This is what blows my mind. Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020MotionsOffice of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0905)[English]The Simms protocol...?Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralNickWhalenSt. John's EastNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0905)[English]By the way I was there. The Simms protocol, Chair—because I need you to make sure this works—is that if a member wants to comment or ask a question, not to engage in debate necessarily, although they can try, but more a matter of “hey, on that point”, then we'll have that little exchange. Then you make sure I get the floor back at the end of it, Chair, and it's usually about a minute or so. That's what we do at PROC.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralNickWhalenSt. John's EastKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0905)[English]Yes. It works well for us at PROC, so please, go ahead, Mr. Whalen. Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0910)[English]Yes.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralNickWhalenSt. John's EastNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0910)[English]Thanks, Chair.As I have thought this through, I suppose the safety net that I'm looking at has been that surely to goodness the next Parliament will come in and when the PACP meets and looks at their workload—which is nothing—they will ask the question: Why do we exist? Hopefully that would draw some attention to it.Here is my problem, Mr. Whalen.... Thank you very much for your kind remarks. It's surprising. At the end of three and a half decades, it's nice to hear. I appreciate it, especially from colleagues and especially colleagues I respect.To me, that's kind of the safety net. I'm going to be completely honest with you. This has just destroyed my pre-retirement time. I made some reference to this at the last meeting, so I won't go on too long. Every since I announced last July, one thing I thoroughly enjoyed.... Something that I used to think about during my career was that I hoped to get a chance to spend close to a year being an elected person and never have to worry about being re-elected. It's a little like being a senator.I looked forward to that, thinking I could get these parting shots on the way out the door. Since last July, I've really enjoyed being more non-partisan than I've ever been. I've never been overly partisan. Given certain incidents, some would argue that may not be true, but in the main I don't think I'm a fire-breathing partisan, at least not in the latter part of my career.In my riding people were saying that I look so calm. You, Chair, apparently said.... I wasn't here then, so I'm paraphrasing your words. When you announced that you weren't going to run again—having changed your mind originally, thinking that you were good for another term—one of the things you said at this committee was that Christopherson was looking way too relaxed, as if to say there's a life out there that you don't want to miss.I was enjoying it. In fact, people in my riding would come up and say that I looked so calm and so relaxed. To me, it was NSD, “new serene Dave”. For a year I've been relatively serene, calm and enjoying it. I wasn't seeing partisan lines, only seeing parliamentary colleagues—and then this.I have to tell you, if this is still the way it is when we rise, I'm not going to leave here with the same bounce in my step. I'm going to feel like I failed because I'm the most senior member of this committee. I know, as well as anyone—if not better—the importance of this work to Parliament and to our reputation in the world as one of the best.When word gets out—I mean internationally—that the Liberal government.... We don't see it, because they're like librarians. They don't make a lot of noise, but there's a lot of them and they know a lot. There is a whole auditing community and a whole oversight, accountability and transparency community, internationally, that pay attention to these things.I won't name them, but I've had responses. We sent out the article that was published in the Hill Times to a few people. You'd be surprised who is really concerned about this—starting with business. The government is going to start hearing from business on this.Do you want to know why? It's because it's not only social democrats like me who believe strongly in transparency, accountability and oversight. When the business community—which sees itself as having to carry the burden of taxation—sees government waste, smoke comes out of its ears. It's the one time that I and that business community are totally united in conflict.I say to my fellow leadership colleagues especially—the chair and the vice-chair because we've travelled internationally and you two know exactly what I'm talking about—that when word gets out internationally that the Liberal government, under the fair-haired Prime Minister who the world adores, slashed the work plan budget of the Auditor General, it's going to leave a whole lot of people wondering what is going on in Canada.(0915) I guess my answer to my colleague, the direct answer, is yes, this is fixable, but a lot of damage is going to be done. If it's going to get fixed by the next government, this is the part.... I will come back to that. I do know where I am, even though I go for a walk around the park. It's like that cartoon where the kid goes out to do a quick thing and ends up going all over. That's the beauty of the committee talking. You don't have to worry about time. As long as the chair is okay with where you are, you're good. I'll come back to that.My point on this is—since I was asked the question—why would the government allow this to potentially become an election issue? Of course, the Conservatives, the NDP, the Greens and I suspect even the Bloc are all going to put in their platforms that they will adequately, properly and sufficiently fund the Auditor General. From a political point of view, just looking at it as an observer, I don't understand why the Liberals would give the opposition parties this gift.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0915)[English]Okay, but don't interrupt me. I'm in the middle of a good rant.Some hon. members: Oh, oh!Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralNickWhalenSt. John's EastNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0915)[English]Then we'll have a different exchange.NickWhalenSt. John's EastNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0915)[English] Sure. Let me just finish this thought, because I'm just not smart enough to hold it for long, and then I'll have a quick consultation and I'd be glad to do that.This is the thing. Again, I'm picking up where I left off yesterday, trying to figure out why the government is doing this. This is what throws me. It's not as though you need the $10.8 million. Come on—in this place, where we deal with billions? Remember, I used to be the parliamentary assistant to the minister of finance in Ontario, so I know a little bit about these things. If it's not for the money and the politics suck, there has to be another reason. I won't review these in detail again today. I may need a refresher down the road, but today we're okay. I pointed out that I thought one motivator might be that the government was really worried about what a cybersecurity audit would show, especially since I was here the last time we had one, and it was scary. Is the government of the day, first of all, arrogant enough to believe that they're going to be the government and therefore they should axe this now because it's going to give them all kinds of pain? Is the political calculation that it will be such a horrific audit, of the dimensions of the sponsorship scandal or the F-35 debacle—or worse, because it deals with security? Would it be so bad that it was worth paying this price? There is a price to be paid. I and the other opposition members are doing everything we can to try to get some attention to this. At the end of the day—I mean, I've been around long enough—the only time this is really going to change is when emails and texts and phone calls start coming in to individual Liberal members' offices. Then they're going to be saying at their next caucus meeting, why do I have this problem for $10.8 million on the Mother Teresa department of Parliament? “Why do I have this problem?” is what Liberal backbenchers will be asking.The other thing I thought was, is this retaliation? When we're going to talk about this big-time...and to her credit, Vice-Chair Mendès has been strong about looking at the long term to make sure we change the process of funding, so that we don't have what we have right now. What we have right now is that the very people whom the Auditor General audits—we recently came out with a couple of reports that didn't make these folks look very good—are the same folks they have to negotiate with. Is this retaliation? It would be horrifically unacceptable from any government, but I have to tell you, there would be an added sting coming from one that got elected on a mandate of respecting Parliament. Is that what this is, retaliation? Are we that kind of banana republic, such that when an oversight body makes the powerful government of the day look bad, they're going to pay a price? Is that what happened?Again, I find it mind-boggling that either of these things could happen: cutting the budget of the Auditor General so that a specific audit or other audits don't happen because of the political fallout; or retaliation led by bureaucrats who felt that they took a whacking from the AG and now they have a chance to return the favour. Again, I find this really hard to believe. I find this whole thing hard to believe. That's why I say I'm trying to understand the motivation. If we can understand the motivation, then maybe we can help unpack it. The problem is that, even after 34 years in politics, I can't figure out what the motivation is, unless this is just in the same category as the stupidity of giving millions of dollars to the Westons for nothing. Is it the same crowd of people with absolutely no political gut who let this get through? Is it incompetence?(0920) I have yet to have anybody give me a satisfactory understanding of what motivated the government to do this, on the brink of an election, no less. The best I have right now.... The part that I still don't understand—there's a part of it I'm hoping someday I will because it totally perplexes me—is that, if a mistake was made, which happens.... We've all been in government—I'm looking at my colleagues—and mistakes happen. Then you run the biggest political mistake of doubling down on a losing hand, and that's what I see the government doing. We made a mistake. Rather than pay the political price of acknowledging we made a mistake and having to put our tail between our legs, we're going to double down. That's what I'm seeing when I hear the minister responsible for this budget stand up in the House and want to talk about 2011 rather than a single justification for this. What's the justification for causing the Auditor General of Canada, for the first time in history, to tell Parliament.... Remember they're our employees, not cabinet's employees, our employees, and our employee is telling us, Parliament, for the first time in our history, that we don't have enough money in the Auditor General's budget to carry out its work plan.You can slice and dice the letters, the issues and the way the minister is responding in the House, and you can parse that all you want. It does not change the fact that the Office of the Auditor General of Canada does not have enough money to do its work. Colleagues know, because I told you that at the end of every estimates meeting of this public accounts committee. The chair of the committee ends the process. I did it. This chair does it, as did all the chair's predecessors and my predecessors. The last question you ask the Auditor General is, “Do you have sufficient money to carry out your work plan?”Why do we ask that question that way? It is because we're not part of the negotiations, because it's not independent, because we can't necessarily as Parliament trust the process explicitly because we're not part of it. It's more this ridiculous business of the executive council and the cabinet usurping the power of Parliament over the years. This is no different from the cabinet deciding how much money the clerk at the Supreme Court is going to get, because they're completely different branches of government and they're all equal.We have two big issues; one is the micro and one is the macro. Macro, I suspect, may not get changed now, although I'm going to get into it because there was a mandate to do it, and there was pressure from the agents of Parliament as long ago as January, and this government has just ignored that and done nothing. Do you know what? It wouldn't have been an issue. It's just not big enough to be an issue had this not happened. Then they could have got away with ignoring their promise in that area. They probably would have. Who would have brought that up in the context of all the things that are going on that are going to be part of the next election, which you're all welcome to? I remain trying to answer the question of funding in the next Parliament, which was, to me, the most important part of that question. Yes, I hope that happens, but I have to tell you, if this government is there, you're going to look bad, and if you're in opposition, you're going to look even worse, because the government of the day will make sure you do. They're going to ride in on their white steed and save the day from a horrible scenario that this government created for no good reason, which is the essence of my point.(0925) Now, I was asked, Chair, by Mr. Whalen if I would consider some language. Do I have a moment?Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralNickWhalenSt. John's EastKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]Thanks, Chair. KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]Thank you, sir. Yes, I did, and I very much appreciate the efforts of Mr. Whalen and in no way feel.... He's very sensitive to the fact that he's not a member of this committee and he didn't want to feel as if he's coming in here and trying to be the one who shakes everything up, but I think any contribution to trying to get out of where we are, because we're looking for a resolution, is helpful and appreciated. I thank him for that. I have taken a look at the language and it's helpful language. It's positive language, but Chair, for me the politics of it are that it's kind of the next step. It deals with what we do to make sure that this doesn't happen again going forward in terms of the funding.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]Mr. Whalen has to go back actually.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]Right.NickWhalenSt. John's EastKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]I don't know where you're going to go with this.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]We were looking to see if this might unlock it, yes. Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralPatKellyCalgary Rocky RidgePatKellyCalgary Rocky Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English] I thank Mr. Kelly and that's what I wanted to clarify. I was listening, but I didn't see anything there that got us off the dime. I was very straightforward with Mr. Whalen. I think I'm being open and honest. I never considered myself clever enough to pull off the alternative. If you ask what gets us out of this, all I need to shut me up—as one member, for what it's worth—is for the government to announce that the $10.8 million for the Auditor General will be there. I don't need mechanisms. I don't need time frames, but I need to hear that the $10.8 million....Again, Mr. Whalen, your suggestion takes me full circle back to the politics of this. How did we get into this? If I were sitting over where you were, I'd be camped out in that minister's office wanting to know why I have this problem. Why is public accounts, two weeks before we rise, into a filibuster? Why was this necessary? What was the purpose? I understand—I won't get into the detail—that it may have something to do with the agents of Parliament and how if one gets funded and it throws things.... I understand that. I've been in government. I understand that problem, but I have two responses. Number one, the House leader already had a mandate to fix this and didn't do it. There was a letter from the agents of Parliament in January of this year asking the Liberals to fix that funding mechanism. Had that funding mechanism been fixed and in place, I suspect that this whole process would have gone down a different road and this wouldn't have happened.However, that's not where we are yet. There are two pieces in front of us. One is that for the first time...and I have more stuff to read in here that underscores that this has never happened before. It's this underfunding of the Auditor General that, again, I'll keep coming back to because there's an answer. I just can't find it.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0940)[English]Exactly.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0940)[English]Yes.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0940)[English] I'll be glad to take it under advisement.Again, here's my thinking, sir: I know as well as you, and I agree, that getting government to change decisions and make decisions at the standing committee level is very difficult. It's like pushing string. However, I've been around long enough to know that if the public turns on them on this issue, it will be fixed real quick, because that's a lot more than a $10.8 million problem. That's my purpose.As I started to say when I got here, part of me is going to feel like a bit of a failure if I leave here after all these years on public accounts—after all the fights and skirmishes we had to get information to make sure we could do our job—and the work plan for the year following has been devastated and gutted. I'm sorry, I cannot help but leave here feeling like I failed really, after 15 years, and that is the condition that I walked away from the PAC and the Auditor General work of Parliament. Whether or not that belongs on my shoulders, that's how I feel. That's why I feel so passionately.I know enough about politics to understand that if enough people become aware of this, there will be outrage and it will be changed. I only stand a very small chance of using this little filibuster at the public accounts committee as my means. Once I let go of that, I may have a letter that's signed unanimously by the committee. Had we done that from the very beginning, we might have a different process, but we didn't. Now the government's getting more and more entrenched, and if I stop this filibuster and relinquish the floor—although I don't believe for a moment I can single-handedly change the world—I know that it will be impossible to do that.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0945)[English]Thanks, Chair.There are a couple of things. I think the government would likely vote for a unanimous letter, because it would allow this to move on and they could stickhandle a letter much easier than a filibuster. That's my take on it, and that's just it. I'm only exercising my rights.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0945)[English]I would also point out to my colleague that it was the Auditor General who said specifically that cybersecurity couldn't be afforded to be done. If the government wants to challenge the legitimacy of what the Auditor General is saying, I am more than willing to agree that we bring the Auditor General back in, in front of the cameras, and let's have it out. I'd love that. If that's what the committee would like to do to get to the bottom of it, if the government believes that the funding is adequate and that this is consistent with the way governments have treated the Auditor General before, if the government members actually believe that as strongly as I believe the opposite, let's bring the Auditor General in front of cameras, and let's have at it. I'm open to a Simms protocol response to that. Let's get the Auditor General in here. If you want to not deal with debate and deal with facts, let's bring him in. Are the government members open to that?Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0945)[English]Do you know what? If you're willing to bring in the Auditor General, I'm willing to negotiate what the rest of the sitting looks like. In terms of my goal, here's the thing; here's my real problem. Madame Mendès, it's exactly what you said, when you said that basically the funding is not going to happen. You said, the bottom line is that this is not going to happen. My position is that it bloody well is, and I'm going to do everything I can to make that happen. Even if it's David and Goliath, David is still going to fight. It seems to me that we're quite a way from a resolution. To be clear, what I would really need is to know that not only is this committee unanimously supporting that but that it's going to do something with the government. I've been around a long time. I can keep secrets, q.t., winks. I'd be more than willing to give the government whatever face-saver it needs. I offer this publicly. I will work with the government, publicly and privately, to do everything I can to help create a face-saver where this is easier to stand down from. I don't care. I don't need headlines. That's the opposite of what I want. I'm trying to fade into the distance and you keep pushing me into a fight. I would love to get this resolved and go back to new serene Dave, rather than bringing this guy back.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English]That's the goal.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English] I'm not hearing anything that I couldn't work with as an idea. I think the wording of the letter would probably require some time.Just on the reports.... I appreciate, because obviously you're all smart people, you would have thought through, as I did, that okay, if I start doing this, what am I going to face? One of the first things I'm going to get from respected colleagues like Alexandra Mendès is, “This is all fine data that's important, but what about the committee reports that we have to get done? They're important.” I weighed that out, and for me, for what it's worth, I concluded that this is so big that if.... The work we do has three key points that really change things. Number one is when the report is tabled from the Auditor General. It's a whole day. We do the lock-up. The media usually controls the media cycle for the next 24 hours, longer if there is a big problem. That's one. The second one is when we hold our hearing. It's public, so the media are at least aware and often they are covering it, but certainly people who are interested are watching. That has an impact.The third one is our committee report. It makes a difference, but I am arguing that the other two are more important. On the reports that we have, we've done those two parts. I'm looking at not being able to finish the third part of a couple of items, versus not even having the report tabled or a hearing because no audit exists. To me in the higher—Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English]Just a minute. You have to learn your timing. I'm friendly, but don't cut me off. Mr. Nick Whalen: Sorry.Mr. David Christopherson: In the hierarchy of things, in my mind as much as it's tragic, I think that the trade-off is worth it.On the legacy piece, I have offered a process and I think we could get around that if we needed to. That's my thinking on the reports. Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralNickWhalenSt. John's EastKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English] I very much appreciate that and I'm trying to think. What I do like is the last suggestion by Mr. Whalen. It gives me some time to think and to see whether the letter....Again, as much as the government members would like this to go away, I want it to stay here, because it's the only way we're going to get any change. What I would be banking on—again, doing it even out in the open, and I'm saying this to my fellow opposition colleagues—is a letter from the committee that is and clear and strong about how we as the public accounts committee unanimously feel about this, combined with a hearing at which we get the Auditor General to talk to Canadians. The question is how that stacks up as pressure. For me, the resolution is not peace in the committee, as much as I want that too. That's not my resolution. It is yours, sir, and I understand that. That's your mandate. My purpose is beyond that. It's to get that money allocated, and everything we're talking about is short of that.Let me reiterate the suggestion that has been made so that I understand it and say it in my words, and if that's the case, then maybe we have an agreement that will let us move forward. The suggestion is that, at the conclusion of my remarks, if we're in agreement with what I'm saying and I have it right, we will switch into committee report writing.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Okay.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]It would have to be. If we're going to pick up on Tuesday as to where we are going, Thursday would be the earliest, wouldn't it?Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Today is Thursday. Tuesday we would decide whether or not we would be having a meeting.That's according to Mr. Whalen, and that was one of the things I was going to articulate. If we keep talking, we're going to waste the opportunity to do that work. I want that work done too.What's been suggested is that I would stand down my control of the floor right now and agree that we would go into committee reports. In this case it would be on the legacy report. Between now and next Tuesday, Madam Mendès, the chair, Mr. Kelly, our researchers and I would sit down and try to come to an agreement on a letter that we would then collectively recommend to the committee.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]If we worked on that letter and, assuming we had agreement that the letter worked, we did confirm that, because we have time now to confirm that the Auditor General could come in for Thursday.... The whole purpose of waiting until Tuesday was to give me that time rather than having to negotiate. As an old negotiator from the auto worker days in the 1970s, I know that you try not to make too many snap decisions in negotiations, so a little time to think would be good. I think there's the possibility. I'm not committing ahead of time that it's a done deal and that we just have to pro forma it. It's really going to depend. I'm going back and forth, but I do think that's a positive way, as long as it's understood that Tuesday I get the floor and that the first thing I will be given the opportunity to do will be to say that, yes, we have an agreement and we will move forward on that, or that, no, we don't have an agreement and I will just launch in again.Is that the understanding?Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootNickWhalenSt. John's East//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]I trust the chair.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralNickWhalenSt. John's EastKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]I would suggest they do.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralPatKellyCalgary Rocky RidgeAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]We'll bring them both in.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralPatKellyCalgary Rocky RidgeAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]Hopefully, we can have the whole two hours with both sides there. We can ask our questions and see if we can get to the bottom of it. At least we have a common starting point. We're starting, and I'm the first one to suggest this, to get off into rhetoric and move far away from.... That's the nature of filibusters, isn't it?Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]Mr. Chair, just to be clear then—Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]I will get the floor, but you're going to work with the clerk to confirm that we can get the deputy and the AG for next Thursday and have that information for Tuesday.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]Okay. Fair enough, but we will have a meeting.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]That was the main thing.I don't want to say on Tuesday that it looks like we have a deal and we haven't asked the AG if they can come or not. My enemy is the clock. This House is going to rise in a couple of weeks and we need to get this done.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]That's what I was asking, if we could do it today.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootDillanTheckedath//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]Mr. Chair, will you please repeat back to me what you think is going to happen so we understand it?Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]Madam clerk is anxiously trying to get in.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]I would just avoid a motion, if we can, because I can see us getting lost in it.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralAngelaCrandallKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]If that's the way you want to go, fine. That's why I was looking for an understanding, but if you need something to convey, that's fine, too.Let's give it a shot. I mean, hope springs eternal.I would still like to believe, I could be wrong, that the government members are working in the background trying to make this go away because it's a lot more than 10.8 million dollars' worth of problem.Let's give it a shot and see if we can't work together to effect the change we need.Government expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP): (0940)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.I'll quickly go around the table. We're running out of time. What would be your number one priority for the government to act on if there were a regulatory change that could take place right now? I know that narrows it down quickly, but the current Parliament has a short runway, and regulations can take place right away.The minister has already said that motion 208 will not be implemented through any type of legislation, so it's basically a lame duck, and anything that would be required will need some type of renewal, but there are regulatory changes that can take place, especially given the fact that the minister has already identified that the motion will not have any type of statutory movement.M-208Private Members' MotionsRegulationRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeJohnLyotier//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0940)[English]Thank you.We're running out of time.With that, Mr. Longfield brought up some interesting aspects with regard to emergency services. So I'm going to move the following motion:That the Committee immediately hold two meetings for the purpose of understanding the current mobile phone services for Canadians during times of emergencies.I can speak to the motion at the appropriate time, but I have moved the motion now, especially given the fact that we've had problems in the past with services, including in the Ottawa region.CellphonesCommittee businessEmergenciesMotionsJasonErnstDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]I will speak, and you can call the question on the motion when you can, Mr. Chair. We have a chance to have two meetings. Given the emergency situations that we've had.... This committee passed on an earlier opportunity to study cellphone coverage services during the tornado this region faced before, and we've subsequently had other problems. We have enough time to have two meetings to have the large telcos and other service providers provide some testimony to educate Canadians about what they and their families should receive during times of emergencies and also potential cracks, stresses or problems in the current system that we have.There's no doubt that there is a lot of misinformation. There are also concerns related to the fact that people can't even get the coverage they thought they would get. Also, there's the planning aspect for municipal, provincial and federal services that have to coordinate. Having two meetings, I think, is a responsible and a meaningful attempt to at least provide that basic sense of information so that there would be some great clarity with regard to what takes place during times of emergencies.Also, more importantly, we use this opportunity so that people can plan appropriately and the government can respond. This Parliament is going to be wrapping up soon. Without that direction, we will be leaving Canadians in a grey zone with regard to coverage for half a year at least before Parliament resumes after the election. I think that having two meetings is appropriate, and we have a time frame wherein we can do that. It would provide an opportunity to at least place some expectations for service delivery.Last, Mr. Chair, is the opportunity to raise concerns about those services for the greater public.Thank you.Committee businessDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]Can we have the vote, then? We can have the vote and go from there. The vote will only take a second. Can we have the vote on the motion?Committee businessDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]What are we voting on? I'll ask for a recorded vote.So we're not going to have a discussion on— DanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDavid de BurghGrahamLaurentides—Labelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]Before that, though, I called the question for the vote, so I called for the question to be.... Maybe you have an explanation of why, when I called the question before that, the debate was to adjourn. DanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDavid de BurghGrahamLaurentides—Labelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]Yes. DanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (0935)[English] I seek some guidance, Chair. Am I debating the estimates and...do we have a motion to approve the estimates or forward the estimates?KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]It's just on my motion. Fair enough. Okay, great.Thank you very much, Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to continue on this motion. Members will know how strongly I feel about this issue. I have to tell you, though, just to warm up to the subject, that it completely wrecked my plans. I want you to know that. If you've noticed, for the better part of this year and a little bit of last year, I've shifted into being non-partisan. It doesn't interest me as much. I wanted to get out of that silo and I have done my very best to almost consider myself as an independent, much to the chagrin of some of my colleagues, and have approached things that way.I've enjoyed it. It's been a lot of fun to be able to use my experience in whatever way I think might be helpful, as opposed to constantly.... Even though I'm not a hardline partisan, as a member of a caucus I'm always running parallel to the interests of the party and the relative aspects of the politics going on in the House on any given day, but I was very much enjoying everything being nice and calm and there not being a lot of drama, no partisanship. Then all of a sudden, out of nowhere, the government wrecks my plans and decides that they're going to stiff the Auditor General, sending my world into crisis. I thought back over 15 years on this committee to the heartache and the consternation and the number of meetings at which we would call in the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, all in an effort to make sure that we got, say, one document that we really needed and that the government was resisting giving to us. I think about how much effort we poured into those kinds of matters, and here we are dealing with a wholesale slaughter of the work plan of the Auditor General. I'll be returning to this a few times, but I just want to lay the groundwork. At another time, I'll go into the details, because I think they're important. For now, the overview is that in most of the years from 2011 to 2018, there were anywhere from 12 to 15 performance audits done in a calendar year, in addition to an average of two to seven Crown corporation audits. That's been the historical reflection going back to the last six, seven, eight years. As I've said, later on, I'm going to put this into the record because it needs to be there in detail, but for now, for the purposes of my point, in 2019, if you go to the website and take a look at what the plan is, you'll see that so far there are five performance audits, which is less than half of what was done from 2011 to 2018, and four Crown corporations, which is at the low end of what got done.But here's the real kicker: For the full report in 2019, there's one performance audit, and no Crown corporations. The first thought is, “What the hell is this committee going to do? What does it exist for? It might as well be part time.” In 2020, in the current plan on the website, there are three performance audits and no Crown corps. Why? It's because their resources have all been sucked up by all the new work they've been given, and the money that they got that the government's bragging about really just gave them catch-up money. It really does almost leave me speechless, which is about the greatest extreme of shock I can have—that I can't talk. I'm almost left without words, because I don't understand why. I've racked my brain trying to think what the motivation would be. I was around for the first review of cybersecurity. Did we nail down what year that was? Do you know, off the top of your head? A voice: There was one in 2002 and another one in 2006.(0940)Mr. David Christopherson: I was here for the one in 2006. As I think I mentioned at previous meetings, it shook me. It shook everybody, and that was 13 years ago. Think what has happened with technology, with the Russians vis-à-vis the American elections, and with our own people and the amount of time and money and effort being put into protecting our systems, let alone our precious election. One of the audits that will not happen now as a result of this refusal to fund the AG adequately is the planned audit on cybersecurity. It will not happen now. If someone wants to make the accusation that the Auditor General is playing games, make it early and make it clear, because I'd be prepared to defend their integrity to the end of the world. Without respect and integrity, they have nothing, and it's the same as this committee; it's all based on respect. Some of you will know that my thinking over the years has been that credibility is the currency of politics. If you have credibility and you're respected, it doesn't matter whether you're sitting as an independent or you're the prime minister; you will have gravitas. If you have respect, you have influence, and if you have influence, you have power. Each of us has that ability, but that also applies to committees and departments. I reject the idea that the Auditor General is playing any kind of games, because if they were found out to be doing that, they would be destroyed. A wholesale clearing out of the whole shop would have to be part of that. It would have to be. I don't believe that is what is going on. I believe they will be able to defend every decision here based on the finances and their triage of priorities.I began by saying what my thinking was as I searched for motivation. When I look at cybersecurity and I think back to the 2006 report, one of the possibilities for motivation is that the government is arrogant enough to believe that they will get re-elected, and they would rather take the heat for cutting the funding. I have to tell you that it breaks my heart. I'm doing everything I can to lift this damn issue off the page, and I'm having a hell of a time. It really is hard, and I know what will happen. If we don't deal with it now, there will be a committee sitting here in about six months that will be faced with this dilemma, only it will be too late. The damage will have been done.One of the possibilities is that regardless of how much political damage the government is taking by withholding the $10.8-million increase the AG's office needs in order to do their work plan, the pain of this right now, no matter how much it is and how much it might grow between now and the end of the sitting.... Remember, right now the calculation, if I'm right that this is one of the reasons, is that the government is winning. This issue is not on any news sites. Nobody is talking about it. We've raised it in the House, but beyond that, it's not being heard out there. Maybe the government's calculation is actually working quite well so far. I'm betting that one of the scenarios was that they looked at what the ultimate price could be for attacking the financial integrity of the Auditor General and saw that the political damage was still less than the mushroom clouds that would be formed over Parliament Hill if the Auditor General actually went in and did an update on where we are with cybersecurity. Is that what's going on? Are we in so much trouble that no government wants to have it exposed?I see that one of my colleagues is not happy with that suggestion. I'm not saying that this is what the government is doing; I'm trying to find a motivation. I'm just sharing my thoughts. That's one of them.(0945) That's one of them. Another one is a real problem, and to her credit my colleague, the vice-chair, Madam Mendès, picked up on this first at committee. What's interesting, Alexandra, is when I was mentioning to Denise about what happened to my plans of nice calm waters, that was the first place she went as well. Her first thought was, “Why are they allowed to do that?”The second motivation that I'm looking at is retaliation. The very people that the Auditor General's staff had to negotiate with in the process to determine the budget are some of the very same people and the same entity that was severely criticized in an audit.E-commerce—there's another one. So, is it retaliation? Remember, this is new. We've never had this. Even Stephen Harper, for all that he gets demonized for around here, didn't do this. I'm actually going to be defending the Conservatives, believe it or not, on this accusation by the government that this is no different from what Stephen Harper did. This is completely different.Sorry? Was there something I was supposed to hear, or are you just mumbling out loud?Committee businessMain estimates 2019-2020MotionsOffice of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0945)[English] We have lots of material. This is just the first page he's given me. We're just warming up.I'm trying to find this motivation. If it's not retaliation, because I find that severe too.... It would break my heart under any regime, but especially under the Liberals, because you made such a big deal about doing government differently and treating committees with respect. I remember how I had to have a rant at the beginning of PROC in order to get Lamoureux the heck off that committee because he was the parliamentary secretary. It took me a little while. He went from that seat to that seat to that seat to the door, which is where he should be—out the door, and not personally, but as a parliamentary secretary. What's surprising, Chair, is that this government made such a big, big deal about doing things differently, and they still do. Well, you're doing things differently with the Auditor General, because nobody in the history of this country, including Stephen Harper, has ever denied an Auditor General adequate funding to carry out their work plan. That has never happened, ever.For some of us who believed that the government at least in part was sincere about wanting to do things differently, how come democratic reform and democracy is one of the files that's going to give you the biggest problem going into the election? It's the easy one.If it's not fear of the findings of a cybersecurity audit and if it's not retaliation for critical audits by the same people.... We're going to get to that a little later, that letter from most of our agents of Parliament. It speaks to their need for a new funding mechanism. The ministerial mandate letter, which I also have a copy of, speaks to that very issue that the officers of Parliament were reminding the government of back in January of this year.Why wasn't that done? If they were really sincere, that would have been in place. It would have been in place for this fiscal planning year, meaning the work we're doing now for the fiscal year coming. Instead, we have the government hardlining on $10.8 million. I mean, come on, colleagues, it's $10.8 million. That's an “m”. They spilled that much in a week when I was at Queen's Park. That much probably gets spilled in a few days around here.Therefore, it can't be the money. Remember the framework for what happened in 2011? The framework was that there was a new government elected with a mandate, and whether the bureaucracy liked the mandate or not, the people had given them one. When the new government put in place an austerity program that cut things across the board, the choice of the Auditor General at that time was to attempt, as much as they could, to be a team player as one of the major entities of Parliament. Here's the key thing, Chair, and I will be repeating this a lot, because there's no way this government is going to continue to get away with saying that what they're doing is the same as Stephen Harper or not even as bad. That's totally wrong and not acceptable.The key difference is that the Auditor General said that he could still provide Parliament with everything that he had before. I think I was in the chair at the time. I went to the Auditor General—and you'll appreciate this, Chair—confidentially, so there were just the two of us. I asked, “Can you really do this, or is there something going on in the background that I need to know?”(0950) The answer was, “It's going to sting, but we can do it, and we can still provide Parliament with everything that we promised and what we normally would”—and they did. The minister—I couldn't believe it. I know Joyce. I've travelled with Joyce. I don't know whether she was just under the gun and felt the pressure, but I was very shocked and disappointed that she made it personal. I work really hard at not doing that. Even publicly, if you take a look at all my election campaigns, you see very few criticisms of my opponents. That's not my style.She, the minister, made it very personal. She said, “Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to supporting the important work of the Auditor General. When an officer of Parliament, such as the Auditor General, makes a request for additional budget, we take that request very seriously.”Well, the evidence would be that no, they don't, but here's the part I'm going to focus on for now. She said, “My question for the member of the NDP is this: Where was he when the Conservatives cut 10% out of the Auditor General's budget”, and then she went off on a rant, “as well as cutting half a billion dollars out of the RCMP” and blah-blah. It was a personal attack on something that I have committed heart and soul to: the work of public accounts, accountability, oversight and transparency. Over the years, this became a bigger and bigger part of why I stayed and why I ran again. For a minister of the Crown to accuse me me of being asleep at the switch, I take personal offence, especially since this was a minister who was swanning around for a couple of years when she was parliamentary secretary trying to be an honorary member of public accounts committee.I remember that we went to a conference, and she was there. I heard her introduce herself as an honorary member of the public accounts committee. What the heck is that? There is no such thing. I said to her, “If you want to be a member of the public accounts committee, great. You're smart. You care. You have good experience. Resign the PS and join the committee, but not both.”You will recall—and you know where I'm going, Chair—Committee businessKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]—that on the steps of Parliament, back when it was a real Parliament—spoken like a true curmudgeon, eh?—we were having a committee photo. Normally when you have a committee photo, it's the members of the committee who are in the photo, and hence the name “committee photo”. It's pretty straightforward. The chair touches base with a few folks and finds a time that works. I think it was after or just before QP. It was one of those times when, if you can grab all us cats and get us herded into one place, you can actually make it work, because we're in transit with committees and QP and things like that.Okay. That's fine. No problem. I put on my best tie and combed my hair really nicely. I got all ready to go into the photo—the “committee photo”—and Joyce was there. Okay. Well, you know, it's always nice to see Joyce. She sort of was hanging around a lot in those days. We gathered on the steps under the leadership of our chair, who said, “Hey, gather on the steps.” We did—and Joyce was there. I looked at the chair and I indicated with my eyes, “Skeezix is here”, and the chair very politely leaned over and said that this was a committee photo, so it would be restricted to members of the committee. She wouldn't leave. She wouldn't leave. Now, I don't like doing this, okay? I really don't. You'll find, if you take a look, that there's not much of me doing this, but damn it, when a minister of the Crown stands up in question period and attacks my integrity, this is what you're going to get. She would not leave the stairs. Do you know, colleagues, how this ends? A couple of people do.Committee businessKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootDarrellSamsonSackville—Preston—Chezzetcook//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]I'll tell you how it ended. We had to forgo the committee photo because a non-member of the committee wouldn't get out of the photo. At the end of the day, our scheduled committee photo didn't happen. This is the person who wants to attack my integrity on public accounts, which I've been on for 15 years. More importantly, had the Auditor General in any way—and you'll appreciate this, Chair, because I.... By the way, I can't say enough about the fantastic chairing that you have done, and I'm not just blowing smoke. You came in out of nowhere. You were a minister of the Crown in a previous government, so partisanship is a legitimate part of your DNA. You rolled into this committee.... When I first arrived, I didn't know too much about public accounts. I want to just say, sir, that in a very short period of time, you have deserved to be our leader, and not just by virtue of having been designated. You've earned that right by how you've led us and in the way you've let us function. A lot of credit that we're getting has to go to you as the leader, because without that leadership at the top, the rest of it can't happen.Committee businessDarrellSamsonSackville—Preston—ChezzetcookKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]Thank you, Chair.When I spoke to the AG, had I received any signal, either directly from the words or.... I'm a politician; I wordsmith. If I had been getting words that were telling me something, or even just a straight-up “We're really under the gun here, and this is really bad”.... If I had been given that in any way, shape or form.... Go ask Mr. Albas what I did and threatened to do as the chair of the committee on a couple of occasions. I can't go into it too much, because we're in public, but suffice it to say that I took any attack on the work of the Auditor General very seriously and was prepared to do anything legal to counteract it, to fight it. But there was no need. Where was the fight? Had I done that, I would have been violating the golden rule of public accounts: I would have become partisan. I would have tried to take a scenario, as the government is doing right now, and as that minister, Joyce Murray, is doing in the House right now, and playing right into that kind of politics. Had I said, “This is a cut; you're going after the Auditor General” and tried to make a great big deal of it, I would have been violating that sacred rule that we have to have to make this committee work, and the rule is that when we walk through that door, we leave our party membership at the door and we are in here as parliamentarians, providing oversight and accountability regardless of the colour of the government in power. To me, that's what I would have been doing.Colleagues, you know me. I was busting for that fight. I was not happy. However, the Auditor General said, publicly and privately, that they could manage and—most importantly for me, meaning me as the parliamentarian—that all the work that they would normally provide to Parliament would continue. He said they could do it, and they did. If you look at the number of audits through those years, and the cuts, you'll see that they managed to live up to their word.Now, to my mind, I made the right decision. I accepted it, as did the rest of the committee, and we moved on. That was that. We've had no problems since then—until this year, until about two weeks ago. All of a sudden, out of nowhere, the government is denying the Auditor General a requested $10.8 million so that their office can do the work for Parliament.I'm going to keep coming back to that, especially when there are more people paying attention, because unless that minister gives me a personal apology, I intend to—Committee businessKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1140)[English]Longest serving, not longest talking. ElizabethMaySaanich—Gulf IslandsLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1150)[English]Thank you, Chair.Thank you both for being here. I appreciate it.I want to pick up on the last item about the private member's bill, just to close that circle.I was one of those who was kind of taken aback when I heard. I'll be straight up that my first thought was that they got to him. They got to him. The election's coming and they said to him if he wants to even see anything from the central campaign, he'd better be dropping this PDQ. We were having a little discussion in the backbenches, where I reside, and we weren't sure how to read it.I have to say that I was very pleased when my motion, M-170, was up last night. It speaks to the issue of the executive—the cabinet—still controlling the hiring process for Parliament's agents and recognizes that Parliament is supreme. Government is not Parliament; government is secondary to Parliament. I'm sure it didn't escape anybody's notice that I didn't even lose it by a close one. I lost it by a country mile. That speaks to a couple of things. The first thing it speaks to is the fact that both our presenters stood up and voted for it. In particular, Frank, I turned to my colleagues the second you did that and said that this puts paid to the issue of whether this was a mistake or whether they got to him because nobody's that stupid to cave on the one hand and then stand up and get himself in trouble on the other.LarryBagnellHon.YukonFrankBaylisPierrefonds—Dollard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1150)[English] Yes.I have absolutely no doubt that that's the case. Again, I had the benefit of speaking to you before, a number of months ago. I was impressed by the fact that you were using your private member's spot to improve Parliament.It was one thing for me to do it, but I'm not running for re-election. If I were running for re-election, make no mistake, I would have been looking at how I could use it to make sure that I was messaging to my constituents that I have their backs, that I'd be a good choice to stay here for them. However, you are going to run again, and you gave that up because you believed in the importance of this.Mr. Chair, it also speaks to the challenge.I have to tell you, colleagues, that I thought—and it's not the fact that it was mine—the notion of our taking back control was pretty straightforward and was motherhood. Do you know what stopped it? The very power structure that I was trying to break through.I wasn't surprised. It just indicated that I failed. To me, that also means that there will likely, and I would hope—hope springs eternal—be another colleague who runs and comes into Parliament, or a veteran who has been around and has a vested interest in this, who would grab it and run with it. I have to tell you that, in terms of the low-lying fruit for democratic reform, taking back control of what is already ours is as easy as it gets. We don't need to pass a new law. We don't need to amend the Constitution. All we have to do is say, “Yes, we will take control of this process.” That's it.I lost. I got maybe five—I'm being generous to myself—non-New Democrats on the main motion, which really wasn't even as effective as the amendment because it spoke to the vacancy that's now created by the untimely death of Michael Ferguson. I'll be honest: I thought I could play on the idea that if I couldn't play to the respect that members should have for themselves as parliamentarians, maybe I could play to their heartstrings—that we could do this in Michael's memory. There are documents that aren't that old—from over the last few years—that have been signed by every agent of Parliament saying, “Take back control, Parliament, please.”And yet, the power structure that.... The reason that I'm tying this in, Mr. Chair—I know that you know why—is that the challenge of what's in front of my colleagues is enormous. If anybody has any doubt, just look at the vote result last night. I don't believe that there's a single parliamentarian in the House who gets up every day and says, “How can I give away my relevancy today just a bit more?” In fact, I think most parliamentarians get up thinking, “I'm going to try to make the world a better place. I'll start by making sure that Parliament is a better place.”However, the power of the current whip-House leader structure is such that I couldn't break through except for a very small handful of courageous members who felt strongly enough that they were going to take their stand.I was very pleased to move the motion. Like you, I appreciate the gratitude of my colleagues for allowing this to be aired and talked about. Oftentimes what happens with these kinds of things is that they don't even see the light of day. You snuff it out early so that you don't have to deal with it. It's now getting an airing. Again, I'm an optimist. I do believe that, over time, we'll get there.This is a major challenge. If the motherhood issue of hiring our own agents isn't enough to do it, I'm not sure about the good arguments that are here. It's going to take a political shift of enough parliamentarians who don't just want to talk the talk of reform, but are actually prepared to put their asses on the line to defend that principle. That's easier said then done—just go look at the recorded vote last night. I see Madam May squirming in her seat, anxious to join in this discussion. I would just invite her thoughts. I've done a good job of saying how difficult it is, so it's not so much to do that, but to maybe affirm that it exists.Give us your thoughts, Elizabeth, on why you remain optimistic. You're running again, and I think there's a really good chance that you're going to come back.FrankBaylisPierrefonds—DollardElizabethMaySaanich—Gulf Islands//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]Well, hey, I don't have to be as partisan as I used to be. That's the beauty of having those things unleashed. You get the chains off. You can state what you actually think. I think you have a very good chance of getting re-elected. How radical.Given that, what are your thoughts on all this, at the tail end of this Parliament as we head into the next one?ProcedureStanding Orders of the House of CommonsElizabethMaySaanich—Gulf IslandsElizabethMaySaanich—Gulf Islands//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (0930)[English]Thank you, Chair.To the witnesses, thank you so much for being here and providing your testimony today.My first question is for Ms. Inman from the Department of Canadian Heritage. I heard you speak about the anti-racism work, which is certainly commendable and incredibly important in the prevention of people getting to a point where they're spreading hateful messages or sharing those things. However, I wonder if there is anything in particular where you're dealing with online hate or talking about an education program for Canadians. That's something we've heard pretty consistently from people who have testified here, that we need, now, a full-blown, almost immediate ability to educate Canadians, not just K to 12, which is fantastic, but all Canadians on what constitutes hate speech, what to do if they see hate speech, and to really have that happen in a very quick manner, because Canadians are struggling. I hear all the struggles that you're having in trying to address this and it's moving very quickly. Have you been directed by the Minister of Canadian Heritage to start such a program, or are you looking at that behind the scenes? It would be helpful to know.Hate propagandaInformation disseminationInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalLisa-MarieInman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Is it online? I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I'm thinking of online specifically.Hate propagandaInformation disseminationInternetLisa-MarieInmanLisa-MarieInman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Do you think it will be expanded to all groups that are essentially targeted by this? Certainly many groups outside of those who experience racism are also being targeted online. Is there any conversation about expanding that?Hate propagandaInformation disseminationInternetLisa-MarieInmanLisa-MarieInman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]I mean more specifically the online portion. Are you working on something at Canadian Heritage in that regard? We hear the urgency in many people who come and present to us, so I'd like to hear that there's something happening or that we're moving towards that.Hate propagandaInformation disseminationInternetLisa-MarieInmanLisa-MarieInman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Okay.Lisa-MarieInmanLisa-MarieInman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English] Anything you could share with the committee or submit to the committee after the fact would be helpful for our report.Hate propagandaInformation disseminationInternetLisa-MarieInmanLisa-MarieInman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Thank you so much.My next question is for the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission. We've heard from many organizations and groups that are attempting to collect their own data. It's very tough. These groups are on a shoestring budget. They don't have the ability to collect that data, and absent the data we don't have the ability to then put that towards the creation of the programs and things that you're discussing. I would like to know, from your respective organizations, whether you are working on any type of outreach program designed to assist those organizations in the collection of that data. Hate propagandaInformation collectionInternetLisa-MarieInmanMonetteMaillet//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Okay.MonetteMailletMonetteMaillet//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]I know.MonetteMailletMonetteMaillet//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Thank you.Mr. Arnot, have you been able to have any type of initiative in Saskatchewan?Hate propagandaInformation collectionInternetMonetteMailletDavidArnot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Thank you.DavidArnotDavidArnot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0935)[English]Thank you so much.DavidArnotDavidArnot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0935)[English]Last, we talked a lot about the tools that are needed by the RCMP, by the human rights commissions, by everyone basically, but when it boils down to reporting, there's no standardization of the way that social media gather reporting and allow people to report. Even how to report is very difficult for a lot of people, or what happens after you report. We've heard actually from several groups that going directly to the police is a challenge for some racialized communities and indigenous communities in Canada. There has been a suggestion of having an intermediary in that space so that they could go to report without feeling that they're directly engaging with the police services and the RCMP. Can any of you weigh in on what you think we should be doing to create reporting mechanisms that are transparent and understandable for Canadians?Crime reportingHate propagandaInternetDavidArnotMarie-ClaudeLandry//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0935)[English]Yes.Marie-ClaudeLandryAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1020)[English]Mr. Chair, I have to intervene. There's a mischaracterization of someone who attended a public rally. A witness here at the committee right now is having to agree with those particular things that were just read, having to subscribe to them. I think that's a gross mischaracterization. Again, this is not what Ms. Mithoowani is here to testify about. This is not meant to be a personal court. I think that the continuing usage by Mr. Cooper in this way to personally go after witnesses is reprehensible. This is the second time, Mr. Chair.Cooper, MichaelHate propagandaInternetMembers' remarksReferences to membersAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1025)[English]I did not say it was—The Chair: I agree, but for the chair to intervene—Ms. Tracey Ramsey: —but I'd like to say—AnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1025)[English]Frankly, he's just read into the record that she agrees with the signs that he read—Cooper, MichaelHate propagandaInternetMembers' remarksReferences to membersMichaelCooperSt. Albert—EdmontonAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1025)[English]—and that's a mischaracterization of this particular individual, and that's unacceptable.Cooper, MichaelHate propagandaInternetMembers' remarksReferences to membersAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1025)[English]Again, it's completely unfair to witnesses at this committee to have to personally defend themselves against these types of accusations.Cooper, MichaelHate propagandaInternetMembers' remarksReferences to membersAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalMichaelCooperSt. Albert—Edmonton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1025)[English]That is not why they're here. She's not here to defend herself as an individual against accusations that she ascribes to the things that he's shared.Cooper, MichaelHate propagandaInternetMembers' remarksReferences to membersMichaelCooperSt. Albert—EdmontonAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1025)[English]Who was doing such a thing?MichaelBarrettLeeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau LakesMichaelBarrettLeeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1025)[English]I'd like a point of clarification from the clerk, please, on if we are, as members of Parliament of this committee, entitled to weigh in with our opinion when we feel that we need to do so, respectfully through you, Mr. Chair. I would like you to confer with the clerk, please, and report back to the committee on whether or not we, as members of this committee, can intervene when we feel that it's important to do so.Cooper, MichaelHate propagandaInternetMembers' remarksReferences to membersAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1035)[English]Thank you all so much for being here today and for all the work that you're doing to reduce and combat hate speech in your respective roles. I really do sincerely thank you, because without a kind of pan-Canadian, over-arching federal framework.... The work that you're doing is so important because it's informing us, but it's also helping Canadians to understand how to combat it and to identify it and what is available in the law.We really are struggling in this committee because this is such an incredibly large topic, and there are so many important areas. It's difficult to know what to start with and where to begin the work that's necessary. I thank you, Ms. Tworek, for some of the examples you shared with us in terms of what's happening in Germany, because the other piece of this is social media giants. We had Facebook here. We were attempting to bring Mark Zuckerberg here this week, and we couldn't even get him to come before a parliamentary committee, so how do we engage with these social media giants who don't view themselves as belonging to one country? They're global. They're the size of countries. It's a very significant challenge to try to talk about any forms of regulation when, quite frankly, they're even resisting to appear as witnesses. I want to ask you about how you think the social media giants such as Facebook could improve the way they handle hate speech on their platforms, given the volume you've mentioned that exists. I'd like you to speak to that. Then, I would ask our other two panellists, how are you informing or helping the conversation in your communities around reporting? How do you make some transparency around that?I'll start with Professor Tworek.AccountabilityHate propagandaInternetSocial networking sitesAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalHeidiTworek//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1040)[English]Thank you.Ms. Mithoowani.HeidiTworekNaseemMithoowani//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1040)[English]Professor Emon, do you want to weigh in?NaseemMithoowaniAnverEmon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP): (0910)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.To start, I'm going to move to something a little easier to deal with. It's actually related to your position as Minister of Sport. Given the fact that the Toronto Raptors are in a historic position today....Some hon. members: Hear, hear!Mr. Brian Masse: Exactly. Actually, my Chris Bosh jersey from the old times is out, as well.I do have a serious question, though, with regard to the National Basketball League of Canada. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the league, but it has been important in terms of bringing sport and science to inner cities such as mine, in Windsor, where we have the Windsor Express.The connection today, ironically, is the Oshawa franchise moved to Mississauga, which later folded for the Raptors 905 NBA D-League, affiliated with the current Raptors. There are franchises in Cape Breton, Halifax, Charlottetown, Moncton, Saint John, Kitchener, London, Sudbury and Windsor. What is your government doing to partner with leagues such as the NBL? I haven't seen anything yet to deal with concussion in sport and other supports. They have grassroots teams that are professional but also have a tremendous amount of community outreach. For example, I know our Windsor Express were out for the Mayor's Walk recently, and also running a clinic on the street. Before, when I had a different job, I ran an inner city youth basketball and sand volleyball program where we got kids off the street and did a lot of stuff for nutrition and so forth. Specifically, has the government done anything with the National Basketball League of Canada? What opportunities are there for organizations such as that to deal with education on everything from nutrition to sport and culture, and most importantly, concussions?BasketballInformation disseminationMain estimates 2019-2020Mild traumatic brain injuriesDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeKirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0915)[English] I'm going to move to another one, but I want to thank you. I'll leave it at that. It will be for another Parliament. There have been some improvements with regard to science, and getting a profile here on the Hill. I have seen that evolve. I've been involved in this committee for a long time. I still think as a country we're underutilizing science and sport. I'm not saying that nothing is being done, but it's one of the things that isn't often raised here. That's my personal criticism. Science and sport don't seem to get the attention they probably deserve for a country like Canada.With some of my time, I want to move to what wouldn't be an unexpected topic for this table. My Bill C-440 on Crown copyright in Canada is very important for the science community. It's not only with regard to the universities, but is also related to a number of different academic associations, research think tanks and so forth.Our law on Crown copyright is based on a 1911 U.K. law, which was put in place here in Canada in 1929. This is the restriction of government publications, scientific research and other materials that the public has paid for. Over 200 research academics testified here at our committee calling for the elimination of Crown copyright. It doesn't exist in the United States or in most Commonwealth nations. It's very rare to find it in Canada.What is your position on Crown copyright as it currently is in Canada?C-440, An Act to amend the Copyright Act (Crown copyright)Crown copyrightMain estimates 2019-2020KirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke NorthKirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0920)[English] As the government, do you believe in Crown copyright? That's my specific question.Crown copyrightMain estimates 2019-2020KirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke NorthKirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0920)[English]Madam Minister, I'm asking about a specific Crown copyright, the protection and prohibited use of government documents and research materials. I'm asking for your position on that. I don't need the deputy minister's position on that. We've studied it extensively in this House. It's a well-known fact that Canada has a unique system of protection, and I want to know whether you support the status quo of Crown copyright.I think it's a fair question.Crown copyrightMain estimates 2019-2020KirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke NorthKirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0920)[English]Okay.How much time do I have?KirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke NorthDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0920)[English]Oh, there we go.Thank you.DanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.Again, thank you, Minister, for being here.To continue along that line, there has been a lot of talk here about the silencing and muzzling of scientists in the previous government but your government right now does not allow scientists to release papers. Your scientists' papers are often redacted when they finally do get them released.Your government right now has partial use and restrictions on papers in scientific research that is commissioned. It is not allowed, when you finally get them, to use them and share them.Often requests from scientists and researchers are delayed or even ignored amongst departments. The situation has become so critical right now that your government also has lost information. As we go to the digital area, some departments treat it with respect, some do not, and information and research are also lost with regard to not moving into digital formats.All of that has been expressed as part of the concerns on Crown copyright. Right now, you muzzle and restrict scientists, not by necessarily restricting what they say in public, but by denying the free access of their works for other Canadian researchers.Aren't you then part of the problem?Crown copyrightInformation disseminationMain estimates 2019-2020Scientific research and scientistsDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeKirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English] Then why won't you let them share their papers? Why do you have restrictions?Crown copyrightInformation disseminationMain estimates 2019-2020Scientific research and scientistsKirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke NorthDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]That is the problem that we face here. Crown copyrightInformation disseminationMain estimates 2019-2020Scientific research and scientistsDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0950)[English]Fair enough.DanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeKirstyDuncanHon.Etobicoke North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (0930)[English]Thank you, Chair, and thanks to all of you for being here. If it wasn't already noted, I think this is our last public hearing that we're holding. Was it noted?Call centresGovernment servicesReport 1, Call Centres, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0930)[English]Well, I'm noting it because it particularly matters to me. It's the last one I'll do in my whole life. There are an awful lot of bureaucrats who are saying, “Yes!”Voices: Oh, oh!Mr. David Christopherson: However, it's unfortunate. I would have preferred to end on a positive note. That's not possible with this one. I agree with my colleague in terms of the amount of time available. It's really hard to know where to focus in.Look, the late Michael Ferguson's mantra was, “Do service well.” This is the opposite. This is doing service lousy. To me, this report highlights the importance of audit reports and having these things come forward. That's why it's such a disgrace that the current government is not providing the Auditor General's office with the money it needs to follow the audit plan it has for next year, including a study on cybersecurity.As you know, Chair, I will be using every opportunity to underscore that insulting, disgusting decision by the government, and it's nothing less than that. That's what autocrats do. They hide. That's what this government is doing. I can only hope that before this Parliament rises we can get them to change their minds.I want to give a compliment to the deputy of Veterans Affairs. I want to say, sir, that one of the things I enjoyed when I was a solicitor general was to work with police in a very similar culture, and that is that things tend to be straight up front. There's not a lot of BS. There's not a lot of fog. There's not a lot of uncertainty—it's this, this or this, or it isn't.I really liked that you came in and said.... There were a couple of compliments in here, but you were good enough to mention this, and I'm asking other deputies to pay attention, because there is something to be learned here. In your presentation you said:When the department stopped offering a teletypewriter service for the hearing disabled, there was no indication from our records as to the rationale for this cut in service, nor whether there was consultation with veterans. This is not appropriate service.That's what I like to hear from a deputy minister. Roll in here, and when something has failed, say so. It goes a long way.Then he goes on to say, “As such, we are reversing this decision”. I'd like the government to get into the habit of that and reverse their decision in terms of funding the Auditor General. That's the way the deputies should be coming in here, and this is what has frustrated me. For Shared Services, I have to tell you, the stuff we hear in terms of the justification for nonsense is just mind-boggling.Again, I would give one example from Immigration and Refugees. The deputy this morning said, “Providing excellent client service is imperative”. What they should have said was, “Providing excellent client service is imperative and we failed.” That's what they should have said.On page 8 of the report, paragraph 1.28 states:We found that call centres were not focused on the needs of their clients when making decisions about call centre services and how they set service standards.I'm going to run out of time quickly, and I know that. I'll just wait for the gavel to drop.I'm glad to see that Treasury Board is saying that they're going to change their existing policy instruments, because at the end of the day, when we want to change behaviour, it's based on both the individual behaviour of employees and the policies that are being followed. If the policies aren't on there at that level, then we can't very well expect the departments to consider it a priority when the guiding Treasury Board Secretariat is not saying so. I am very pleased. Again, these are some of the benefits that come out of the public accounts that really don't get registered as a dollar, but these things change behaviour and they change focus. I have one question. It's not the most profound one I could ask, but it's the one that jumped out at me, I must say. (0935)On page 15, at paragraph 1.60 about good old Shared Services Canada, the report says, “However, in order for departments and agencies to use these features”—new features for the phoning—“Shared Services Canada had to upgrade its existing information technology infrastructure—a task it overlooked during planning.” How can that be? How could something so important be overlooked during planning? It speaks to competency. It speaks to where senior management is not doing the job that they should. Call centresGovernment expendituresGovernment servicesInformation technologyReport 1, Call Centres, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaShared Services CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Everything's okay now.Call centresComputer systemsGovernment servicesIncome and wagesInformation technologyNational Museum of Science and TechnologyPhoenixReport 1, Call Centres, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaScotDavidsonYork—SimcoeAlexBenay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Everything's fine, no problem.ScotDavidsonYork—SimcoeKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]Thank you very much, Chair. I will take an opportunity. It's the last moment of the last hearing, and I also want to give my appreciation and thanks.Mr. Chair, Madam Mendès and I.... Mr. Arya, have you been here right from the beginning?Call centresGovernment servicesReport 1, Call Centres, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootChandraAryaNepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]I thought so. Those are the four musketeers. When we got here, as you'll recall, absolutely nobody had any experience doing public accounts except lonely me, and one of the biggest things about this committee, Chair...and I want to speak to you directly and include Madam Mendès as the lead for the government. The toughest thing to accept in this committee is that we have to completely change what we normally do when we walk through that door. This is a different universe. We're not sitting here as Liberals, Conservatives and New Democrats. We're sitting here as parliamentarians providing oversight, regardless of the party that's in power, and it's a non-partisan effort. That's easy to say and really hard to do.Chair, I can't thank you enough for the leadership. I've been in your role and I did the same job for four years. It's not an easy job. I had the advantage of already having been on the committee for at least a decade. You came in cold and you've done an outstanding job. I've had a chance to travel with you and Madam Mendès internationally. We've all learned and brought back best practices from around the world, and I just want to say what an honour it has been to serve with all of you, Mr. Arya and everyone here now, but from the beginning, the four of us. This has been the most productive public accounts committee I've had the honour of sitting on, and I thank you all for that.I have one question for the secretariat.Call centresGovernment servicesReport 1, Call Centres, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaChandraAryaNepeanKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English] That's good. I'll just weave in my message and keep saying how wonderful you are, because you understand how bad it is that the government's not giving the Auditor General enough money to do his job. That's why I'm so pleased to see.... No, I won't do that. I thank you, Chair.Secretary, what troubled me, on page 16, 1.62 stood out. “We found that the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat developed a government-wide service strategy in 2017: the Government of Canada Clients First Service Strategy.” That sounds great. “The strategy prioritized providing services online but did not include call centres or mention the government-wide modernization of call centres, despite the fact that they continue to be an important way for clients to get information.”That number is 25%, a quarter of all Canadians use that. How on earth did you get to the point where you were planning contact for services for Canadians, and never gave a thought to the phone? Twenty-five per cent of Canadians.... Given the fact that Michael Ferguson's mantra was, again, “Do service well”, don't measure how well you move paper or a message from one desk to another. Measure the outcome for citizens and how they are, or are not, receiving the services they're entitled to.How could something this obvious—a quarter of all Canadians—be overlooked in this grand strategy? Call centresGovernment servicesReport 1, Call Centres, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaService deliveryTelephonesKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootAlexBenay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]I hear that, but my question was, how did it happen?Call centresGovernment servicesReport 1, Call Centres, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaService deliveryTelephonesAlexBenayAlexBenay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]What do you mean by agnostic service strategy?Call centresGovernment servicesReport 1, Call Centres, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaService deliveryTelephonesAlexBenayAlexBenay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]People are paid good money to be planners. The whole idea is that they're supposed to think these things through. I understand if it was a small percentage, but a quarter of all Canadians? That's really disheartening. It's further disheartening that you don't seem to be able to acknowledge when anything is wrong. All you want to do is talk about how wonderful things are. I've told deputies before, don't come in here and be defensive. Do what the Auditor General did and approach the criticism that way. If it's wrong, say so, admit it, acknowledge you failed, and then say what you're going to do about it. Don't spin. That's our job.Voices: Oh, oh!Call centresGovernment servicesReport 1, Call Centres, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaService deliveryTelephonesAlexBenayKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1015)[English]Thank you.RandeepSaraiSurrey CentreRandeepSaraiSurrey Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1025)[English]Thank you, Chair.Yes, I wish to exercise my right to move my motion. I move:That the committee condemns the underfunding of the Office of the Auditor General; that the committee recommend that funding to the OAG be increased by $10.8 million annually; and, that the committee report this recommendation to the House.The $10.8 million is the money they asked for. Now this doesn't necessarily affect the estimates process. It's a standalone motion that we're sending to the government. Some were wondering why this was in order since we can't increase on estimates. That's a separate process. We're not doing that. This is a standalone motion. If I might, Chair, with your indulgence, I will say about Dillan that you will know that the Canadian Audit and Accountability Foundation is our prime resource consultant on how to professionally do our job and how to constantly up our game. You will know that in the last while I've joined the board of directors of the CAAF, and in part the idea of having Dillan come in was a recognition when we were doing some international work, particularly in Rwanda earlier in the year, that one of the key aspects of making committees work—this is the benefit of international travel when you get a chance to see how others do it—is the analyst. If you think about the role the analysts play and what we do, they're that magic elixir that allows this to actually work because we have such trust in their professionalism. There was a recognition that when we're helping countries like Rwanda...and CAAF has a long-term commitment with Rwanda and I'll likely be going back there myself and possibly to Vietnam also to work with their public accounts. Now CAAF has the ability through Dillan to not only provide expert advice and training to the Office of the Auditor General staff and auditors, and then also public accounts members like us, but also to reach out to the analysts and train them on the importance of the job they have. It's a real coup for us. I think it says a lot about the calibre of the people who are hired here on the Hill. I just can't say enough about Dillan and the work he does. I know he's going to help us do a better job internationally.Now I will go to my motion.Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020MotionsOffice of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1025)[English] “Hopefully” is a good word; you never know. This is a very serious issue. I want to go straight to the key thing, to something that public accounts members, in my humble opinion, should be asking themselves. Exactly what the heck are you going to do in the next Parliament? Right now, under the current funding plan, when we get a chapter like this, it's part of a report. Within that report, which is done twice a year, we have anywhere from eight to 13 chapters. Today was one. This committee has been very efficient and effective at hearings. I've been in other parliaments where we didn't do a fraction of the work, and that was deliberate. It was deliberate by the government members of the day to slow down the work of this committee and prevent accountability. Right now, as I read the plans, the Auditor General has one planned performance audit for the fall 2019 report—one—and in 2020 there are three. Meanwhile, one of the areas the Auditor General wanted to look at was protecting Canada's north. Now that won't happen. Every single member of Parliament who represents a northern riding should be going out of their minds that there will be no accountability on the service government provides to their constituents. It won't happen. As important as that is, guess what other area will not be looked at next year: cybersecurity.Now, Mr. Arya and others were kind enough to mention my longevity on this committee. One of the benefits of that is that I was here the last time we got the report on cybersecurity. It scared the living heck out of me and out of everybody who read it. The government responded and said, we get it and we're going to get on top of this thing. The report showed us that we were one of the most vulnerable in the G7. It was really, really worrisome. I know that my memory is not the best, but this goes back at least eight or 10 years, so it's been a decade hence. We were in a bad place then, so after a decade, in an area as important as cybersecurity, where we had a failing report from the Auditor General, does it not make common sense, does it not seem prudent, that the Auditor General would go back in to see how they're doing and how we fare in the current climate? I think that makes sense. That's exactly what we want an Auditor General to do. We want them to keep an eye on these things and say it's time to go back in there and look at it. That's not going to happen.It begs the question.... I heard my colleague Madam Mendès, whom I respect enormously, defending the government. I have to tell you, though, that in the absence of some kind of austerity program, which is what happened the last time the Auditor General's budget was reduced, I think in 2011, the government said.... I'm losing my train of thought here. What happened in 2011? Remind me; where am I?Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1030)[English] Thank you. I'm thinking three steps ahead and losing my current step.There was a government-wide austerity program. Much to my chagrin—to tell you the truth—the Auditor General of the day said that they could live with those cuts because they saw themselves as being team players. They recognized that the government got elected with a mandate and that mandate was being carried out. Remember that they don't play politics. They follow the government, whomever the people decide will be that government. At the time, they felt that they could manage within the reduction and—here's the key thing, colleagues—not affect the work they do for Parliament. For us, that work is performance audits. It used to be called value-for-dollar audits. I was raring for a good fight. Like today, I thought, “You're cutting the Auditor General?” What was I going to do, though? The Auditor General said they could do it. It's a non-partisan committee and if the AG says they can do it, then fair enough. They did it. We were not impacted by it. This is the first time in Canadian history that the Auditor General has told Parliament that the executive branch is not giving them sufficient money to carry out their audit plan for the year ahead. As my colleague just said, they had to cancel them. Two of them were the ones that I mentioned. This has never happened before.These are my last days here and I don't have to worry about getting elected. I have to tell you that I'm shocked it's you guys—the Libs. For one thing, it's the antithesis of what you talk about and what you ran on—accountability, transparency and service. A lot of my constituents bought into that argument because it's the kind of thing they want from government.In the absence of an overall austerity program—which doesn't legitimize it, but at least provides an understandable context—there can only be two motivating reasons that I can think of. One is retaliation because we still have a funding mechanism where the very people the Auditor General audits also decide how much money they get. We just had an e-commerce report that didn't make the government look so good. They're the very people that the Auditor General had to sit down and negotiate with and they're the very people, for the first time in the history of Canada, who have said “no”. They recommended it up through the ministers and it's the ministers at the end of the day.Don't kid yourself. We've all been around long enough. Staff reports matter. Staff recommendations matter. They got slammed by the Auditor General in that e-commerce report, yet they're the very same people they had to go to, cap in hand, to ask for funding—only this time they said “no”. It's either retaliation—which would be unacceptable—or the government really is hiding from things like the cybersecurity report because they know what the last report said, and perhaps, I would assume, they know how much has been done or not done. There would also be people in government who would be very aware of what our threat level is, and whether it's improved in the last 10 years. If you have enough arrogance to believe you're going to be the government when that report comes out, a sharp political move—unacceptable from an ethical point of view—that a good autocrat would act on is to make sure that audit doesn't happen. The thinking is that the price of taking the heat for not providing adequate funding for the first time in Canadian history is less than the criticism they would get when that report comes out.(1035) I have to say, I'm just perplexed as much as anything. If it was perhaps another party in power that had a different view of accountability and transparency, that might help me understand the context. For the life of me, I can't understand. Well, I haven't yet had a chance to hear from colleagues officially, so I won't speculate until I hear what they have to say on the record on this issue.This is big. I can remember Tyler and I sitting up at night trying to figure out how we could force the government to give us one particular piece of information that we needed in a key hearing. I would just get myself so wrapped up and concerned that we needed that information. Parliament is entitled to that information. Parliament needs that information. As I remind people a lot, Parliament is supreme—not the government. Parliament decides who government is. Parliament decides who the prime minister is. Parliament decides when the prime minister and the government get fired.Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1040)[English] My colleague says “in principle”, but it is still the case.When I look at something like this, where never mind a detail of information or a letter or a report that we need to do our job properly on an audit report, rather than that being what's in front of us, the issue is whether the bloody audit's going to be done, this is insane and I don't get the politics of it. That's why I say to the government members—through you, Chair, with respect—that I don't understand the politics of this. Why on earth, on the doorstep of a federal election, would the Government of Canada pull funding or deny funding for one of the most motherhood departments in all of government?The department and the person that I call the best friend Canadians have on Parliament Hill is the Auditor General, and in the ramp-up to an election, for the first time in Canadian history, the sitting government decides it's going to cut. That's assuming it's not cut but an increase denied, which has the effect of a cut. Maybe Gerry Butts' leaving has left you with absolutely nobody with any strategic sense at all. I have to tell you that I was hoping that, once the you-know-what hit the fan, the message would go up through the system and there would be a minister somewhere who said, “Wait a minute, what?” I was a minister and you were a minister, Chair. You can't follow every single moving part, especially if you have a big ministry. You have to rely on your staff and you're approving things at a certain level. Trust me, $10.8 million, the finance minister of this G7 country almost spills that much in a week. It's not about the money. It can't be, with $10.8 million. I think that's the number. That's chump change in terms of the federal budget, but in terms of the importance to Parliament, it's a thousand times greater.If the politics make no sense—and they don't—there has to be another reason, and that's why I'm looking at this and I'm saying, there are only two that really come to my mind. It's revenge. It's Treasury Board officials—or if I'm wronging them, it's whomever the people are who sit down at the staff level and talk about budgets with our agents of Parliament. I remind colleagues that the OAG are not the executive's employees, not cabinet employees, but Parliament's employees, and this nonsense that we have a funding mechanism that says they have to go back to the very people they audit makes no sense. The government—and I'll get to this a little later—made a commitment that it was going to provide an alternate mechanism. It hasn't happened. In fact, I didn't even know about this letter, but there was a letter in January of this year that went to the Clerk of the Privy Council, signed by all Parliament's—not the government's—officers, every one of them, basically saying, “You promised you were going to do this. It hasn't happened. We need it to happen quick.” That was January. Crickets!So retaliation is.... I mean it's hard to believe in this country that something like that would happen, for those of us who know how this system works, but I'm desperately trying to find reasons that would explain to me why the government is doing this, because if we could figure out why they're doing it, then we can work at focusing on that and getting it unravelled. But for the life of me.... So that's one possibility.(1045)The other.... I suppose there are three because there's also the unknown. Both of those could be wrong and there could be some other thing motivating it that I don't know. Fair enough, but when I look at that combatting cybersecurity and I think how important that is.... Think ahead. What if there was a report in a year or two that said we're more vulnerable than we were 10 years ago?Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertChandraAryaNepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1045)[English]For the record, I didn't want an extension. I wasn't seeking one. I'm sorry, Mr. Arya was asking about extending. Nobody raised the issue. I assumed we'd adjourn at the usual time.Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralRenéArseneaultMadawaska—RestigoucheKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1045)[English]We would resume.Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1045)[English]No, I understand that, but procedurally, I have the floor. I defer to you, as you're the chair, but it seems to me that the next meeting is what we call a continuation of the previous meeting, because I have the floor. Therefore, when we come back, I have the floor, and when I'm done, we can move a vote on the motion and move to other items.Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1045)[English]Yes, of course.Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1045)[English]I'm going to give you as honest an answer as I can at this time. I'm going to do everything I can to try to keep this issue alive, because my goal before we rise is to get the government to blink, to realize this is wrong and to put the money back. In the absence of that, I'm going to use every tool I have.Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1045)[English]I've thought this through. There are three aspects to what we do. There's the audit itself, which is tabled and the public sees it. We hold a public hearing, which is the second big one. The third one is that we do reports.The first two have been done with all the chapters. The issue I'm dealing with is whether there will even be audits to deal with next time, and I think it's more important—Government expendituresGovernment servicesMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertRenéArseneaultMadawaska—Restigouche//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (0915)[English] Thank you, Mr. Chair.I was talking to my friend at Apple about how I bought my first Mac Plus in 1984 with a little 350k floppy disk, and I saw it as a revolutionary tool that was going to change the world for the better. I still think it has changed the world for the better, but we are seeing some really negative impacts.DemocracyInformation collectionInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: Now that I'm aging myself, back in the eighties, imagine if Bell Telephone listened in on my phone. They would be charged. What if they said, “Hey, we're just listening in on your phone because we want to offer you some really nifty ideas, and we'll have a better way to serve you if we know what you're doing”? What if the post office read my mail before I got it, not because they were doing anything illegal but because there might be some really cool things that I might want to know and they would be able to help me? They would be charged.Yet in the digital realm, we're now dealing with companies that are giving us all these nifty options. This was where my colleague Mr. Erskine-Smith was trying to get some straight answers. I think that as legislators, we're really moving beyond this talk about consent. Consent has become meaningless if we are being spied on, if we're being watched and if our phone is tracking us. Consent is becoming a bogus term, because it's about claiming space in our lives that we have not given. If we had old school rules, you would not be able to listen in on our phones and not be able to track us without our rights, yet suddenly it's okay in the digital realm.Mr. Davidson, I'm really interested in the work that Mozilla does. Is it possible, do you think, for legislators to put some principled ground rules down about the privacy rights of citizens that will not completely destroy Silicon Valley and they will not all be going on welfare and the business model will still be able to succeed. Is it possible for us to put simple rules down?DemocracyInformation collectionInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionCharlieAngusTimmins—James BayAlanDavidson//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0920)[English]Say more.AlanDavidsonAlanDavidson//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0920)[English] I love it when someone agrees with me. AlanDavidsonAlanDavidson//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0920)[English]Explicit consent.DemocracyInformation collectionInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionAlanDavidsonAlanDavidson//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0920)[English]Thank you.Some of the concerns we've been looking at are in trying to get our heads around AI. This is the weaponization of digital media. AI could have a very positive role, or it could have a very negative role.Mr. Ryland, certainly Amazon has really moved heavily in terms of AI. However, Amazon has also been noted as a company with 21st century innovation and 19th century labour practices. With regard to the allegations that workers were being monitored right down to the level of being fired by AI tracking, is that the policy of Amazon?Artificial intelligenceDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetLabour lawPrivacy and data protectionAlanDavidsonMarkRyland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0920)[English]It was a pretty famous article about Amazon. It said that right down to the seconds, the workers were being monitored by AI, and those who were too slow were being fired. I may be old school, but I would think that this would be illegal under the labour laws in our country. That is apparently how AI is being used in the fulfillment centres. That, to me, is a very problematic misuse of AI. Are you not aware of that?Artificial intelligenceDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetLabour lawPrivacy and data protectionMarkRylandMarkRyland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0920)[English]It was a pretty damning article, and it was covered in many international papers. Would you be able to get back to our committee and get us a response?Artificial intelligenceDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetLabour lawPrivacy and data protectionMarkRylandMarkRyland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0920)[English]I don't want to put you on the spot here, but I'd rather get a response on this. I think we would certainly want to get a sense of Amazon's perspective on how it uses AI in terms of the monitoring of the workers within the fulfillment centres. If you could get that to our committee, it would be very helpful.Artificial intelligenceDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetLabour lawPrivacy and data protectionMarkRylandMarkRyland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0935)[English]I'm sorry, Chair, but can I just make a point of order?I want us to be really clear. When you're speaking before a committee, that's like speaking before a court. It's not about your consent to be recorded or that you think you may be recorded. This is a legal parliamentary process, so of course you're being recorded. To suggest that it's the same as Alexa selling you a thing in Barbados is ridiculous, and it undermines our Parliament. I would just remind the witnesses that we are here to document for the international legislative community, and this will be on an official record.DemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East YorkNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1030)[English]Your older brother.FrankBaylisPierrefonds—DollardFrankBaylisPierrefonds—Dollard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1050)[English]Thank you very much. Diapers.com was an online business selling diapers in this competitive market that Amazon says is out there. Jeff Bezos wanted to buy it. They refused, so Amazon went to predatory pricing. Amazon was losing $100 million on diapers every three months to put a competitor out of business or to force them to sell. They finally agreed, because they were afraid Amazon would drop prices even lower. We talk about antitrust because of the “kill zone” of innovation that The Economist is talking about, but with Amazon, it's the kill zone of competition—the power that you have through all of your platforms to drive down prices and actually put people out of business. Shaoul Sussman says that the predatory pricing practices of Amazon are antitrust in nature and need legislation. What do you say?CompetitionDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesMarkRyland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1050)[English]Yes, so you've got all the people to use your cloud services and then you can drive down prices against mom and pop. Lena Kahn, from Open Markets, says that because you are controlling so much market dominance in so many various areas, you can use your profits from the cloud to run predatory pricing and to run down competition. She says that your “structure and conduct pose anticompetitive concerns—yet it has escaped antitrust scrutiny”.This is an issue that I think legislators need to think about. We see that in Canada one of the great advantages you have is that you're not paying taxes the way our poorest businesses have to. In the U.K., you made 3.35 billion pounds and paid only only 1.8 million pounds in taxable income. I mean, you're like our biggest welfare case on the planet if you're getting that. In the U.S., it's even better. You made $11 billion in profits and you got a $129-million rebate. You were actually paying a negative 1% tax rate. That seems to me to be an extraordinary advantage. I don't know of any company that wouldn't want to get a rebate rather than pay taxes—or any citizen. How is it that we have a marketplace where you can undercut any competitor and you can undercut any book publisher and you're not even properly paying taxes? Don't you think that it's at least our job to rein you guys in and make sure that we have some fair rules in the marketplace?CompetitionDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionMarkRylandMarkRyland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1055)[English]Yes, that's unfortunate. I mean, this is why our chair asked that we get people who would be able to answer questions, because these are the questions that as legislators we need to have answered. We're dealing in this new age, and your colleagues at Facebook have put us in this situation. If Facebook had better corporate practices, we might not even be paying attention, but we're having to pay attention. If Amazon was not engaged in such anti-competitive practices, we might think that the free market was great, but it's not great right now, and you can't answer those questions for us. It puts us in a bind, because as legislators we're asking for answers. What's a fair taxation rate? How do we ensure competition in the marketplace? How do we ensure that we don't have predatory pricing that is deliberately driving down prices and putting businesses—our businesses— out of business because you have such market dominance and you can't answer the question? It leaves us very confused. Should we call Alexa or Siri? Would they help?Voices: Oh, oh!CompetitionDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionMarkRylandMarkRyland//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1055)[English]Thank you.MarkRylandBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1135)[English] Thank you to our two excellent chairs. Thank you to our witnesses. I think we have seen something extraordinary. I've been very proud of the Canadian Parliament and our willingness to be part of this process.There's been some extraordinary testimony in terms of the quality of questions, and I've been very proud to be part of it. Two extraordinary facts are that we have never in my 15 years ever worked across party lines on pretty much anything, and yet we came together. Also, we have never, ever worked across international lines. We can thank a Canadian whistle-blower, Christopher Wylie, who opened the door to the digital Chernobyl that was happening around us. As politicians, we stay away from complex technical things. They frighten us. We don't have the expertise, so we tend to avoid them, which I think was a great advantage for Silicon Valley for many years.These things are not all that technical. I think what we've done these last two days with our international colleagues—and what we will continue to do internationally—is to make it as simple and clear as possible to restore the primacy of the person in the realm of big data. Privacy is a fundamental human right that will be protected. Legislators have an obligation and a duty to protect the democratic principles of our country, such as free expression and the right to participate in the digital realm without growing extremism. These are fundamental principles on which our core democracies have been founded. It's no different in the age of the phone than it was in the age of handwritten letters. I want to thank my colleagues for being part of this. I think we came out of this a lot stronger than we went in, and we will come out even further. We want to work with the tech companies to ensure that the digital realm is a democratic realm in the 21st century. Thank you all.DemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1555)[English]Being the only New Democrat, as The Clash would say, should I stay or should I go?Voices: Oh, oh!BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1555)[English]If I leave, you're not taking one of my seats.BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1615)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for appearing, Ms. Weintraub.You Americans are like our first cousins, and we love you dearly, but we're a little smug, because we look over the border and see all this crazy stuff and say we'd never do that in Canada. I will therefore give you the entire history of electoral fraud and interference in Canada in the last 10 years. We had a 20-year-old who was working for the Conservatives who got his hands on some phone numbers and sent out wrong information on voting day. He was jailed. We had a member of this committee who got his cousins to help pay an electoral paying scheme. He lost his seat in Parliament and went to jail.We had a cabinet minister who cheated on 8,000 dollars' worth of flights in an election and went over the limit. He lost his position in cabinet and lost his seat.These situations have consequences, and yet we see wide open data interference now for which we don't seem to have any laws, or we're seemingly at a loss and are not sure how to tackle it. I can tell you that in 2015 I began to see it in the federal election, and it was not noticed at all at the national level. It was intense anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant women material that up-ended the whole election discourse in our region. It was coming from Britain First, an extremist organization. How working-class people in my region were getting this stuff, I didn't understand. I understand now, however, how fast the poison moves in the system, how easy it is to target individuals, how the profiles and the data profiles of our individual voters can be manipulated. When the federal government has new electoral protection laws, they may be the greatest laws for the 2015 election, but that was like stage coach robberies compared with what we will see in our upcoming election, which will probably be testing some of the ground for the 2020 election.In terms of this massive movement in the tools of undermining democratic elections, how do we put in in place the tools to take on these data mercenaries who can target us right down to individual voters each with their own individual fears?DemocracyElectoral systemInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesEllenWeintraub//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1615)[English]Mr. Therrien, I will go to you. It was your predecessor, Elizabeth Denham, who identified the Facebook weakness in 2008 and attempted to have them comply. If they had done so, we might have avoided so many issues. Now, in 2019, we have you making a finding in the rule of law under your jurisdiction that Facebook broke our information protection act.What has been very disturbing is that Facebook has simply refused to recognize the jurisdiction of our country, based on our supposed necessity to prove to them whether or not harm was caused.I'm not sure whether you heard Mr. Chan's testimony today, but in terms of the rights of democratic legislators to ensure that laws are protected, how do we address a company that believes it can pick and choose, opt in or opt out, among national laws?DemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetMeta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionSocial networking sitesEllenWeintraubDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1620)[English]Finally—DanielTherrienBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1620)[English]My watch says it's four minutes and 53 seconds.Voices: Oh, oh!BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1720)[English] Thank you, Mr. Chair.We heard an extraordinary statement from Google today that they voluntarily stopped spying on our emails in 2017. They did that in such a magnanimous manner, but they wouldn't agree not to spy on us in the future because there may be nifty things they can do with it.I can't even remember 2016—it's so long ago—but 2018 changed our lives forever. I remember our committee was looking at consent and whether the consent thing should be clear or it should be bigger with less gobbledygook. I don't ever remember giving Google consent to spy on my emails or my underage daughters' emails. I don't ever remember that it came up on my phone that, if I wanted to put my tracking location on so I could find an address, they could permanently follow me wherever I went and knew whatever I did. I don't remember giving Google or any search engine the consent to track every single thing I do. Yet, as legislators, I think we've been suckered—Zuckered and suckered—while we all talked about what consent was, what consumers can opt in on, and if you don't like the service, don't use it.Mr. Therrien, you said something very profound the last time you were here about the right of citizens to live free of surveillance. To me, this is where we need to bring this discussion. I think this discussion of consent is so 2016, and I think we have to say that they have no consent to obtain this. If there's no reason, they can't have it, and that should be the business model that we move forward on: the protection of privacy and the protection of our rights.As for opt-in, opt-out, I couldn't trust them on anything on this. We've heard from Mr. Balsillie, Ms. Zuboff, and a number of experts today and yesterday. Is it possible in Canada, with our little country of 30 million people, to put in a clear law that says you can't gather personal information unless there's an express, clear reason? It seems to me that's part of what's already in PIPEDA, our information privacy laws, but can we make it very clear with very clear financial consequences for companies that ignore that? Can we make decisions on behalf of our citizens and our private rights?ConsentDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1725)[English]Thank you.My final question is on facial recognition technology. There's a story in the Toronto Star today that the police are using facial recognition technology. San Francisco has attempted to ban it, and other jurisdictions are at least putting a pause on it.As for the right of a citizen to be able to walk in a public square without being surveilled and without having to bring photo ID, facial recognition technology changes all that. There are obviously legitimate uses. For example, if someone on a CCTV camera has committed a crime, and there's a database, we would maybe have judicial oversight that this is a fair use; however, what about a number of people in a crowd that you can just gather in? I'm sure Facebook and Google would be more than helpful because they have such massive facial recognition databases on us.As a Canadian regulator, do you believe that we need to hit a pause button on facial recognition technology? How do we put the rules in place to protect citizens' rights with clear safeguards for police use and for commercial use prior to abuses?BiometricsDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1735)[English] I have a point of order, Mr. Chair, before you try to shut us all down. I do want to commend the excellent work of the staff, our analysts who have put this together, and Mr. Collins for what was done in England. This goes above and beyond. I think we have really set a standard. I'm hoping that in the next Parliament, and maybe in other jurisdictions, we can maintain this conversation. You've done incredible work on this. We really commend you for it.[Applause]BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1035)[English]Mr. Chair, just as a point of order for our committee, we are very surprised, I think, that Mr. Zuckerberg decided—and Ms. Sandberg—to ignore the summons of a parliamentary committee, particularly as we have international representatives here. As far as I know, we were not even informed that he wasn't showing up. I have never seen a situation where a corporate head ignores a legal summons. In light of that, I would like to bring notice of a motion to vote on: That the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, on account of the refusal of Mr. Mark Zuckerberg and Ms. Sheryl Sandberg to appear before it on May 28th, direct the Chair to serve either or both with a formal summons should they arrive in Canada for any purpose to appear before the Committee at the date of the next meeting from the date of their summons, and should they be served with a summons when the House is not sitting, that the Chair reconvene the Committee for a special meeting as soon as practicable for the purpose of obtaining evidence from them.Mr. Chair, I don't know if we've ever used an open summons in Parliament—we've checked and we haven't found one—but I believe you'll find that this is in order. If Mr. Zuckerberg or Ms. Sandberg decide to come here for a tech conference or to go fishing, Parliament will be able serve that summons and have them brought here.Committee witnessesDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetMotionsPrivacy and data protectionSocial networking sitesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1125)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you so much for these presentations. They're very helpful.Mr. Chan, we know that Mr. Zuckerberg and Ms. Sandberg are very important people. Are they busy today?Committee witnessesDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionSocial networking sitesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1125)[English]Okay.I'm trying to get a sense of corporate governance with Facebook. You come from Canadian politics. You worked for the Liberal Party. We're kind of meek and mild here in Canada. I don't ever remember a summons being issued against the head of a corporation. I don't know of anybody who has ever decided to ignore a summons.Surely to God they have something really pressing to keep them busy. When Mr. Zuckerberg recently spoke, as my colleague pointed out, about his willingness, his desire to talk with legislators. Was that a joke?This is for Mr. Chan. I'm interested in Mr. Chan because he represents us in Canada.Committee witnessesDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionSocial networking sitesKevinChanKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1125)[English]Yes, thank you for that. Sorry, I only have a few minutes.I appreciate that work. I'm a big fan of Facebook.Mr. Kevin Chan: Thank you, sir.Mr. Charlie Angus: I've spoken greatly about the powerful tools it has in the indigenous communities I represent.My concern is this idea of opt-in, opt-out that Facebook has when it comes to national law. First of all, you ignored a summons by Parliament because Mr. Zuckerberg may be busy. It may be his day off. I don't know. You were recently found guilty by our regulator in the Cambridge Analytica breach. Our regulator, Mr. Therrien, said:Canadians using Facebook are at high risk that their personal information will be used in ways they may not be aware of, for purposes that they did not agree to and which may be contrary to their interests and expectations. This could result in real harms, including political...surveillance.What was striking was that Facebook didn't concede that we have jurisdiction over our own citizens. If you're saying you're willing to work with parliamentarians, I don't get this opt-in when it works for Facebook and opt-out when.... Can you give me an example of any company saying that they just don't recognize whether or not we have jurisdiction over our citizens?Cambridge AnalyticaDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternational lawInternetPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy CommissionerSocial networking sitesKevinChanKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1130)[English]Okay, but on that point—I only have a short period of time—622,000 Canadians had their data taken. Facebook became aware of it in 2015, and Facebook said nothing until it was exposed internationally because of the Cambridge Analytica breach. That is a breach of Canadian law under PIPEDA.You know that law, yet to tell Canadian legislators that we had to prove individual harm before Facebook would concede jurisdiction, that to me would be like an international auto company saying, “Yes, there were mass deaths in Brazil; yes, there were mass deaths in the United States; yes, there were mass deaths all over Europe; but since nobody died in a car accident in Canada, we are not going to comply with Canadian law.”How do you get to decide what laws you respect and what laws you figure don't apply to you? Why do you think that?Cambridge AnalyticaDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternational lawInternetPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy CommissionerSocial networking sitesKevinChanKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1130)[English]No you don't. You don't recognize that we have jurisdiction.Cambridge AnalyticaDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternational lawInternetPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy CommissionerSocial networking sitesKevinChanKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1130)[English]How can you say that to us with a straight face, Mr. Chan? How can you?Cambridge AnalyticaDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternational lawInternetPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy CommissionerSocial networking sitesKevinChanKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1130)[English]So we have to take you to court to get you to recognize that we have jurisdiction to protect our citizens, after you sat on a breach that you knew about for three years and did nothing to tell us about because you didn't want to up-end your business model.Cambridge AnalyticaDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternational lawInternetPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy CommissionerSocial networking sitesKevinChanKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1130)[English]I'm talking about the privacy rights of Canadians and the breach of our law that you were found guilty of. That's the question.Cambridge AnalyticaDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternational lawInternetPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy CommissionerSocial networking sitesKevinChanKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1130)[English]He had to take you to court, because you wouldn't concede that we as legislators even have jurisdiction over our own citizens. That's not coming to a resolution. That's like, “Hey, Facebook, is it okay if we come and see, and if it's okay, we'll all work things out?” That is not how law works. Maybe that's how it works for Mr. Zuckerberg, but that's not how it works internationally, which is why we are here. It's because we have international legislators who are frustrated—Cambridge AnalyticaDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternational lawInternetPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy CommissionerSocial networking sitesKevinChanKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1130)[English]—by the lack of respect for international law.Cambridge AnalyticaDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternational lawInternetPrivacy and data protectionPrivacy CommissionerSocial networking sitesKevinChanKevinChan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1325)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.I want to make a confession. I'm a recovering digital utopian. I came here as a young democratic socialist and I fought hard against regulation. Imagine that, because we saw all the start-ups and we saw a great digital future. That was 2006. Now in 2019, I have conservative chairs here who are pushing for government regulation. That's the world we're in with you folks.It's because we're talking about democratic rights of citizens, re-establishing the rights of citizens within the realm that you control. We're talking about the power of these platforms to up-end our democratic systems around the world, which is unprecedented. We're talking about the power of these platforms to self-radicalize people in every one of our constituencies, which has led to mass murder around the world. These are serious issues. We are just beginning to confront the issues of AI and facial recognition technologies and what that will mean for our citizens. It's what our Privacy Commissioner has called the right of citizens to live free of surveillance, which goes to the heart of the business model, particularly of Facebook and Google, and it came up yesterday and today from some of the best experts in the world that the front line of this fight over the public spaces and the private lives of citizens will be fought in the city of Toronto with the Google project. Mr. McKay, we asked you questions on Sidewalk Labs before, but you said you didn't speak for Sidewalk Labs, that it was somehow a different company. Mr. Slater, we had experts say this is a threat to the rights of our citizens. Mr. McNamee said he wouldn't let Google within 100 miles of Toronto.How is it that the citizens of our country should trust this business model to decide the development of some of the best urban lands in our biggest city?DemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetLand usePrivacy and data protectionSocial networking sitesTorontoBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesDerekSlater//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (0910)[English] Thank you very much, Madam Chair.Thank you very much for being here. We truly appreciate the advice and the insight that you bring. Professor, I would particularly like to thank you for your observation regarding the hierarchy in a committee and how power is used.I'm sure most of us have been to a mess, and my God, you have to know the protocol or you're in trouble. You may not get dinner if you don't understand the hierarchy there.I was very interested in the comment in regard to education. You mentioned the RMC, and it reminded me of a situation in the town where I come from with cadets. For whatever reason, because of friendship, because somebody had access to a vehicle, a child predator was allowed in to be an instructor. The reservist who tried to bring attention to that went right up the chain of command. He was drummed out and the predator remained. It seems to me that this education you spoke of does indeed need to start very early. I wondered if you would comment on that.CadetsCanadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceEducation and trainingWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonAlanOkros//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0915)[English]Thank you.Madame St-Pierre, did you have anything to add?AlanOkrosKristineSt-Pierre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0915)[English]That's interesting. In terms of gender-based analysis, governments are still grappling with that.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceEducation and trainingWomenKristineSt-PierreKristineSt-Pierre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0915)[English]It is tricky and it makes significant demands.You talked about the national action plan, and I wondered how government has responded. Are you happy with the response? What more could happen, if anything?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceWomenKristineSt-PierreKristineSt-Pierre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0920)[English] Thank you.It's interesting that you mention the funding for women's organizations. There has been a decline, in terms of that funding—a very serious decline. There's no core funding anymore. Everything is piecemeal. I'll be very interested in your report. I think the discontinuation of that core funding has created a real vacuum, in terms of women's organizations' ability to respond to some very important issues. I also had a question in regard to the 2016 Auditor General's report. The recommendation was to increase the representation of women in the Canadian military. Despite whatever good intentions, that hasn't happened. What do you think the main barriers are to recruiting and retaining women, because they may come along. We've seen some at this committee who enlisted with incredibly positive attitudes and intentions, and felt that they were not able to continue.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceMilitary recruitmentStatisticsWomenKristineSt-PierreKristineSt-Pierre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1015)[English]Thank you, Madam Chair.Thank you very much for bringing this perspective.I'm going to throw out some questions, and please feel free to answer or add to whatever responses I get. I would like to begin with Brigadier-General Tattersal. You talked about the strength of diversity, and absolutely, when we look at any community, that diversity of perspectives and life experiences is indeed our strength. We've also heard that there's a pressure to conform to the male norm in the military. I wonder if you could comment on that.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonVirginiaTattersal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1020)[English]Thank you.I came from the teaching realm and I can tell you: when the first female vice-principal at the high school level emerged, it was tough for her. They put her through the ropes. This would be in, I don't know, the late 1980s, not that long ago.You talked about attracting women who had been released and wanting to bring them back. I wondered what the process was and what kind of success you had. Perhaps you could even identify for us the reason they were released in the first place.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceFamilies and childrenMedical discharge from armed ForcesWomenVirginiaTattersalVirginiaTattersal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1020)[English]Okay. Is it time for a female chief of the defence staff?Canadian ForcesChief of the Defence StaffDepartment of National DefenceWomenVirginiaTattersalVirginiaTattersal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1020)[English]Given all of that, do you see a future where we would have a female?Canadian ForcesChief of the Defence StaffDepartment of National DefenceWomenVirginiaTattersalVirginiaTattersal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1020)[English]Okay. That's good.Brigadier-General Bourgon, you're the defence champion. I thank you for that. You spoke about peacekeeping. We heard that there is an important role for women in terms of peacekeeping. Given some of the negatives, like the experience in Haiti and other places, could you speak about the strength that women bring to that role?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefencePeacekeeping and peacemakingWomenVirginiaTattersalLiseBourgon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1025)[English]You talked about the crisis on the ground. We know that when Canadians go into crisis situations there's rape, there's displacement and there are all kinds of quite horrendous experiences that the population has been traumatized with.How are women important in dealing with that? Do you have any direct experience?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefencePeacekeeping and peacemakingWomenLiseBourgonLiseBourgon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (0925)[English] Thank you, Chair. Thanks to all of you for being here today. I appreciate it. I want to pick up on the last discussion. I jotted down some things. My first thought as I was listening was that in terms of the backlog, you have a plan to get a plan. By 2021, you think the backlog will be 100,000. You've slowed the growth, and the system is being managed. These are just some of the things I've jotted down. To me it sounds like flood waters. I mean, you're managing the disaster, but we're not getting at the cause, and we're certainly not getting at the immediate problem, which is the backlog.It's astounding, quite frankly. I mean, it's a plan designed to fail, because it doesn't meet the total intake and it still leaves a growing backlog. There are more fingers in more holes in the dike than I can count here. Quite frankly, it's overwhelming that we're at this stage, and with an auditor's report in front of us, and I still don't like what I'm hearing. This is the best you can spin it. This is the best way it can be framed. I've had people.... I want to segue—poorly—to “Security screening results still pending”, as an example, as 10% of the reasons for postponed hearings. Something needs to be done there. I get it. I'm a former justice minister and I get security better that most people, but I've also had constituents come in crying—and I'm sure I'm not the only one—because they've been waiting so long that they've actually gone ahead and started a life.... Here's the thing about the security thing that throws me. If they're not a threat, why are we keeping them on tenterhooks for up to 10 years? I've had people waiting for up to 10 years and not knowing when there's going to be a registered letter telling them that they have to leave. Also, if they are a threat, why are we letting them walk around for 10 years free and clear? There's something wrong there.Again, when I look at it from the human point of view, I'm from the working world and I get it. Nobody wants to be the one who says, “Yes, they're safe” and hands it off, and then worries about how they're going to be the one at an inquest sometime that is wanting to know why they made this decision. The easy thing to do, and the safe thing to do, is just don't do anything.Give me your thoughts on that if you would, please, because that one is, again, a lived experience. You've had enough people cry in your office because they don't know what to do and you can't help them, and it's right there—it's at security. You should know that when we phone, there is a concrete wall that we cannot get past, and all we are told, even confidentially as MPs, is that “It's with security”, and that's it. Just give us some thoughts on that, please, and on my opening mini-rant.AsylumBacklogsRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaSecurity checksKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootRichardWex//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0930)[English] Thank you.This is just a reminder that all these things that we're hearing—and some of that's good, and I'm glad to hear all of this—are a result of the Auditor General's report, the very reports that government is trying to cut and slash so that there are fewer of these reports. Get used to it, colleagues; you're going to hear this from now until we leave, this business of cutting the budget or denying the increase of the budget to the Auditor General, which means the next Parliament's going to have fewer audits. I can't believe there aren't more people outraged about this, but I'll be getting on that at another time, trust me. I'd like to move to page 11. This one jumped out at me.AsylumRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRichardWexKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]It is a short question, believe it or not, truly. It says “Furthermore, new claims were prioritized over those that had been postponed, resulting in delays of several months for postponed claims.”If you had an old claim and a new claim, the new claim got priority over the old claim. Where's the natural justice in terms of first come, first served?AsylumBacklogsRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootRichardWex//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]I'm not a lawyer. Call me a used car salesman, but not a lawyer.AsylumBacklogsRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRichardWexRichardWex//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0935)[English]Well, at least you have a plan.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]Thank you, Chair.On page 2, paragraph 2.7, there's a reference to an independent review commissioned by the government that recommended “further system-wide efficiency improvements to the asylum system.” Would you be sure to forward a copy of that report to our analyst, please?AsylumRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootLoriMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]Great. Thank you.You can see all of us are just.... I'm not overly impressed with things like “enhanced efficiencies”. I've been around politics for an awfully long time, and I know that means exactly nothing, so I do have some concerns. I have a question—and Auditor General, this is going to be one of those you don't like, because it's outside the normal box, but if you're comfortable with it, I'd like you to comment also.We're looking at a backlog of 100,000. If we manage well and do a really good job, we'll have a backlog of only 100,000. Let's just pretend there's an election coming, and let's further pretend that there are political parties that might want to do something about this.How much money would it take up front, 100% dedicated to this problem, to eliminate that 100,000 and get us back to where we should be? What would that dollar figure look like? I'd like your thoughts, please, first from the deputy and whoever she wants to defer to, but then the Auditor General, if you're comfortable. I realize it's up in the air, but give it a shot, please.AsylumBacklogsRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaLoriMacDonaldLoriMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English] Deputy, I appreciate that, but with the greatest of respect, please answer my question. To clear a backlog of 100,000, what are we looking at? Is it a billion dollars? What number would it take if a political party wanted to put it in their platform? What is that number?AsylumBacklogsRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaLoriMacDonaldLoriMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]Help me. Give me some idea. A couple of billion dollars isn't getting us too far, so...?AsylumBacklogsRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaLoriMacDonaldLoriMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]Get a hold of it.AsylumBacklogsRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaLoriMacDonaldLoriMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]Thank you.Auditor General, I noticed that in one of the paragraphs you do mention that you looked at some funding. It was relative to a specific part of your report. I appreciate that these are difficult waters for you because your business is precision, but can you help us at all, sir?AsylumBacklogsRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaLoriMacDonaldSylvainRicard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]First of all, it makes my head explode, I have to tell you. I agree that it's been around so long, and there's no easy answer. You folks are very good at giving answers that don't get us very far, and you're not doing it deliberately. You can only do the best you can. I want to mention one last thing, though, to underscore the argument about how devastating it is that the Auditor General's office is not getting the funding it needs to do its audits. The deputy mentioned in her comments that “The audits allowed us”. I'm going to continue to point out the benefits of having these audits, because the current government's intent is to not provide sufficient funding to the Auditor General to do this very work.Thanks, Chair.AsylumRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1030)[English]Are we back again on the same....?AsylumRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1030)[English]That was on another matter. It's business. When we're finished this file—AsylumRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1030)[English]On both? Very good. My understanding in talking with colleagues is that there was some interest in calling the witnesses back. I don't know that we want to move that motion. I think there was a notional date of June 6.AsylumRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1030)[English]No. My motion—AsylumRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1030)[English]If I might, Chair, this is internal business, but here we go. I would suggest also that we find time to have a meeting of the committee to meet ahead of time. We've taken this big issue and tried to get our arms around it. I really think we need a strategic meeting prior to the next one. Additionally, I'd like to see somebody there from the Auditor General's office to help us so that we can home in on the questions that we all have and try to provide a framework for answers that will actually end up getting us somewhere. I will leave that with you, Chair.Then I have one other motion on a related but different issue. AsylumRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1035)[English]I do. I have a notice of motion, Chair. The Chair: Go ahead.Mr. David Christopherson: Thank you. I'll read it in English, but I have it in both languages to be tabled. I move:That the committee condemns the underfunding of the Office of the Auditor General; that the committee recommend that funding to the OAG be increased by $10.8 million annually; and, that the committee report this recommendation to the House.AsylumGovernment expendituresNotice of motionRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1035)[English]I have no doubt.AsylumGovernment expendituresNotice of motionRefugeesReport 2, Processing of Asylum Claims, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (0930)[English]Mr. Chair, you cannot have a member of this committee calling for witnesses to be ashamed. That's unacceptable.Committee businessHate propagandaInternetRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton CentreAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]It's unfair to put Mr. Suri in that position. That is unfair—Committee businessHate propagandaInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]—to put Mr. Suri in a position to have to defend himself in front of the—Committee businessHate propagandaInternetRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton CentreRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]It's unacceptable.Committee businessHate propagandaInternetRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton CentreRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]You can't put Mr. Suri in that position. That's unfair.Committee businessHate propagandaInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]I think that's unacceptable. You're putting—Committee businessHate propagandaInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]—him in a position of vulnerability to have to respond to these attacks. Quite frankly, that's unacceptable. He didn't come here today to defend himself. He came here to present on behalf of his organization.Committee businessHate propagandaInternetRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton CentreAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]It is unfair, Mr. Chair, if you attempt to have him respond and legitimize what has been said. I will call for us to go in camera immediately. I think I'll have support from my colleagues.Committee businessHate propagandaIn cameraInternetMotionsAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Mr. Chair, I move that we go in camera.An hon. member: On a point of order—Committee businessHate propagandaInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAliEhsassiWillowdale//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]I put a motion on the floor that we go in camera, please, to have this conversation. I'm not comfortable putting our witnesses in this very difficult position of listening to this disagreement that we're having.Committee businessHate propagandaInternetAliEhsassiWillowdaleRandyBoissonnaultEdmonton Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0955)[English]Thank you.Thank you very much to all of our witnesses today.We're looking at the digital charter, and all of you have mentioned strong enforcement and real accountability when it comes to social media platforms. Today on the Hill we have an international grand committee that's looking into citizen rights and big data. We have a real challenge, because we have Mark Zuckerberg refusing to even come to the committee. He's in contempt of Parliament, essentially, because he refuses to come before this international committee, and therein lies the biggest part of our challenge.If the big digital players don't respect what we're trying to do in our respective legislatures around the world, how can this end up being meaningful? It's a very significant challenge. It's really going to require, I think, all of our countries to call them on the carpet and tell them that they are responsible. When you hear about the numbers online, the percentages that you've all raised here, it's just mind-blowing. That, in and of itself, is a very serious challenge when we can't even hold them accountable to what we're trying to put forward. We can put forward what we think will be important legislation, but if they don't adhere to it, where are we?I want to go back to something. Lina and Sinan, thank you for being here from my local community of Windsor-Essex. I appreciate your being here by video conference today. I want to go to something that Lina said when talking about that real-life experience. I wonder what this looks like on the ground when you're trying to combat online hate or you see something and you think, “Is this hate? What is this?” You start to have those conversations among others to try to get them to stop it as well. I also wonder if you can speak to the impact of having that burden on you and your community and in particular on young people. I know you do a lot of work with youth. What is the impact of this responsibility that's now on their shoulders to battle this every day when they're seeing things online?CensorshipHate propagandaInternetYoung peopleAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalLinaChaker//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1000)[English]Thank you so much. I'll ask this more broadly. How can we hold social media companies accountable? We are all, essentially, their customers, right? We're in that space. It's a very big question, but I have to ask. I feel that you, obviously, are looking at ways to combat online hate. The biggest partners in that are the social media platforms. What are your suggestions for holding them accountable for what's happening on those platforms?I'll go down the line.AccountabilityHate propagandaInternetSocial networking sitesLinaChakerAviBenloloMr.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1055)[English]Thank you so much. There are so many great topics. I think we could dive into the education piece—it's critical—and the work, Mr. Galloway, that you've been doing. You've been talking about deradicalization and the relationship of online hate to offline and how it becomes a real-world hate that impacts people's safety.I want to talk about something that Ms. Sangha brought up. First of all, I thank you for your call to action. I absolutely echo that. We need to have something strong coming out of this committee that's not just aspirational but can actually make an impact on the ground. You're talking about the fact that many people in our country have a relationship with the police that is not good. They don't go to the police because they mistrust them and they mistrust the way they're being treated. This reporting online, I think, is really critical in the sense that people don't feel they have to go and be challenged or experience that racism or other things they currently experience with the police. It's very challenging. I want to ask Ms. Omer first, then Ms. Konanur, and finally Ms. Sangha: How should this reporting process be structured so that everyone can feel comfortable coming forward? Who should be handling it? What are your thoughts on that?Crime reportingHate propagandaInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalDahaboAhmed Omer//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1100)[English]You had a comment.DahaboAhmed OmerShaliniKonanur//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP): (0905)[English] Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Minister, for being here.Unfortunately, your legislation didn't make the Canadian chief statistician independent. That has continued to undermine Canadian confidence, given the antics of collecting the data information from the banks.I want to move to page 3 of your presentation. Minister, you mention the creation of 100,000 jobs under two programs. What is the name of the study that gives these results that there will be 50,000 jobs created, for example, in the supercluster over the next 10 years? Where was it published, who did the actual study, what was the sample size and what was the methodology of the study? Lastly, where is it available?Department of IndustryIndustrial clustersInnovationInnovation Superclusters InitiativeJob creationMain estimates 2019-2020DanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0905)[English]I'm not asking for a business plan. You're making an—NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0905)[English]I want the study, though. Thank you.NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0905)[English]Where is the study available, then?Department of IndustryIndustrial clustersInnovationInnovation Superclusters InitiativeJob creationMain estimates 2019-2020NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0905)[English]All that information you mention and the list of the third parties.NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0905)[English]Are they available right now?Department of IndustryIndustrial clustersInnovationInnovation Superclusters InitiativeJob creationMain estimates 2019-2020NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0905)[English]The reason I have concern about that, Minister, is that it's a significant allegation, really, of 100,000 jobs being created. The problem is that we don't have any of that information and data.I'll shift to where I'm going with this, which is with regard to Crown copyright. Again, we have an example where we have a minister of the Crown coming here, making—I guess—an argument about the creation of jobs from materials, but we have no access to any of that information.In 2017, over 2,000 Canadians independently called for the elimination of Crown copyright. During our copyright submissions here, there were over 200 organizations that called for the elimination of Crown copyright. For more than four decades, there have been Parliaments—in 1981, 1985, 1993 as well another Parliament—calling for the abolishment of Crown copyright.There have been continued delays of public information and Crown materials with the transition to the digital platforms that have taken place, and in fact, we're losing not only that information but our heritage, because some of this material is being destroyed. This feeds our democratic deficit and economic disadvantage, because the U.S. does not have Crown copyright.We do have a report coming forth. Your government decided to go ahead with an order in council for Matty Moroun, a private American billionaire, to provide a new border crossing in my riding, without any stipulations to the local community and without any type of public input or even involvement. Will you commit to moving on Crown copyright in any form necessary to abolish this procedure that's blocking Canadian innovation, access to information and democracy? The reason I point it out in your materials that you submitted here today is because there is valuable information that could be helpful. I'm not saying your business plan was not effective. However, none of that is available. Will you, then, do what's necessary? I have Bill C-440 and you can steal it. It has been done before in the past. Will you commit to abolishing Crown copyright before the next election?Copyright and copyright lawCopyright BoardMain estimates 2019-2020NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0910)[English]I'll leave this for you. You used it for a private American billionaire to provide him a new bridge. I'm hoping that you can actually look at the government tools available for abolishing Crown copyright, because our time is winding down here in Parliament. Can I move to automotive, then, Mr. Minister?Copyright and copyright lawCopyright BoardMain estimates 2019-2020NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0910)[English]In some good questions, Mr. Oliver noted that in fact we've seen our footprint shrink over North America with regard to production and output. Mr. DesRosiers had that in a recent article. However, in a quick recap, we looked at General Motors with $300 million in a plant in Orion Township, close to Windsor, Ontario, close to me; $1.8 billion in six U.S. manufacturing states and theatres; $1.4 billion announced again additionally on top of that. They also talk about 20 new all-electric vehicles globally by 2023 with none of them planned in Canada right now, so zero out of 20 planned for Canada. They have an investment in Brazil of $2.7 billion, and they've expanded that from the previous investment, so it caps at about $4 billion put in. The reason I ask is that Fiat Chrysler announced $4.5 billion in investment in Detroit, a few kilometres away from the Windsor plant that is losing a third shift right now. I wrote you back on February 27, 2019, and I'll provide you with a copy of that as well. I'll give you credit. Your ministry and your department has been very good at getting back to me over the last number of years, but you've yet to respond to this, and this is calling for a specific auto action team. I have support from the chamber, from the unions, from other auto suppliers and groups, to specifically go after that Detroit investment. Could you please respond to that now? I've been waiting since February 27, and since that time we've not only had the dust-up related to the Pacifica being left out for the incentive. I'm glad that's done; it's not the exact one I want, but thank you for at least listening and doing that. Most important is that we're losing a third shift.Automotive industryDepartment of IndustryMain estimates 2019-2020NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0915)[English]Please consider support for the proposal we put toward you.NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.How much was collected by your government from the steel tariffs on the U.S., the dollar-for-dollar tariffs? Aluminum industryCustoms tariff and customs dutiesDepartment of IndustryMain estimates 2019-2020Steel industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]It's over $1 billion.With regard to the spectrum auction, there has been actually over $10 billion collected over a decade for that. Do you know how much has been invested from that money, or has it gone to the general treasury?Advanced wireless servicesAuctionsDepartment of IndustryMain estimates 2019-2020NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]My point is that there's capital available there.In closing, though, I want to give you an opportunity to revisit your digital bill of rights. I tabled one in motion M-175. I know you've said you're interested in trying to table some of your initiatives in the House or getting some things moved. You mentioned that today. Canada's Digital CharterDepartment of IndustryHate propagandaInternetMain estimates 2019-2020NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]There's an open door for that.I'll give a quick example and let you finish, because it is important. It's related to the issue of hate and other online issues. A lot of this goes to algorithms that the larger companies, such as YouTube and others, have that can identify hate speech, and so forth. There has been pressure to increase them and their use. They've done it with regard to terrorist materials that have been posted on their platforms. It has been less assertive when it comes to racism and hatred and other types of things.What will your plan do to improve, or will it? Are there other government initiatives to step up expectations on these global platforms and their algorithms, which actually can reduce some of the content that is clearly not only just offensive, but criminal in some cases?Canada's Digital CharterDepartment of IndustryHate propagandaInternetMain estimates 2019-2020NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English] Yes.NavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—MaltonNavdeepBainsHon.Mississauga—Malton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1005)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.I want to follow up a little bit with Crown copyright, not specifically, but indirectly to a successful thing that took place in the estimates, increasing the Copyright Board of Canada's financial capabilities. This was good news, I think. I want to find out how it's going to be followed up because, in brief, the Copyright Board has been known to not be able to meet deadlines or at least have quick turnarounds with decision-making. And similar to Crown copyright, where we heard a universal frustration with regard to that issue, was the Copyright Board's incapabilities to respond adequately to artists and even disputes and so forth. Even people on both sides were saying they just couldn't get a decision. The good news is there was an increase in the budget, if it is for the improvements to turnarounds. Could you maybe give me an update as to how that's going or if there's going to be measuring of this? I just find this is low-hanging fruit and hopefully will bear some good results.Copyright and copyright lawCopyright BoardMain estimates 2019-2020DanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeJohnKnubley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1005)[English]Is it possible, as this particular sitting Parliament winds down, that a response to the chair about the implementation of that could be disseminated amongst members? Whenever you can, update this and send it to the chair. I'm interested. It was under Bill C-86 that the changes were enacted. The budget includes some increases. I would think that all members here might be interested in seeing how that's progressing to the Copyright Board. We're going to continue to receive a lot of advice from people who are interested in this matter. Copyright and copyright lawCopyright BoardMain estimates 2019-2020JohnKnubleyJohnKnubley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1005)[English]I'd really appreciate that. I think that would be good.I would like to move to the Canadian Space Agency. I know there were some increases with regard to that, but right now, there's a decision-making process. We've been participating in the Hubble telescope, and the Webb as well, but we're not part of the next one. Are there decisions about that? Have there been budgetary allotments to allow them to participate in that? As well, there are going to be some new initiatives on core component designs and partnerships. I'm just wondering whether the Canadian Space Agency is receiving support to do more work, in terms of outreach, and how Canadian companies can engage in international competitions for project procurement. You may not be able to answer this now. It might be a bit too specific, but I'm curious, in terms of the budgetary allocations for the Canadian Space Agency, whether those include more comprehensive support for them to win contracts for Canadians companies, or to be engaged themselves in competition for joint initiatives.Aerospace industryCanadian Space AgencyMain estimates 2019-2020PhilippeThompsonJohnKnubley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English]There's been increasing stress on Canadian consumers with regard to competition issues. I didn't notice any improvements to the Competition Bureau, from the estimates. I was wondering why that wasn't considered, especially given that we've had a ruling from the CRTC, with regard to Canadians being affected by the predatory practices of the telcos—pricing, engagement with consumers and so forth. I think their decision is still another 10 months away. I believe they announced that it would take a year to decide on the penalties for that. Has there been anything allocated to the Competition Bureau I may have missed that would enhance their capabilities to deal with—Competition Bureau CanadaDepartment of IndustryMain estimates 2019-2020Telecommunications and telecommunications industryJohnKnubleyJohnKnubley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English] Thank you.JohnKnubleyDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1040)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.I'll go quickly over to the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario. There is a 40% increase over the previous years. Is there any particular reason for such a large increase? Was there something in the previous year that did not get spent that was reallocated, or is it just an overall increase of 40%?Department of IndustryFederal Economic Development Agency for Southern OntarioMain estimates 2019-2020Regional developmentDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeJohnKnubley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1040)[English]On the tourism front, one of the shifts we saw from the Canadian Tourism Commission was away from North American visitation to concentrating on international visitation. Is this tourism initiative because the numbers are down with regard to the border in southern Ontario and in the Niagara region—where I'm from—and others, where we have seen...? Really, this started through the Vancouver Olympics, when the Canadian Tourism Commission was moved out to Vancouver. It disappeared from the face of the earth here in Ottawa. It is now in Vancouver. We've seen our travel tourism from the United States become increasingly challenged. Is part of what's happening here to try to localize and make more incentives for tourism to bring those numbers back up?Canadian Tourism CommissionDepartment of IndustryMain estimates 2019-2020TourismJohnKnubleyJohnKnubley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1040)[English]Thank you.JohnKnubleyDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (0925)[English]Thank you, Chair. I'll say at the beginning that I represent a region that's bigger than the United Kingdom. I represent communities that have no roads, some of the poorest indigenous communities. Facebook and YouTube transformed the power of indigenous communities to speak to each other, to start to change the dynamic of how white society spoke about them. I understand it has incredible power for good. I see more and more, though, in my region self-radicalized people, who are impossible to speak to. There are flat earthers—yes, there are; I've met them—anti-vaxxers, 9/11 truthers. I've seen the effect on our elections of the manipulation of anti-immigrant or anti-Muslim materials, but I had not yet seen the threat of death. Ms. Ressa, you said yesterday that while in the west we face democratic threats, people are dying in Asia from the manipulation of these platforms. In an act of solidarity with our Parliament, with our legislators, are there statements that should be made publicly through our Parliament to give you support so that we can maintain a link with you as an important ally on the front line? I'd like to ask that as my first question. Civil and human rightsInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesMariaRessa//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0925)[English] Thank you very much.I've been very concerned about Sidewalk Labs. Looking at it as a real estate deal, this might be the most prime real estate in North America that was handed over to Google on what the Auditor General of Ontario said was the shortest RFP she's ever seen, of I think six weeks. It's 10 weeks for a local art project down there. Dan Doctoroff came and told us it was the longest RFP in history. The Auditor General raised concerns that there was no public involvement, that this was done behind the scenes. Dan Doctoroff told us that this was the most open process ever. I'm very concerned about the privatization of public space. I come from mining country. We had company towns. We fought like hell to get rid of them. I've heard from Mr. Balsillie and I've heard from Ms. Zuboff, so Mr. McNamee, what do you think the citizens of Toronto should do regarding giving Google that prime real estate in the downtown where so many people gather?City of TorontoGovernment contractsInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionSidewalk LabsUrban community developmentMariaRessaRogerMcNamee//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (0930)[English]Thank you.RogerMcNameeBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1900)[English]I am Charlie Angus, vice-chair of this committee and a member of the New Democratic Party. I represent the constituency of Timmins—James Bay, which isn't a country, but it is larger than France.JensZimmermannJacquesGourdeLévis—Lotbinière//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1905)[English]I'm sorry to interrupt, Mr. Chair, but I just wanted to confirm that our committee, through all-party consensus, issued a subpoena to Mr. Zuckerberg and Ms. Sandberg. I do believe that's unprecedented. I am reading reports that Facebook is speaking to media, saying they're not showing up to our committee. I am not aware whether they have officially responded to the subpoena. Can you inform this committee whether they have bothered to respond to us on this issue?Committee witnessesDemocracyInternational Grand CommitteeInternetPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1905)[English] Thank you very much.BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (1655)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.Thank you for being here, Commissioner. It's lovely to have a chance to meet you.I'm going to be following up with some questions, some of which will just be me thinking out loud, if you can't answer, but wherever you can answer, I would truly appreciate it.Recently, your office issued a report on sponsored travel and unregistered lobbying that could be happening on these trips. I guess Captain Renault from Casablanca is one of those situations. At any rate, how would you monitor unregistered lobbying on these trips? How did you find that and how do you respond? Can you tell us?Lobbying and lobbyistsMain estimates 2019-2020BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesNancyBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1655)[English]That's a lot to investigate.Main estimates 2019-2020NancyBélangerNancyBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1655)[English]I understand your problems in regard to budgeting in that particular term.The statutory review of the Lobbying Act is years overdue at this point. In your opinion, should Parliament direct this committee to have a review and examine the legislation as soon as possible?Main estimates 2019-2020NancyBélangerNancyBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1655)[English]Obviously, it would be a good thing if this committee were to invite you to speak since you have a number of issues that you could provide good, sound recommendations for.Main estimates 2019-2020NancyBélangerNancyBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1655)[English]Mr. Chair, I hope that that is duly noted. Thank you. Main estimates 2019-2020NancyBélangerBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1655)[English]My colleague, Mr. Angus, requested an investigation about SNC-Lavalin's lobbying practices. Are you going to act on that request? When we saw information in that regard we saw numerous lobbying attempts, as it were. Did that raise any red flags with you? Are you able to go ahead on Mr. Angus' request?Main estimates 2019-2020BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesNancyBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1700)[English]Now I'm into the thinking out loud. I'm interested in what you said in regard to the court's ruling on the Aga Khan. It seems to me that in regard to a benefit, the holiday may have been a benefit, but there was also the concern about the Aga Khan Foundation receiving funding. Is there not a benefit then to at least the Aga Khan through his foundation and wouldn't that raise some issues and cause a need to look?Main estimates 2019-2020NancyBélangerNancyBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1700)[English]Thank you.Very quickly, you talked about a mental health strategy. It seems to me that obviously, with all of the work your office does, your staff is under stress. I'm interested in the strategy. How are you going to cope with burnout and stress?Main estimates 2019-2020NancyBélangerNancyBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1345)[English]Thank you to all of you. I'm going to get right into it because of the time. Targeted sanctions and targeted support: I'm looking at it that way. We heard from Ms. Shafipour that the lawyer who championed her is now imprisoned. We heard a moment ago from Ms. Boroumand about targeting the judiciary. Are there opportunities for us that haven't been used yet and are worthy of exploring, in terms of ways that Canada can be concentrating on the judiciary? I know that we have a periodic review coming up in November of this year. Now would be a time, in my view, to build a case and build momentum or awareness on this. I'd like to hear quickly, if you could give us your thoughts, on how we can actually target the judiciary but also support members of the judiciary who are on the front lines, helping to defend human rights. I don't know who wants to start. Ms. Shafipour.Civil and human rightsIranJudiciaryAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanMaryamShafipour//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1350)[English]Thank you.Ms. Boroumand, do you have anything to add?MaryamShafipourLadanBoroumand//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1350)[English] Ms. Raza, you have 30 seconds.LadanBoroumandRaheelRaza//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1350)[English]Okay.Mr. Akhavan.RaheelRazaPayamAkhavan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1120)[English] Thank you, Chair.Thank you, Minister. It's good to see you again.You're right that we've been around this a few times. I have to tell you that I even leaned over to Tyler and said, “I'm running out of questions,” because we have gone around a lot of times.I will reiterate, because it needs to be said, that the only thing on which I agree with my colleagues from the Conservative caucus is that the process was ham-fisted. There wasn't as much respect paid to this committee and the work we did as was promised in the election, and the name was chosen unilaterally. Those are all legitimate criticisms that the government has to wear.However, I am in full alignment with the desire to make this so credible that the price to be paid by any political leader for not attending the leaders debate would be greater than any benefit from hiding and not having to be accountable and not facing scrutiny. I'm going to draw a very distinct line at criticizing the government on some of the missteps on the way to getting here. Those criticisms are not, in my opinion, enough to delegitimize the existence of the commission, particularly in the choice of Mr. Johnston. You had to go a long way to find a Canadian that no one could lay a glove on politically in any way, but you found him, and it matters.I have to tell you that the inquisition-style questioning that was put upon Mr. Johnston from the official opposition was almost becoming a little embarrassing. He finally turned and said, in my paraphrased words, “You want assurances that this position is going to be filled with integrity? My name is on the line and my reputation is on the line. That's where the credibility is going to come from.” You know what? For me, and I think for the overwhelming majority of Canadians, given Mr. Johnston's track record as a servant of Canada and as a servant of the public interest, that's good enough for me, as long as it's linked with public accountability at the end.I did ask him about that, drilling down to make sure that the review was going to be as vigorous as it needs to be, and again I was satisfied. If I were returning to the next Parliament, which I am not, I would feel satisfied that I was going to have in front of me the analysis that I need to go back and determine whether we achieved the objectives in the way that we wanted, particularly in terms of accountability.I could take more time asking questions, but I don't want to take away from joining with you in being surprised and pleased that we now have on record that the Conservatives believe that this is important and that it matters. Now what we need to do is make sure that there's so much credibility around this process that never again does a leader from any party dodge national debates when he or she wants to be the prime minister of this country.If I have any time left, Minister, you're welcome to it to reinforce something, or we can just move on, but that was the most important thing. I don't have any questions now. I think the really important questions are going to come after the fact, when we review how well it worked and where we can make improvements.Quite frankly, as a last thought, the proof of the pudding is going to be on the night of the debates. Are all the seats full? If they are, then we collectively, in the majority, were successful. If there's even one empty seat, then we failed. We've failed to create the political climate where you couldn't afford to pay that price. History is going to tell us the tale.Thanks very much, Chair.Thank you again, Minister.Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020LarryBagnellHon.YukonKarinaGouldHon.Burlington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1125)[English]Thank you.KarinaGouldHon.BurlingtonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English] Thank you, Chair.I'm going to take a moment to again be absolutely as crystal clear as I can possibly be on my behalf and on behalf of my caucus and party. The process left a bit to be desired. I have held the government to account as best I can—repeatedly, forcefully and legitimately, I believe. As concurred by Mr. Bittle, it's at least a point of legitimate debate. We are where we are. The commissioner is acceptable to us and the rules of engagement are acceptable to us. We had no more input as the NDP than the Conservatives did, but we believe this is an important element of our democracy. We were not, as a country, well-served by the processes and antics, and I'm not suggesting that my party is without blame, either. It behooves all of us to do everything we can to respect and support the debates commission, because it's an important part of our democracy. We've got the example from the U.S. where for the longest time now, it has had an independent commission that conducts its debates. The Americans fight about everything, but I haven't heard anybody suggest that there's unfairness or partisan advantage in their system and process.My hope is that the commission be successful, that all the party leaders turn out, that Canadians get what they need from the process. I have every confidence that the next Parliament will do its due diligence in terms of holding the government and the commissioner to account for the money they spend, the decisions they make and the procedures they follow. It would be very disheartening for me—and I'll end on this statement while watching the election unfold that I won't be involved in, at least as a candidate—as one of the debates is whether there's legitimacy around the commission as it provides an exit strategy for one of the party leaders or any of them who don't want to be held to account and be held to the kind of scrutiny that those debates will offer.We wish the commission well. We look forward to its success. Notwithstanding and subject to some details that could arise, we have every intention of being supportive and participating. This committee's done a good job.I have one last point. I hope there's a good analysis between what this committee proposed.... We spent a lot of time, we worked hard on our report, and it was disappointing to see the way a lot of that work was set aside by the government after it promised to do things differently. Being where we are now, it behooves all of us to see this be successful, in my view, and I say that as a small “d” democrat, not just a large “D” democrat. There's nothing more precious than our democracy, and this is an important part of strengthening that democracy. Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]Write to him to ask a question.LarryBagnellHon.YukonScottReidLanark—Frontenac—Kingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1215)[English]Very good. Thank you, Chair. I appreciate that.Just to pick up on where Ms. Sahota left off, we could be done in 10 minutes. My sense of this is it could go either of two ways. One is we're going to be done in 10 minutes, and everybody will say yes, we'll study it and give some respect to the people who did all this work. We could decide how much of a study that is and so on, once we make that decision. If we're not going to say that, then there's a distinct possibility this discussion will go on for a period of time. It seems unreasonable for us not to give this group of colleagues the opportunity to at least be heard.This is running parallel to another motion in the House that has similar effects. We just have to let those two paths unfold as they will. The issue for us is whether we want to study it right now. Whether we'll be done or not and how extensive our study will be are details we can deal with after the fact.Chair, I think I ended my brief remarks last time almost on the same note, in that I'm looking to get a sense of where colleagues are. Either this is going to be real quick, and we'll decide we're going to do it and just need to talk details, or we're into a different world where.... Well, I'll be optimistic and hope we don't enter that world. There's no need to describe a world that I'm optimistic we won't enter.Again, I would just plead—literally plead—with colleagues. There's frustration on the part of a lot of backbenchers about the continued sense of backbench involvement in decision-making being watered down. More and more power over the decades has accrued in the PMO. There have been presidents in the United States who have said publicly they would give anything to have the amount of direct power that a majority prime minister has in our system. It's understandable. I'm speaking to the leadership of all the caucuses in the House when I say that at the very least, if this safety valve is not triggered, these frustrations aren't going away. They're only going to get stronger.I've described publicly a couple of times what I think is going to happen going forward. As the public demands democratic reform because they don't see it responding to their current needs, they're going to elect people who have a mandate to go and fix things. This is not going anywhere. It has to be dealt with. Either it's going to be dealt with by the majority of members opening their arms to change and being fair-minded, or we're going to be facing blockages and thwarted attempts to be heard. That's just going to lead to greater and more extreme actions on the part of future MPs. I don't see how it could not result in that.Again, I want to remain optimistic. I haven't had any indication from colleagues on where we're going on this motion, either privately or publicly.I would ask that my name be put back on the list as I relinquish the floor. I would be very interested to hear from colleagues. Again, in my view we could be out of here in a few minutes, or we're going to be wrestling with this for far more time than we ever thought.Committee businessMotionsStanding Orders of the House of CommonsLarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1220)[English]Could I hear that again, please?LarryBagnellHon.YukonStephanieKusieCalgary Midnapore//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1220)[English]That's okay. It's not a requirement.StephanieKusieCalgary MidnaporeLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1225)[English]Thanks, Chair.I have two things. One, it's always been our preference that any changes to the Standing Orders, just like election laws, would have agreement of all the parties. That's the first point. That is sort of our default position.Two, this is new, and it potentially changes the power structure. It's not going to go easy, and it's not going to be straightforward. At this point, I would take just about anything that is not wildly unacceptable as an amendment, if we can get a unanimous consent to have this heard. To me, that's the key thing. Those are the two points: one, the preference that any changes like this, or election laws, where we're talking about the referee's rules, should have, in an ideal situation, the support of all the parties involved, including the independents for that matter, given that they're affected by these things too. Two, it's really important that this be heard, that it be given the light of day. As much as possible, I think we should be bending over backwards to accommodate that. Quite frankly, if that's the only amendment that it takes for us to get unanimity in sending the message that we want this to be heard and we want to provide a venue for our colleagues to express their concerns and recommendations, then by all means, I accept the friendly amendment and appreciate the sincerity with which I believe it was put forward.Committee businessMotionsStanding Orders of the House of CommonsUnanimous consentLarryBagnellHon.YukonStephanieKusieCalgary Midnapore//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1230)[English]I think we're all singing from the same page. I'm not going to say anything that might derail that. I think we're in a good place, and I hope it carries.Thanks.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1230)[English]Was that unanimous?LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1235)[English]Why not?LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1235)[English]We can move another motion. LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English]I hear your quandary. I just looked at it and thought, “Well, what's the downside of not having the report?”The efficient thing is to let the motion go alone. Is there anything lost? I'm not sure there is. As long as we maintain that information within our considerations, that's where it needs to be right now. It seems to me that speed is of the essence. In terms of anything anybody wants from the House, you had better get your dibs in early.Those are just some thoughts, Scott.ScottReidLanark—Frontenac—KingstonScottReidLanark—Frontenac—Kingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English]Chair, if I may, do we want to start the study before we even begin the process, or anything else, and invite the delegation in to give us their presentation, so that we can understand exactly how big the project is? From there, we can make a plan of attack. Normally, we do it the other way around, but in this case, given that it's being driven by MPs, it seems to me to make sense to give them a chance to come in, be heard and make their case. Then we can decide what the process is. We are going to break it down. I can imagine some of the long discussions we're going to have. It'll be interesting, but we'll break that down piece by piece, and go through it.We could do it ahead of time, but, again, anything that delays it.... Time is our enemy right now, so I'm constantly thinking that if we have options that allow us to get things done and moving, that is really the prime consideration.I'm not married to that, colleagues. I just throw that out as a thought, in terms of how we might begin.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English] I would maybe ask Mr. Baylis if he wants to bring a representative delegation of the people involved, and let him decide who that is, how many, their presentation.... Give them their day in court. Let them take as long as they want, because it's a complex report, and then outline what they hope to get from us. Then we are equipped to make some decisions: What's our time frame? How are we going to bite this off? What information do we need? Is there any research we're going to do? Can we get that under way early, so that it's ready for us?I'm open to better ideas, Chair.LarryBagnellHon.YukonDavid de BurghGrahamLaurentides—Labelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English] I think that is an excellent idea, but I, for one, would probably.... As I've said, I'm one of those who contributed, but I'm not a major contributor. There are others—David de BurghGrahamLaurentides—LabelleDavid de BurghGrahamLaurentides—Labelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1245)[English]Yes. It was more because I'm on this committee, and I was willing to provide the vehicle.I hear what you're saying. That could flow from what we hear. Then we can decide not only what we're going to do, but who's going to be involved in doing it.It's such a disparate subject, and so vast. You've got multiple parties, and we have unanimity—we're actually there. If we can just hold that together, and give them a chance to come in and make their pitch as to what they hope to see, and what they realistically hope we can do in the remainder of this Parliament, we can be seized of that. If one of the things we want to talk about is who is part of this, the way we did with some other files we've had, I'd be open to that, at that time.I still think that, right now, it makes sense to bring them in as early as possible. There is some media interest. This is what they want more than anything—a chance to get these ideas out there. If they did have hope that we were going to conclude it in this Parliament, let's hear that. Some of them are veterans who understand what's entailed in the process of trying to get it done. They may offer us some ideas that we otherwise wouldn't think of, as we set about our work plan.Again, with the greatest of respect—and I'm not married to the idea—it still seems to make sense to me that our first step, right now, would be to invite them to come in, and give them as much time as they need to make their pitch. From there, we're well equipped to set out our work plan, and the objectives we think we can achieve, in the time available.David de BurghGrahamLaurentides—LabelleLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1245)[English]The only thing different from our usual rules, Chair, is that I would suggest we give them the courtesy of as much time as they want to make a fulsome and complete presentation, respecting the amount of work that they've put into it.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP): (0910)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Minister, for being here.The 700 megahertz band mobile spectrum option was probably one of the most successful spectrum options in Canadian history. Brand names like Telus paid over $1 billion. SaskTel paid nearly $1 billion and Rogers paid over $3 billion. In total there was $5 billion, with $300 million allocated to the government. How much of that money, that $5 billion-plus the government received, has been directed to expanding broadband?Advanced wireless servicesBroadband Internet servicesCostsM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0910)[English]That's for this budget, but I'm asking about the previous money your government received, the $5 billion. That $1.7 billion is actually over 13 years and it's actually legacy for another government, be it yours or someone else's.What did your government do with the 2015 spectrum auction, which netted a sum of $2.1 billion? Where did that $2.1 billion go? Did any of that go to rural broadband?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0910)[English]That also, then, includes the other 2015 auction, the 2,500 megahertz band, which is another $1 billion. There was the residential spectrum licences for the remaining 700 megahertz as well.In total, Canadians have received from their government over $14 billion with regard to spectrum auctions in recent history, so it's hard to believe we've ended up with a revenue stream of $14 billion and some of the highest prices and some of the least coverage in rural areas. Why do you think that's the case? We've received record amounts of unaccounted-for money in terms of it being required for anything.With the spectrum auction, for those who aren't aware, you're selling off land rights and air rights. That's like water. It's something that there is no cost to do for the Canadian government, so it's pure revenue for the government. Why do you think there's been no allocation of these resources to rural broadband, especially given the high prices we have?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0910)[English]Given that, right now, you have two spectrum auctions under way, are you able to commit the revenues from those spectrum auctions, which will be in the billions, to broadband services?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0910)[English]I'll take that as a no.Those are future budgets. Future revenues will come in. There are future spectrum auctions on top of that. There's an excessive amount of money being generated here. I know that you're seeking partners for the Canada Infrastructure Bank to the tune of $2 billion. At the same time, you're expecting Bell Mobility, Telus, Vidéotron, SaskTel and Rogers to spend billions of dollars on a spectrum auction.I want to move towards consumer protection. The recent CRTC decision acknowledges that consumers in this country have been abused by predatory pricing practices and the telcos' behaviour toward customers. The decision is going to take a full year to put penalties on those companies for such behaviour.Is that acceptable to you and the minister? M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0915)[English]This is about their behaviour. There was an inquiry with regard to their behaviour and predatory practices with consumers, be it marketing, soliciting of business or moving customers to different elements. There is a ruling specifically identifying that they're guilty.The CRTC has said they will take a year to bring consequences for that. Is that acceptable to you and the minister, that it would take a year to rebate or compensate Canadian consumers for behaviour the CRTC has ruled was inappropriate?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0915)[English]I'm really asking you. It's going to take a year. I want to know whether you find that acceptable for the CRTC, after they have issued a guilty decision. The penalty is not going to take a matter of days, weeks or months. It's going to take a year. There's been dead silence related to that. I want to know whether you find it acceptable that for abusive practices identified and acknowledged by the CRTC, the penalties and consequences will take a full year to benefit consumers.Do you think that's appropriate for the CRTC to take that length of time?Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications CommissionM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0915)[English]You have had a directive letter, exactly.You can have public comment with regard to whether or not it's acceptable for them to take that long—BernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0915)[English]—if the minister issued an actual directive to them—DanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0915)[English]—as you have acknowledged and expressed here.DanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Amos' motion was a good motion. I'm happy to support it. Motions can become law in regulation. My motion on microbeads did that and the previous government actually made it law. How much of Mr. Amos' motion are you making law, and which sections, if not all?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]Yes, and I worked with Sheila Malcolmson on that.M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English] Are you making it law? That's what I want to know.M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]What about through regulation? M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]Why wouldn't the government make this law? What would be holding it up, especially section (c)?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]I'm sorry. Section (c) is about equality for “rural and remote” areas. You shouldn't be expected to know exactly what.... It's rural and remote connectivity, that's what it is, and it's about equality for those two. Why not make that law?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]Has there been analysis about making it law, though? Has the department done an analysis of that?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsBernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. Margarets//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (0945)[English]Okay. Thanks. I'm just trying to drill down into that.Hon. Bernadette Jordan: Thank you.BernadetteJordanHon.South Shore—St. MargaretsDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (0930)[English]Thank you all so much for being here today.This panel is really critical, I think, as a diversity of voices, certainly in talking about how we tackle this in different ways.Morgane, the fact that you were successful and referencing the case, I think, is important. Talking about what you're putting online for women is important, as well as the services you provide in Edmonton.I thank you all for the work that you're doing. It's incredibly important. As the only woman politician currently sitting at the table, I certainly have experienced this. I've had my children threatened. I know what that feels like, and I know how that feels in your home.First of all, you're all courageous—and Morgane, certainly you for being here and sharing your very personal story. I thank you for that because it's going to take the courage of people to stand up and fight this together, to battle it by exposing themselves more than they already have. I thank you for that. Your efforts are incredibly important on behalf of all Canadians, so I thank you for that today.It really is shocking when you think about what you pointed out: that things are allowed online that are not allowed in print. If something was handed to us, we could challenge that. We have a way to do that. We know where to go. However, when it's online, things just seem to get lost. People attempt to report, and the reporting system is certainly something that we could study entirely on its own. Ricki, you highlighted newcomers and immigrants who are nervous to report, LGBTQ people who are nervous to report and women who are nervous to report because then it puts the spotlight on them. We see the horror stories of what happens when people put themselves out there.Morgane, you highlighted what your family has been through, which is unacceptable in our country.First of all, I want to congratulate you on receiving the meritorious service medal in 2018 for your service to Canada on the matter of LGBTQ2+ rights. Thank you for that and, specifically, your transgender human rights work for sure.I want to ask you all two questions—a little more about why you feel that the online publications are more harmful than the physical. What is the difference between the harms that people are experiencing online versus something that they would see in a publication? Second, how do you feel that limiting online hatred would help your work? I can imagine the work that you would all be able to do if you didn't have to focus so much of your efforts on combatting online hate. Maybe I'll open it with Morgane because I started with her, and then we'll work down the panel.Hate propagandaInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalMorganeOger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1020)[English]I'd like to start by saying that we're talking about people's lives. We heard a very personal story from a witness in the previous panel that was backed up by a decision at the Human Rights Tribunal in favour of her and her experience.There is a very important line around freedom of speech and making sure it's protected fiercely in our country, and at the same time preventing...not just online hate speech. Yesterday we heard from some Facebook folks. The chair and the vice-chair and I participated in a panel where we heard from Facebook about hate and what happens with the building of online hate and how it's really a systemic issue that ultimately results in hate speech on the Internet. We talked about Facebook and Twitter. We mentioned those things here. There are so many applications, so many gaming chat rooms, so many corners of the Internet that we haven't been able to have proper conversations about here, because we've focused on the larger web giants. This is systemic throughout the entire Internet.The challenge before us is very difficult—having conversations about reporting; having conversations about lived experience, which we heard previously; about the importance of protecting Canadians and making sure they feel safe in our country. It is a very difficult task ahead of us to take all these things and place them ultimately into a report that will reflect everything we've heard here.In the previous panel, we heard about the differences between the way online content and physical publications are treated in our country. Ms. Zwibel, how do we account for the differences in treatment of what you're able to put in print and what you're able to put online in our country, and how do we reconcile those two? How do we create something that is equal across those platforms?Hate propagandaInternetSetting of standardsAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalCaraZwibel//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1025)[English]It's certainly a global issue, and that's something that was part of our panel discussion yesterday as well.There is a report by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage titled “Taking Action Against Systemic Racism and Religious Discrimination Including Islamophobia”. It was an all-party report that was brought to the House of Commons.One of the recommendations they had was to establish uniform pan-Canadian guidelines and standards for the collection and handling of hate crime data and hate incident data, including efforts to standardize the definition and the interpretation by law enforcement of “hate crimes”.What are your thoughts on that particular recommendation?Hate crimesHate propagandaInformation collectionInternetSetting of standardsCaraZwibelCaraZwibel//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (0910)[English]Thank you, Minister, for being here.I have a number of questions, and I would prefer succinct answers because I want to cover a lot of ground.First, when are you planning to restore core operational funding to women's organizations, funding that was withdrawn by the government in 2006? You talked at the beginning about collaboration and partnerships, yet by favouring project funding over core funding, your government has increased its control over the types of community services offered, while making women's organizations more financially vulnerable. They're busy desperately trying to cobble together short-term proposals, and they cannot do long-term planning for the provision of service, advocacy and research. Minister, how on earth will they participate in this collaboration?Second, there's a conference in early June in Vancouver called Women Deliver. Community organizations have been excluded because they cannot afford to go to the conference. When will we see core funding again, please?Associations, institutions and organizationsDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityMain estimates 2019-2020WomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—Kawartha//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0910)[English]I'm sorry, Minister, but that is not what I am hearing from organizations. I've been in this portfolio off and on since 2006, and women's organizations are very clear that they require stable funding so they can plan and hire, and this mishmash of project funding is simply not working. It's certainly not working for organizations that do the groundwork. I don't accept that answer in any way.My next question has to do with your statements about women in non-traditional roles and child care. This committee did a study in 2008 of women in non-traditional trades and found that they were excellent. They were probably the best employees ever because they were conscientious and careful. Unfortunately, most of the women who tried to educate themselves for these jobs had to drop out because there was no child care.You talked about child care; you talked about 40,000 spaces. How is this adequate across an entire nation? Are they publicly funded, are they permanent, is there going to be a program to provide for the kind of child care we need, that we do not have? Associations, institutions and organizationsCare for childrenDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityMain estimates 2019-2020WomenMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—KawarthaMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—Kawartha//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0915)[English]Yes, Minister, there has been.Associations, institutions and organizationsCare for childrenDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityMain estimates 2019-2020WomenMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—KawarthaKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0915)[English]Thank you.Minister, you're absolutely wrong. There was always capacity-building funding until the Conservatives removed it in 2006. I would have expected you to restore it simply because women's organizations—Associations, institutions and organizationsDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityMain estimates 2019-2020WomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—Kawartha//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0915)[English]You did not. You made it into piecemeal project-by-project funding. Child care spaces in Toronto cost about $1,200 a month for one child for a family. That is not affordable, and if we are going to have successful child care, it must be affordable.Minister, you talked about the need to have women represented. Some time ago, I think about in 2004, the NDP introduced a bill to require federal boards to have 50% participation of women. I reintroduced the bill, and I wonder, since you support it, will you ensure the passage of that NDP bill to make sure that women are properly represented?Board of directorsDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityMain estimates 2019-2020WomenMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—KawarthaMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—Kawartha//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0915)[English]All right. I most certainly will send it along.There is some profound concern with regard to funding for the Native Women's Association of Canada. You talked about the importance of work connected with missing and murdered women, and yet NWAC's funding has been reduced and they were the key catalyst for the Sisters in Spirit campaign.What is your relationship with NWAC? Are you able to interact in a positive manner? In terms of partnerships and collaborations, is there a good working response in terms of your department and the work that NWAC does?Aboriginal peoplesAssociations, institutions and organizationsDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityMain estimates 2019-2020Native Women's Association of CanadaWomenMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—KawarthaMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—Kawartha//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0945)[English]Minister, I wonder if you are aware of the bullying experienced by some of the young women who were Daughters of the Vote. How did you respond to that bullying? What actions did you take to support these young women, and will you continue to fund important programs like Daughters of the Vote? Clearly, we need the strength of women in this Parliament.Daughters of the VoteDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityIntimidationMain estimates 2019-2020WomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonMaryamMonsefHon.Peterborough—Kawartha//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1005)[English]Thank you for being here. I appreciate the light that you can shed on these many questions.I want to pick up on the gender-based budgeting plus.You mentioned, Madam Gardiner, that there is a plan to put in place a centre of expertise. Can you describe that? Is it funded? Is it in place? How do you see the concrete follow-up that I think we're all looking for with regard to GBA+?Department for Women and Gender EqualityGender-based Analysis PlusMain estimates 2019-2020WomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonDanielleBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1005)[English]There has been some discussion in regard to a program to end gender-based violence. To be quite frank, we've been waiting for it and we're not seeing it. Organizations are concerned that these plans have not been fully developed. When can we expect them and will these plans include concrete outcomes, timelines and deliverables to ensure that women are indeed at the centre of any programming to reduce gender-based violence? As has been mentioned, women's economic security depends on that. Where are we in regard to a program in terms of gender-based violence?Associations, institutions and organizationsDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityGender-based violenceMain estimates 2019-2020WomenDanielleBélangerNancyGardiner//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1010)[English]On that last point, I'd like to pursue it, first internationally and nationally.Canada needs to continue its work in defence of sexual and reproductive health and rights—obviously, internationally through development assistance. The money for that program is set to end in less than a year. Given the need to support SRHR objectives, like abortion, contraception and adolescent sexual rights, is the department prepared to ensure that Canada will step up beyond the end of the funding regime with the $500 million that's needed over the next 10 years? Have you any sense of that?Department for Women and Gender EqualityMain estimates 2019-2020Reproductive healthWomenDanielleBélangerNancyGardiner//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1010)[English]I would appreciate that.In terms of the national perspective, the minister talked about young people being violated online and taken advantage of, not knowing the reality of bullying, and things like that. In regard to that, Canada accepted and received a recommendation from the UN in 2018—the universal periodic review—to take action and ensure equal access to comprehensive sexuality education throughout the country.That's a human right. It's a right under the Canadian charter and the Ontario Human Rights Code. Has the federal government looked at the fact that sexual health and reproductive rights are not being taught in jurisdictions across the country? Is this something that concerns you? I'm referring back to the minister's comment about young people and their rights to sexual health and reproductive rights.Department for Women and Gender EqualityMain estimates 2019-2020Reproductive healthSex educationWomenNancyGardinerLisaSmylie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1020)[English]I have a couple of more questions.KarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1020)[English]Thank you very much, Madam Chair.I have a couple of questions. There was some discussion relating to our study on the violence experienced by women in the military and at work in terms of sexual assault and harassment. To what degree you have worked with DND with regard to the recommendations of Madame Deschamps?One of our witnesses indicated that if DND were to pursue the recommendations of Madame Deschamps' report, it would be a very effective kind of approach and resolution to the issue. Are you familiar with the report? Has it come up in your discussions? Does DND seem to be working around that report?Canadian ForcesDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityDepartment of National DefenceExternal Review into Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Harassment in the Canadian Armed ForcesMain estimates 2019-2020Sexual abuse and exploitationWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonNancyGardiner//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1020)[English]Okay. Thank you.There was some discussion, too, about the event coming up in Vancouver in June. It's a conference called Women Deliver. We have heard there's a parallel conference called Feminists Deliver, and it's happening at the same time in response to concerns about a lack of funding for women's organizations to participate. Has the department ensured that all women's organizations can effectively participate in this conference, which Canada is privileged to host, which has been described as once in a very long time frame?Canadian ForcesDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityDepartment of National DefenceExternal Review into Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Harassment in the Canadian Armed ForcesMain estimates 2019-2020Sexual abuse and exploitationWomenNancyGardinerNancyGardiner//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1025)[English]Just very quickly, the minister indicated that funding is already in place for a future Daughters of the Vote.... Can we—NancyGardinerKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1025)[English]Okay.KarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1025)[English]It was connected to Daughters of the Vote. I was interested in how future funding will be secured and how the department will make sure that the young women who participate feel safe, have a full program and actually come out of it wanting to be parliamentarians.Daughters of the VoteDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityMain estimates 2019-2020WomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonNancyGardiner//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1030)[English]I have one quick question, and this has to do with our core concern with regard to the economic security of women. We know that women cannot organize their lives, particularly if they have a family, if they're alone raising a family.... Have you collaborated or does the department collaborate with other departments in regard to the national housing strategy? There are figures about how sometime in the future there will be houses—but we need houses now. Women are under-housed and they can't manage. Secondly, and also as important, is child care. The minister talked about 40,000 spaces, but we need far more. Are there plans in place to create those spaces? How will you ensure that they are affordable? The cost of $1,200 a month is not affordable for a family, and certainly not for a single mom trying to manage.Aboriginal peoplesCare for childrenDepartment for Women and Gender EqualityHousingMain estimates 2019-2020National Housing StrategyWomenNancyGardinerNancyGardiner//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (0920)[English] Thank you, Chair. Thank you, all, for your presence today. It's good to see you again.There are a number of pieces to this and my colleagues have raised a number of the issues I was going to raise. That's all to the good. I'm going to start drilling down a bit into some of the weeds here. We have problems with government-wide procurement, all the way from flying—as everybody follows the saga of military jets—down to hammers. Paragraph 5.62 says: We found that the RCMP did not have a plan to manage the acquisition of carbines, causing bottlenecks in distribution and backlogs in firearm recertification and maintenance. We also found that in the RCMP’s effort to expedite the rollout of the carbines, the RCMP and Public Services and Procurement Canada did not follow procurement rules. This matters.When I look over to page 13, paragraph 5.72 adds further insult to injury. Not only did the RCMP not follow the procedures properly, and that's including Public Services and Procurement Canada, but once again Treasury Board let us down on its challenge function, which is its duty to make sure that these things are double-checked. There was a falling down there.Specifically, under procurement, here's what troubled me the most: 5.71: Under procurement rules, the RCMP should have submitted these orders—This would be for, I believe, the carbines: —to Public Services and Procurement Canada as a single request. However, this request would have exceeded Public Services and Procurement Canada’s own purchase authority and therefore would have required approval from the Treasury Board. Instead, the RCMP split the order into three requests, which Public Services and Procurement Canada ordered under its own authority.What's the deal, Commissioner? This looks, for all intents and purposes, like an absolute, deliberate attempt to get around requirements at Treasury Board, notwithstanding that it didn't do its job either. What's going on here, Commissioner?Government contractsLong gunsReport 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootBrendaLucki//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]Yes, I do want to drill down a bit on this, because it's problematic.BrendaLuckiKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English] So this wasn't a get around?Government contractsLong gunsReport 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceDennisWattersDennisWatters//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]Okay, Auditor General, are you comfortable with the answers you've heard?Government contractsLong gunsReport 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceDennisWattersSylvainRicard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]Thank you.Do we have anyone here from Treasury Board, Chair?SylvainRicardKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]Maybe, in our deliberations, we could think about sending a letter to Treasury Board to ask them where they were on their challenge function because, again, that's the safety net for us in most of these policy procedures. If it's failing us at the departmental level, it gets caught at Treasury Board in their challenge function, and so it seems that this may have slipped.Commissioner, who, not an individual, but—Report 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]Okay, thanks.What department is responsible for the planning? I'm really surprised at the lack of planning. That's normally not RCMP failure. They're usually pretty good at doing lots of planning. It's between there and the ground where things get difficult, as in most cases. Who was responsible for this? Where did your organization fail? What have you done about beefing up the very planning that Monsieur Ricard has just spoken of?Government contractsReport 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Thank you, Chair. I want to underscore that we're talking about a lot of data, a lot of detail, and getting in the weeds and that, but let's not lose sight of the fact that the subject matter is about officer safety and public safety. When these things go wrong that are just paperwork for us right now....That's okay; it's just the House starting—KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Exactly. You notice they didn't rush to protect us. Voices: Oh, oh!Mr. David Christopherson: I just wanted to underscore that this is not a good report. I thank my colleague for raising that. The conclusion was that you did not provide all your officers with access to body armour, carbines and the recertification training required to respond to active shooters. We've been kind of quiet and subdued here, but that's because we aren't dealing with dead citizens. We're dealing with policies meant to prevent that, and the policies are not where they should be, so it is still serious.I want to go to page 8 again. It's been raised a couple of times and I noted it in paragraph 5.37. I had it down as sort of the good, the bad and the ugly. We found that part of the good is that the RCMP had met its target for the initial training of front-line officers on carbines. Congrats for that. That was the good. But 13% of those officers had not completed the annual recertification. We talked about that a bit and that was the bad. We also found that 13% of all officers who were required to carry pistols had not completed their annual pistol recertification, and that's the ugly part.Paragraph 5.42 underscores that every officer required to carry a pistol on duty must complete the pistol recertification every year. Now that's RCMP policy. Mr. Brennan, I heard you giving kind of a defence of the 13%. But that's your number. It's the RCMP that said this needs to be done once a year. It's not someone from outside saying you have to do this irresponsible and unmanageable thing. These are your own numbers. Now, back in 2005, you were at 23%, and 14 years later you're at 13%. You're going the right way, but you're still in double digits. What's the deal? Are you going to meet the darn standard or change it? Please don't keep coming back here failing to meet a standard that you set. Could I have your thoughts, please?Adult education and trainingFirearmsReport 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]I hear you. I'm trying to be fair-minded about it, but again, it's your number, your system. If you need to put in factors that make a more realistic number, that's fine, but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to create a measurement, consistently fail in that measurement, and then come up with excuses as to why. I'd rather see a number that's more accurate—maybe 7%—and would be easier to manage. I'm having a real difficulty when you set a standard and don't meet it and then come in and tell me why the number is not as effective as it looks on paper.Adult education and trainingLong gunsReport 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceBrianBrennanBrendaLucki//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English] Fair enough, Commissioner. I'm hearing what you're saying, and I'm accepting some of that. As you well know, I have a bit of background in policing. I understand the management side of it, too, and I know how incredibly difficult it is.That's why I'm perplexed by why you can insist on having a numbers system where you rate yourself, but you're not factoring in your own mitigating factors. If you don't factor them in, then you're creating a number that just causes confusion. On that 13%, I'm thinking, it's not horrible, but it's not good. It should 100%. That's what it's supposed to be.If there are some variables, put them into the formula so that the number you're giving to the public and reporting to Parliament is an accurate reflection that takes these things into account.I'm hearing you. I'm trying to be fair-minded and if what you're saying is true and that number is not as accurate because there are nuances, then find a way to factor in those nuances so that when we look at a number, it's a real number.Adult education and trainingLong gunsReport 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceBrendaLuckiBrendaLucki//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]Okay, I hear you.To me, this just reinforces the need for a police services board. You're raising the point: Should it be 75% or should it be 100%? That's what a police services board would look at and would talk about.We don't have that in our system. We didn't have it in Ontario. It needs to be fixed. It shouldn't just be one person, the solicitor general or Minister of Public Safety, who has all that responsibility for all this minutiae. There should be an accountability layer. I know the government is starting to bring that in, but it's a somewhat limited mandate from what I can see.To me, you're arguing against yourself, not me. I'm just trying to find out what the number is. I look at the number the AG gives me, and then you say that number isn't really that number because there is this, this and this, and yet you're the one who created the number and the formula to determine whether you achieve that number or not.That's all. It just leaves me a little confused. I've taken up most of my time on that. I hope I get another round, because I have one last area I'd like to pursue, if I could.Report 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceBrendaLuckiAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]Thank you very much to my vice-chair colleague. I appreciate that.On data, your policy on page 10 in paragraph 5.53 says:RCMP policy states that pistols and carbines must be sent to the armoury for preventive maintenance every three years or after every 5,000 rounds fired, whichever comes first.Then it turns out that you don't keep track of how many rounds are fired on each firearm. So what's the deal? Why do you maintain a policy that says, either this threshold or that threshold, but we only measure one threshold anyway? Why do you have a policy like that?FirearmsReport 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootBrendaLucki//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]I should probably know this, but I confess I don't. Is there a deadline in your action plan to have that done?FirearmsReport 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceDennisWattersDennisWatters//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1005)[English]Just to reinforce—and I'll end here—the chair's message about data and data collection, it's also making sure we interpret it properly. When we see policy, especially for the RCMP.... You have to cut a little slack for some outfits that just don't have the means, but you do, so when we see some of the lack of planning and redundancy in policies like this.... I'm glad to hear that it's being caught, but I'm somewhat troubled that something like that would still be there at this stage and that it took the Auditor General's report to flush it out. Luckily we have a system that does that, but to reinforce this—and I hope the next Parliament continues to make this a priority—we've been doing this for a number of decades now, collecting information. As Mr. Ferguson used to say, we've become very good at collecting information; we're just not very good at using it. That's why we're continuously pushing on this. It doesn't generate headlines. It's not very sexy politically, but it is the key and cornerstone to proper governance and management.On balance, again, as a citizen, especially as I take leave of the public stage, I do offer again, as we always do, our thanks for the work of the police officers and everybody in the RCMP.But this is not a good report, and you can do better. I know that going forward you will do better for Canadians. Hopefully, when there's a follow-up report in a few years, it will look a little better than the one that we're following up from 2005.Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Auditor General.Thank you, Chair.Report 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceDennisWattersKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1015)[English]Point of privilege.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1015)[English]Thanks, Chair.This is a strong committee and we have a lot of authority to put people through some pretty tough times. We ask our staff that if we're wronging anyone, to let us know. Earlier I put a lot of blame on Treasury Board not doing their challenge function. Dillan, our analyst, was good enough to point out to me that in this particular case, because of the process that was followed, it wouldn't have been in front of Treasury Board. So there was no Treasury Board challenge function to be had. So my criticizing it was completely wrong and I withdraw that and apologize. That was incorrect. They did nothing wrong in this regard. I wanted to correct the record. Thank you.Report 5, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, of the Spring 2019 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted PoliceKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP): (1555)[English]I'm going to continue on that theme, but switch over to questioning Mr. Williams and Ms. Hassan.With regard to the medical discharge of someone like Mr. Rea, what is recognized by the Treasury Board and in the collective agreements that we have? What does the military recognize as a medical discharge, and how does that equate to employee evaluations? Are there any understandings or memorandums of understanding that you have with the military for those skills and abilities, and also a medical discharge?Border officialsCollective agreementsEducation and trainingLabour unionsMedical discharge from armed ForcesPublic Service and public servantsRecord of serviceStaffingVeteransTomLukiwskiMoose Jaw—Lake Centre—LaniganBaxterWilliams//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1555)[English] You've reached—Sorry, go ahead.BaxterWilliamsSandraHassan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1555)[English]Doesn't it seem a little incomplete? Has there been thought about that, though, in terms of reciprocity, or at least some type of parallel? Has there been work done? If you're recognizing the time, then you're recognizing that there's latent ownership and value there. The mere fact that they have a medical condition related to their experience in employment in one capacity or another under the Government of Canada.... I guess this comes from my background. Before here, I was an employment specialist on behalf of persons with disabilities in the workplace.What has been done to assume some sense of co-operation, of understanding that there might be some medical issues, or a medical discharge, but it's done through a formula and it's done through a process? How does that apply to our negotiating of other agreements, especially when you're now actually considering some type of recognition of time in service?Border officialsCollective agreementsLabour unionsPublic Service and public servantsRecord of serviceStaffingVeteransSandraHassanSandraHassan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1600)[English]Mr. Gay, because of that hole, then, you and your members are left with coming up on the fly for current agreements in how to deal with that lack of a full policy that has evolved, for one reason or another. It's not a fault; it's where we're at right now. That's why your members are doing a plebiscite, because there's a gap between the two in terms of public policy. Is that not correct?Border officialsCollective agreementsLabour unionsPublic Service and public servantsRecord of serviceStaffingVeteransSandraHassanMorganGay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1600)[English]No, and I don't know how you can, because they're not even part of your responsibility yet. You can't just bargain on behalf of employees five or 10 years in the future.Border officialsCollective agreementsLabour unionsPublic Service and public servantsRecord of serviceStaffingVeteransMorganGayTomLukiwskiMoose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1625)[English]To Mr. Williams and Ms. Hassan, one of the reasons I was asking about the correlation before the medical discharge is that PTSD and other issues are in fact quite often linked to mental health. I know you have a memorandum of understanding on mental health. How is that going with enhancing or bridging that?That would seem to be a mechanism that we have in place right now that actually helps in this matter.What is in place with our memorandum of understanding on mental health? How are we looking to enhance that? That would be a natural bridge to some of the problems. We know from our previous discussion that we have a gap in the medical discharge information coming from our good veterans, like we have with Mr. Rea here.How are we looking to augment our memorandum of understanding on mental health, to use it perhaps as a jumping point to make a more formal improvement in the connection between medical issues and discharges from one department, being that of Mr. Rea's, to that of the public service?Leave from workMedical discharge from armed ForcesMental healthPublic Service and public servantsStaffingVeteransTomLukiwskiMoose Jaw—Lake Centre—LaniganSandraHassan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1630)[English]Since the memorandum of understanding, would you say that you've taken a step forward in improving the issue of mental health?Leave from workMedical discharge from armed ForcesMental healthPublic Service and public servantsStaffingVeteransSandraHassanSandraHassan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1630)[English]In this agreement, are you looking to enhance that? Is that the goal here?Again, we have a program here with a discharge. I want to see if there's consistency in that. There's been a lot of work on PTSD. There's been a lot of work in the Canadian public on how to deal with mental health as an issue. It seems to me that we have a memorandum of understanding, but when will we actually get a full understanding on it?When will we actually have it implemented and also an obligation on the employer for mental health? When is that something that's going to be something that's done?Leave from workMedical discharge from armed ForcesMental healthPublic Service and public servantsStaffingVeteransSandraHassanSandraHassan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1630)[English]I want to give the last word to you, Mr. Rea, for this. I want to thank you.I think it needs to be more than an understanding. In a country like Canada, there should be more than just an understanding at this point. Mr. Rea, I have about a minute left. I don't know if you have qualifications to fix a payroll system, because we desperately need your help on payroll.But if you have some advice to the committee, please give it, because it's the last minute. I invite you to sharpen us in the last moment.Thank you, Mr. Chair, for your indulgence.Computer systemsIncome and wagesPhoenixPublic Service and public servantsStaffingVeteransSandraHassanTomLukiwskiMoose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1550)[English]Thank you very much for being here.Picking up from where my colleague, Mr. Kent, left off in respect of the coaching you're doing, what about the solicitor-client privilege issue with the Department of Justice, section 13? Is that an area you're looking at trying to review, reinforce, or repair? Is that an area you see needs attention, or is that just...?Main estimates 2019-2020Privacy of personal recordsSolicitor-client privilegeBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesCarolineMaynard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1550)[English] Okay. Thank you very much for that.Going back to the issue of the backlog and the need for stable, predictable funding to be able to put forward a game plan, there was some initiative that was taken with the online pilot project. Maybe you can tell us a little about some of the opportunities there or what you learned from it, and the financial impact that it has on your resources.Main estimates 2019-2020Privacy of personal recordsCarolineMaynardCarolineMaynard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1555)[English]Are there recommendations with that? How are you envisioning the financial impact? Should new dollars be invested in that area? Another area would be the security aspect and the technical security online. What are you doing moving forward?InvestmentMain estimates 2019-2020Privacy of personal recordsCarolineMaynardCarolineMaynard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1620)[English]Thank you very much.I'm interested in following up on some of the questions raised by Mr. Baylis.My first question, though, is the following: We have repeat offenders, the same organizations year in, year out, do we not? The RCMP—I've always been on this beat and it's always been RCMP, CRA and Canada Border Services. It's a question of either they don't have the funds or they decide not to put the funds in because they have other priorities. To me, if we have a quasi-constitutional right to access to information and you find the same laggards, year in and year out, the problem is not a lack of funds. It's a corporate problem within their structure.What tools do you have to make them comply?Access to informationMain estimates 2019-2020Privacy of personal recordsBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesCarolineMaynard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English]When we make requests, sometimes the department comes back and says, “Oh my God, it will be so many thousands of pages. What about focusing it and limiting it?” Then maybe instead of asking for a two-year period or a three-year period, we ask for a two-week period where we're looking.To me, that's reasonable. That's a department that's trying, within its means, to respond.Access to informationMain estimates 2019-2020Privacy of personal recordsCarolineMaynardCharlieAngusTimmins—James Bay//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: My concern is that we've just had a situation with Facebook telling the regulator, “Thanks, but we're just going to carry on.” I dealt, through your office, with the justice department for six years to try to get the political decisions around the decision to target the St. Anne's residential school survivors, and we were given delay after delay and a threat to go to court. We ended up with 3,000 pages of blacked-out emails. That tells me that the justice department doesn't believe they actually have to comply. Do you have the tools to make them comply? In a case that, to me, is so egregious, I'm sure out of 3,000 pages there had to be at least one email that wasn't solicitor-client privilege. We hear that with SNC-Lavalin. We hear it whenever there's a government scandal. They just throw in solicitor-client privilege and then they can black everything out.How, then, do we actually hold the justice department of Canada to that—that they have to respect the quasi-constitutional rights of citizens as well?Access to informationElectronic mailMain estimates 2019-2020Privacy of personal recordsCharlieAngusTimmins—James BayCarolineMaynard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English]The ability, then, to make an independent report based on a case and the ability to issue order-making powers are fundamental for you to ensure the rights of citizens to get access to information.Access to informationMain estimates 2019-2020Privacy of personal recordsCarolineMaynardCarolineMaynard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English]Thank you.CarolineMaynardBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1345)[English]Thank you very much, Madam Chair.It's always very difficult during Iran Accountability Week. We hear the emotion, we get frustrated and we have the emotion, but we do know.... I'm a member of Parliament who's been here for one term. I've been like you; I've been someone who's been following this issue, as a Canadian, following what I think the mistakes are in our foreign policy and how we should be doing something. I do understand how even words are construed; I know. This is a long game, as we sometimes call it. There does have to be patience in terms of diplomacy.You inspire us with your testimony. I've been to other groups of women who do the White Wednesdays, and that courage inspires me. I just want to say thank you for that kind of inspiration and energy, which you give all of us for all of our work in international human rights. We've had other people come before this committee, even General Roméo Dallaire, with two fists on the desk—do something about the Rohingya; do something—because he knows; he's lived it. It gets at our frustration and our emotions, but with that, we have to take this logic and say, “What is the government's role here? How do we use Canada's soft power?” This committee has to discuss that.Mr. Hashemi, in the time I have left, I'm wondering if you can talk to us a little bit about that kind of frustration in how we're trying to help advance this capacity of Iran as brothers and sisters in the global world, and what Canada's role is. You recently experienced a vicious smear that went against another person I had asked to testify. There are some very convoluted issues when we talk about threats and when we talk about lobbies and proxies. Would you talk a little bit about what is happening to you? Maybe discuss the MEK and their mouthpiece organization in Canada and how we should be cognizant of these things as we are taking our government role further.You can use the rest of my time. My preamble probably took us to three minutes. You can take three minutes.Civil and human rightsInternational relationsIranAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanNaderHashemi//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1150)[English]That's great. Thank you, Chair.Thank you all for being here.It's interesting, quite fascinating, to watch this evolve.To me it looks like one of the tricky things going forward is the possibility of a parallel chamber. The good news is that this would enhance our democracy; we've already had an initial study. We haven't made it yet, but my hunch is that there'll be a positive recommendation going to the House that we continue to look at this.The downside is that it's not a decision that's going to be made right away, yet it may be an important ingredient because of the space. It has to be dedicated; it'll just be for that purpose if it's the way we're currently looking at it. I'd appreciate your thoughts on how we would move forward with that, given the various timings here. Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectLarryBagnellHon.YukonMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1150)[English]Yes, I get that. I'm looking for a little more.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]No, not at all.MichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]My curiosity is around trying to make the timing work so we can make an informed decision. Parliament is not known for rushing, to start with. You, of course, are on a deadline to make these decisions. Give me your thinking on how that's going to unfold.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]It could be daily.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]Okay, that's fine.MichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]I have no doubt.It sounds as if you've taken the election period into account. I want to be very clear: We leave here near the end of June.This Parliament's not coming back. It'll be the next Parliament. That could be any time in November or later, and then, once Parliament sits, it sometimes takes weeks on end to get committees running—although this one gets set up first. It wouldn't be unreasonable for that to tip us into the new year before committees are on the ground and functioning.Have you taken that into account, that you're not going to have access to MPs for a period of months, starting Canada Day, recognizing that you've got decisions that have to be made?Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English] Here would be my concern if I were returning, which I am not. When we come back and start to ask questions, we might hear, “Oh, sorry, we had to make that decision on a deadline and you weren't around.” We don't want to hear that. I need an assurance from you so that the 43rd Parliament doesn't get the answer: “Well, we had to make that decision because you weren't here.”Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]Okay.MichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]No, and that's a perfect segue to my last question. Would this committee be able to get both a list of key decisions that have to be made, and also the timing of those decisions and the process? Could we get those from you?We're getting closer to understanding this, but it's still a little bit nebulous about who's making the final call. BOIE represents us...almost. Remember, they're under the string of command that starts with the leaders. We are not. When we sit in these committees, we are each sovereign. Therefore, I, as a member of this committee, would like to see what that critical path is, with all the decisions listed that have to be made, what the timing is for those decisions and what the current process is, if it's different from a general process of decision-making and specific to any of the particulars. Can we get that?Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]I appreciate that. You did hear us, and you're responding as though you have it posted above all of your desks. That's excellent. We appreciate that.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]Can I just leave a thought, and then I'm done?Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English] I don't think for one minute that you're going to try to run out in front of us. In fact, in this current system, that's the last thing you want. If anything, you're probably going to be hounding us to make sure. There's lots of CYA here; I get it. That's good. That's what we want.Here's the point, though: There are some decisions that are mechanical, with one following another, but again, I just want to be clear that there aren't going to be any such decisions that, because they have to be made, negate the ability of Parliament to make a further decision. This might throw things off a bit, but I just want it to be crystal-clear in the committee evidence that there won't be any decisions that preclude this committee's ability to have input and their opinion, both by virtue of optional things and things that have to be done from a construction point of view. I just want that reassurance.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]Good.MichelPatriceLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]Nicely put.David de BurghGrahamLaurentides—LabelleDavid de BurghGrahamLaurentides—Labelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1215)[English]Mr. Chair, if I might, it was suggested that one of the things that's left flexible and yet to be decided is the size.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1215)[English]How can they start digging if they don't know what size it will be?I'm sorry, but you said that one of the areas where there was still some room for input and flexibility was the size of the welcome centre. How can you start digging it if you don't know how big you're going to make it?Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectParliament Hill Visitor Welcome CentreLarryBagnellHon.YukonRobWright//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1220)[English]I'm sorry, I still didn't hear an answer. If there's still some flexibility about the size of it, how can you start digging the hole? That's all. How can you know how big a hole to dig until you know the size? You're telling me the size is flexible, yet we're going ahead and starting digging. I just need some help understanding this.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectRobWrightJenniferGarrett//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1220)[English]Yes. JenniferGarrettJenniferGarrett//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1220)[English]We're getting....Go ahead.JenniferGarrettJenniferGarrett//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1220)[English]Let me just try to repeat that in my words and see if I've got it. JenniferGarrettJenniferGarrett//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1220)[English]Yes, I'll be as quick as I can, but I need to be clear.There's a minimum size and you're going to dig that anyway, and once you're in there you have the options of making it bigger or not, depending on what decisions are made about committee rooms and where they're placed. It sounds like you can start digging without knowing the final size, because you do know a minimum size and it requires the same kind of start. Am I starting to get it?Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectLarryBagnellHon.YukonJenniferGarrett//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1220)[English]Thanks.JenniferGarrettLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1235)[English]I have a quick question that I promised my daughter I would ask. I was going to do it quietly, but I'll do it publicly. I think I know the answer, but I'm going to ask anyway. Are there any plans to reintroduce the cat world that existed prior to West Block's being closed? I confess that walking over to see the cats was her favourite part of coming to Parliament Hill. It's a cool tradition.CatsCentre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectLarryBagnellHon.YukonRobWright//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1235)[English]There you go. See?RobWrightRobWright//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1235)[English]I didn't think so, but it would be really cool if there were. I leave that out there. Maybe there are some creative folks.I have two things, one point and then a question.The point is that I really appreciated knowing for the first time how you're looking at the parliamentary precinct differently. Right now, truly, we have a frankenparl. In the decade and a half that I've been on the Hill, we added a committee space here and grabbed offices there. It's been pulled together with duct tape and bale wire. It doesn't make any sense when you talk about flow. So I'm pleased to hear that we're going to get away from that nonsense, take a step back and look at all the facilities as they all start to blend, and the idea that we may still have to be off the Hill, whereas we weren't in the past. When I first got here, everything was nice and neat on the Hill. So I'm pleased about that. I share some of the concerns that Mr. Reid has raised about the visitor welcome centre. When you're providing the committee with the list of decisions and the time frames, I assume this will be a part of that; that a detailed subset will speak to exactly where we are with the visitor welcome centre in the decisions that are made and are not being revisited versus those that, going forward, have not been made, and what your thinking is on when and how those decisions are going to made. I would ask that you include that in the report you provide to us.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectParliament Hill Visitor Welcome CentreRobWrightMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English] You keep saying “noted”. I assume that “noted” is your word for yes.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectMichelPatriceMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English]That's very good. Thank you.MichelPatriceLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1255)[English]How much time does that give me, Chair? I can't see the face of the clock. LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1255)[English]That's what I thought. I'll take this opportunity. I appreciate that. I only asked for the floor so that I can formally move my motion: “That the Committee study the following proposed changes to the Standing Orders and report back to the House”. The attached documents with the details of those changes have been circulated in both languages. I don't know how much discussion we require here. I'm sort of going on the assumption that there's enough support in the back benches to at least explore, and give some air and time to, a lot of work that's been done by a lot of colleagues. I'm a little bit part of it, mostly just contributing thoughts as opposed to being a key player. My role is just that I'm on this committee, so I'm the one moving the motion. I'd be looking for, either now or quietly afterwards, or at the beginning of the next meeting, but in some way, whether the study is going to become an issue or whether we can quickly deal with this motion and get on with having the delegation come in and start rolling up our sleeves and going through some of the proposals. That's what I would be seeking going forward. The answer to that will dictate how quickly we can dispose of this motion and get on with the work, or if we're going to have to make a bit of a cause célèbre out of it, which I'm hoping is not the case. Committee businessLarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1300)[English]If I can win, I'll take a vote now.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (0910)[English]Thank you, Chair.Auditor General, thank you for your presence again. We appreciate it.I'd like to talk about this budget business. This is incredibly troubling. Colleagues will know that traditionally, in the 15 years and five Parliaments that I've been here, at the end of this meeting, the one question the chair always asks of the Auditor General in closing, no matter what has transpired in between, is “Do you have sufficient funding to carry out your mandate?” The answer inevitably is yes. That wasn't always an easy road to get through. I stand to be corrected, but I do not recall ever having the Auditor General come in and say, “I do not have sufficient funding to do the work I would normally do; therefore, I have to do less.” That's what I'm reading here. I'm going to quote it again:Although the 2018 federal budget provided us with some new ongoing funding, we did not get any of the new funding that we requested in the 2019 federal budget. We are continuing to explore our options to ensure we are properly funded and accountable only to Parliament. In the near term, we have no choice but to decrease the number of performance audits that we conduct.I want to be crystal clear. You put in a request for more funding. It was denied, and as a result, you're going to do fewer audits. Is that correct?Audits and auditorsGovernment expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralReports on Plans and Priorities, Main Estimates, 2019-2020KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootSylvainRicard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0915)[English] The performance audits are meat and potatoes. That's what we do and that's the main accountability of government. This is the premier oversight committee of Parliament. The one thing in my opinion that we cannot stand, and I don't care who the government is, is cutting the Auditor General. That's what autocrats do when they want to deny accountability. I'm hoping that we take this very seriously and that whatever action we decide is by majority, unanimous vote, to send a clear signal that regardless of whether we're a government member or not, when we walk into this room we are different and we are oversight. We have a responsibility to our colleagues and, to me, this is about as big as it gets.This is right in there with the department saying, “No, we're not giving you information. We refuse.” Oh yeah? Well, we have legislation that says you can't refuse, but the funding is our responsibility collectively and this is not acceptable. I would hope that we would begin turning the wheels necessary to undo this, because just to be political for a moment, this government already has a bit of a deficiency on the democratic front. Here is yet one more knock against the professed belief and adherence to democracy and democratic values.Chair, I am beside myself. This is not acceptable. I'm not going to raise any other issues because to me.... I have a couple of questions, but they pale in comparison to the question of whether.... Some of us do this work internationally. You've travelled internationally. Vice-Chair Mendès has travelled internationally. This is the kind of stuff where we say, ”Holy smokes, are you kidding me? Is that how your accountability system works?” Then we're so thankful that we live in Canada where that kind of thing doesn't happen. Well, this is exactly that and it's not acceptable that any government cuts the money of the Auditor General, which is the main accountability of government in this Parliament, period, full stop. I can only hope, Chair, that colleagues are in agreement and that we agree on a course of action, whatever that is, to send a signal to the government that this is not acceptable from an oversight point of view. I'm good.Audits and auditorsGovernment expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralReports on Plans and Priorities, Main Estimates, 2019-2020AndrewHayesKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0945)[English]One of the benefits of being around for a long time and the supreme benefit of not running again is that you have absolutely no need for and no interest in headlines. I'm thus not going to make any further comments. I've had some consultation with my fellow vice-chair and the chair of the committee, as well as with the representatives of the official opposition caucus, and there seems to be some interest in buying ourselves some time. If possible, it would be in all our interests to avoid this train wreck. I personally will make it my mission in life between now and when I leave in the next few months to scream from the mountain tops that the government is stifling accountability, and this would be the beginning. Chair, at a time you think is appropriate, I'd like to move a motion to table the discussion and the vote on the estimates for a week to give the government members an opportunity—and I don't want to put words in their mouths, but as I understand it, an opportunity—to go back to their government and ask some of the questions that have been raised here and satisfy themselves that it's the right thing, or help us find a way to get this amended so that we can get back to where we need to be. I'm just going to stand down any further comments, and when you feel it's appropriate, I'd like to be given the floor to move a motion to table the vote on the estimates for a week.Audits and auditorsGovernment expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralReports on Plans and Priorities, Main Estimates, 2019-2020KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1015)[English]It's two weeks.Audits and auditorsGovernment expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralReports on Plans and Priorities, Main Estimates, 2019-2020KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1015)[English] I'm sorry to interrupt you, Chair. I apologize but we have a little time. I just want to make one point. Really, it's quite salient, and it is that the examples Ms. Mendès was mentioning.... That is how it happened, but I was here and the difference is that the Auditor General, when asked, “Can you still properly carry out your work?”, said yes. When we cut back from three reports a year to two.... In both those examples, I was really concerned—obviously, from the fact that I'm making the same point today—that things are being cut. What's going on? This is not good. But the AG was saying, “We can manage it. It would be difficult, but we can do it, as part of our effort, back in the day, to make our contribution.” To me, the distinction, and the reason I'm the way I am, is that in the past, being good corporate players and being team players and part of the government, the AG absorbed what they could, and that's when the funding went down. That, however, was them saying they could still do this and do their job. It's in the Hansards. I asked the pointed questions. Now when we ask those questions, the answer is, no, we can't do all the audits; all the audits should be done, but we have no choice but to reduce audits. This business of “least important” is just a bad choice of descriptors, because we're talking about things, as you pointed out, such as cybersecurity. I just want to point out the difference. Whereas in the past when there was reduction, the AG testified to us that they could manage it within their budget and it wouldn't affect the work that they wanted to do and felt needed to be done. The difference now is that the AG is being very clear that they are being impeded in carrying out what they want to do and feel needs to be done, because their funding requests were denied. That is new. Audits and auditorsGovernment expendituresMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Auditor GeneralReports on Plans and Priorities, Main Estimates, 2019-2020KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (0905)[English]Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Paula.This is very disturbing. What you are telling us goes beyond anything that any of us, I think, could ever imagine.I wonder about your experience. You said there was a sign or placard that said, “If you can't take our harassment, you are a weak woman.”Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceSexual abuse and exploitationSexual minoritiesWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0905)[English]Was that common?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceSexual abuse and exploitationSexual minoritiesWomenPaulaMacDonaldPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0910)[English]Thank you. I think the more evidence we have, the better prepared we are to write a report.It sounds like a hazing.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceSexual abuse and exploitationSexual minoritiesWomenPaulaMacDonaldPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0910)[English]Was there a feeling that the military or those who had power over you didn't want women and didn't want LBGTQ individuals? Was it that they simply wanted them gone and would do whatever it took to get rid of them?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceSexual abuse and exploitationSexual minoritiesWomenPaulaMacDonaldPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0910)[English]In terms of victim support, the Auditor General wrote a report about the situation in the military, and he was very critical. He said that the Canadian Armed Forces should make victim support a top priority. I take it that you didn't have any sense of there being support.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceSexual abuse and exploitationWomenPaulaMacDonaldPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0910)[English]You were on a treadmill. You kept going around and around.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceOperation HonourSexual abuse and exploitationWomenPaulaMacDonaldPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0910)[English]Thank you.You talked about the personal attack, and you said that when they couldn't deal with you, you were declared medically unfit.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceExternal Review into Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Harassment in the Canadian Armed ForcesSexual abuse and exploitationWomenPaulaMacDonaldPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0945)[English]You touched very eloquently on one of the things that we've heard in Veterans Affairs, and that is that when you join, your personality and your resilience are destroyed to make you somehow tougher. It means that in coming back to civil society, there is this inability to relate to the norms of society.The decision or the suggestion at that time—and this would have been at the same time that Madam Deschamps was writing—was to take a different approach. You have outlined that approach succinctly and I think very well.I do have one question. You referenced “It's Just 700”, and there may be folks here who are not familiar with that organization, so I wonder if you could describe it and explain what “It's Just 700” does.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceIt's Just 700Peer supportSexual abuse and exploitationWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0945)[English]Yes, and it's interesting. I have something written by Marie-Claude here, and she talks about being sexually assaulted, asking for help and being directed to the Sexual Misconduct Response Centre phone line, but it had been discontinued. Has that resource been put in place again? Is it effective?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceIt's Just 700Peer supportSexual abuse and exploitationWomenPaulaMacDonaldPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0950)[English]Again, thank you, Paula. Thank you so much.This whole issue of your having to come up with the financial resources to pay for your own lawyer is very, very troubling, and I wonder about the impact on your financial security as a result.What do you hope will come of the hearing at the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal?Canadian ForcesCanadian Human Rights TribunalDepartment of National DefenceSexual abuse and exploitationWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonPaulaMacDonald//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP): (1005)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.Thank you, Mr. Amos, for being here and congratulations on your bill being passed in the House. It's a motion, really. There's a big difference between a bill and a motion, and I've passed both, but it's good that it's a subject that continues to rise.You're aware that the committee had an extensive review on this. What was missing out of the committee's report that you'd like to have on another review? What specifically did we miss out or not adequately cover in our report?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeWilliamAmosPontiac//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English]Is there any other part, other than just the cellular, in the report? Did you agree with all the recommendations of the report? I don't have time to go through them, but is that something I'm assuming is correct? Is there anything else you thought was missing that we could enhance?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryWilliamAmosPontiacWilliamAmosPontiac//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English] I don't disagree with that.I'm going to move on to another quick question, if I can. You mentioned the tornadoes and their affect on Ottawa. What were the failings of the cellular service at that time?CellphonesM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryWilliamAmosPontiacWilliamAmosPontiac//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English]What was missing though?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryWilliamAmosPontiacWilliamAmosPontiac//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English]Are you aware that this committee turned down an opportunity to study that—by your members from the Liberal Party? Why do you think this was not an appropriate body then to study it, if you agreed or disagreed with them?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryWilliamAmosPontiacWilliamAmosPontiac//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English]It's not about motion 208. It's about whether or not we actually had an opportunity to study the situation in Ottawa with the tornadoes, which was was turned down by this committee. There was a particular motion moved and it was a study. Do you think that should be studied here at this committee, or why do you think that was turned down?M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryWilliamAmosPontiacWilliamAmosPontiac//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English]It's a fair question. It was raised by the witness here.Committee businessM-208Private Members' MotionsTelecommunications and telecommunications industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English]No, we weren't.Committee businessM-208Private Members' MotionsTelecommunications and telecommunications industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English]It's a part of your caucus. I expect those conversations might have taken place, given the fact that the member raised it as a serious issue as part of something here. I think that would have brought some light to it.Committee businessM-208Private Members' MotionsTelecommunications and telecommunications industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeWilliamAmosPontiac//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1010)[English]Those are my questions.Thank you, Mr. Chair.WilliamAmosPontiacDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple Ridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1040)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.I'm going to follow up on that. It's a good point. You mentioned the notice directives by Maxime Bernier and then subsequently Navdeep Bains, and the differences between the two. If you had a directive right now, where would you focus that in terms of the CRTC, to direct the companies? I believe that the system is broken, but if a directive is what we're at right now, what would you do with that?Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications CommissionM-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryDanRuimyPitt Meadows—Maple RidgeWilliamAmosPontiac//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1040)[English]What would your directive be? What would be helpful? I guess that's what I'm looking for. Is there a special carve-out that you're looking for that the CRTC should really zero in on right away? You could send them that message now. That's what I'm trying to provide the opportunity for.M-208Private Members' MotionsRural communitiesTelecommunications and telecommunications industryWilliamAmosPontiacWilliamAmosPontiac//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1005)[English] Thank you, Chair. I thank our Auditor General and his staff for being here again.The thing that jarred me the most going through these reports, and it's just personal experience, was your overall message on the RCMP where you state on page 2, “Overall, we found that not all RCMP officers had access to the equipment they needed to respond to an active shooter situation.”It struck me for three different reasons. One is just as a citizen. Particularly when we link this to Mr. Arya's point, normally the issue in these cases is that the money and the equipment are not there, and that's the source of the problem. In this case, we were well past that. The funding had been issued, the equipment had been purchased, and it was now just a matter of distribution and making sure it was available to the right people at the right time. That is solely management. As a citizen, it just jars me that a world-class national police service like the RCMP, given the funds and the equipment they need from Parliament, failed to manage them in a way that kept our officers and public as safe as they could be.Then it hit me because of my own experience as a former solicitor general in Ontario responsible for some of these things and having a little better understanding of how policing works than the average person. It jarred me.Last, as with other colleagues, some of whom were here, I've been in an active shooter situation where I was one of the targets right here in Centre Block. For those three life experience reasons, when I read that, it really jarred me.I know we're going to call them in, and I know we're going to hold them to account on this one, and they're pretty good at keeping an eye on these things. I suspect, and I would hope, that they're going to have ironclad answers and procedures, more than what we find in here. You can tell that they spent time wording some of this stuff. I've been there; I get it, but we need to hear satisfactory answers that commit to safety.The last thing I want to say on this is that it's important that the Canada Labour Code is referenced here, because part of it references the right for RCMP officers to have as safe a workplace as they can, notwithstanding that they're in one of the most dangerous workplaces you can be in.It was under the Occupational Health and Safety Act in Ontario and the fact that the responsibility for police officers under that act was not being met, that I, as the solicitor general, authorized police in Ontario, OPP and municipal, to move from a revolver to a semi-automatic. It was all based on the health and safety of the officers. I've got to tell you, this one really jumped out at me. I don't really have a question per se, but I'll give you the opportunity, Auditor General, to either agree with my remarks or, if you think I've been over the top, I'm willing to hear that. I'd like your thoughts on both your findings and my comments about your findings.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Government advertisingKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootSylvainRicard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English] Very good. Thank you. We'll be following that one up, big time.I'd like to move now, because we're running out of runway in terms of Parliament, and I'm not sure how many hearings we're going to get in before Parliament not only rises but very soon dissolves. I'd like to raise one issue that may not get some further attention beyond this, and it is your report on the “Oversight of Government of Canada Advertising”. It's not as serious as the issue we just talked about, but looking at the overall political situation, this is always a rub.I've been around long enough in elected office to remember when this was just an idea thrown out a few decades ago, and now we've got to the point where we've got actual policies and legislation that speaks to government not using taxpayers' money to advance its partisan interests. Your message on page 3, paragraph 4.15 is:Overall, in our view, the Government of Canada’s oversight of advertising was not sufficiently robust to ensure that the Government of Canada was meeting its commitment that public funds were not...spent on partisan advertising.Could you just tease that one out for us a little more, please, Auditor General, in terms of your findings?8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Government advertisingSylvainRicardSylvainRicard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]I am assuming there should have been. That material should have been there.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Government advertisingSylvainRicardSylvainRicard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1010)[English]Very good. Thank you.SylvainRicardKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1040)[English]Thanks, Chair. I'll try to do this quickly.I just want to touch on a couple of themes that are running through these reports and some ones that we've seen in the recent past. I'll start with the special examination on Marine Atlantic. Again, in your overall message in paragraph 14, Auditor General, you state that:Overall, we found that Marine Atlantic Inc. had good practices in place to oversee the running of the Corporation and to manage its operations.It's hard for us to ask for much more than that.The next paragraph says:Nonetheless, we were concerned that the Corporation was not able to make long-term strategic decisions because of circumstances outside its control—specifically, delays by the government in approving the Corporation’s full five-year corporate plans. We reported this issue in our 2009 special examination, and we found it to be a significant deficiency in the current audit.That's the government, and it's not necessarily this one per se. It's previous governments too. I've fessed up that I saw the same problems bottlenecked at the provincial level where decisions at the centre—around the premier or the prime minister—are holding up major decisions, and so they're not able to do the job that they want to do for Canadians because the senior government that gave them the mandate and the funding to do it didn't give them the approvals they need and didn't give them the people on the board. I'm running out of time.Canada Post—it takes so many hits. It needs to be said. This is the Auditor General:Overall, during the period covered by this audit, we found that the Canada Post Corporation had in place good practices to oversee the running of the Corporation and to manage its operations.It's been a while since it's had that kind of good news, but there you are, and fairness dictates that it be put there. However, the AG goes on:We were concerned that circumstances outside the Corporation’s control limited its ability to make long-term strategic decisions. The circumstances included delays in several areas that were within the government’s control: appointing new members to the Corporation’s Board of Directors, along with a new President and Chief Executive Officer; approving the Corporation’s annual corporate plans...Does that sound familiar? That's just from here. There's one more here—8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Canada Post CorporationCrown corporationsMarine Atlantic Inc.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1045)[English]—that is an example, and I can't go into that because I've run out of time, but the point is we have a huge problem with decisions being bottlenecked at the PMO level, at the government approval level, and something has to be done, and it's not just one party. This is a systemic problem that can be fixed. We just need to make sure they have the political will.Thank you, Chair.8560-421-64-10 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the House of Commons (Spring 2019)Canada Post CorporationCrown corporationsMarine Atlantic Inc.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (1635)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. First, in relation to Bill S-238, I've been advised that in order for the clause-by-clause to be held on May 27, I need to put forward this motion:That the proposed amendments to Bill S-238 be submitted to the Clerk of the Committee in both official languages by noon on Wednesday, May 22, 2019, at the latest.Committee businessMotionsS-238, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (importation and exportation of shark fins)SharkKenMcDonaldAvalonKenMcDonaldAvalon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1635)[English]Yes, Mr. Chair. I will certainly change it to a notice of motion.Committee businessNotice of motionS-238, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (importation and exportation of shark fins)SharkKenMcDonaldAvalonKenMcDonaldAvalon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1640)[English]Thank you very much. I do not pretend to be expert at all in terms of DFO's work in invasive species, but a colleague of mine some years ago was doing quite a lot of research for the University of Western Ontario. It was in regard to Asian carp. Apparently, from what I hear today, that research was effective. It paid off in terms of addressing the issue and prevention. Of course, prevention is far more effective than remediation. What kind of research is being funded, if any, by DFO in collaboration with universities or other entities at this point? How do you see that research proving effective?Invasive speciesScientific research and scientistsKenMcDonaldAvalonSimonNadeau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1640)[English]Obviously, there are lessons learned in terms of what's going on in the Great Lakes. I'm from the Great Lakes region and I'm very concerned about that. We've heard from others that there are other areas that are at risk. I'm thinking of Lake Winnipeg, I believe, and of course the Miramichi River. Is the research you're able to do supported? Do you need more support in terms of investment from government? Where is it going in regard to both Lake Winnipeg and the Miramichi?Invasive speciesScientific research and scientistsSimonNadeauSimonNadeau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1640)[English] Okay.Do you need more people doing this work? It sounds very intensive in terms of the human component.Invasive speciesScientific research and scientistsSimonNadeauSimonNadeau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1640)[English]You're probably right.Are you finding that you have enough personnel, and are employees distributed equitably across the nation? Is there something that would be more advantageous there?Invasive speciesStaffingSimonNadeauSimonNadeau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1640)[English]One thing sort of helps or informs another.SimonNadeauSimonNadeau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1640)[English]I was an MPP at a time in Ontario when the zebra mussel problem was out of control. The impact on water intakes, other species and the food source of other species was quite profound. I heard that lamprey eels have been controlled. Are zebra mussels also under control?Invasive speciesMusselsSimonNadeauSimonNadeau//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1645)[English]With regard to preventing the establishment of invasive species, Professor Hugh MacIssac outlined a two-pronged approach of managing targeted invasive species as well as the pathways. I think that we've talked about that to a degree. What proactive measures should DFO take to prevent the threat of invasive species, and how would you rate the effectiveness of DFO's invasive species response operations?Invasive speciesRisk managementSimonNadeauHélèneMarquis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1645)[English]Okay.You mentioned—HélèneMarquisKenMcDonaldAvalon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1530)[English] Just before we get started, I want to give the committee notice that I will be bringing forward a motion for us to discuss a possible summons of Ms. Sandberg and Mr. Zuckerberg from Facebook.Meta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East YorkNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1550)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Therrien, for coming before us.You will be going to Federal Court with one of the most powerful corporations in the world. I think the maximum Canadian fine is something that I was told Facebook makes in about 60 seconds. Facebook is going to want to spend whatever it takes to defeat you in court. In your legal presentation, will you have to be drawing on your existing budget, or will the justice department cover the extra costs of ensuring the people of Canada are well represented in court?CostsLegal casesMeta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1550)[English] My concern is in making sure that you have the resources. I've been on this beat for about eight years, and the various offices of Parliament come before us and talk budgets. There are always constraints and limitations, but in your office, it seems to me, the mandate is changing—it's dramatically different. The Commissioner of Lobbying has always dealt with dodgy questions of lobbying here and there; the Ethics Commissioner deals with what is dealt with there. I have nothing against their work. It's very important work, but it would seem to me that.... This office was created in 1977. The Privacy Act was passed in 1983 for the public sector, and then PIPEDA was passed in 2000. When I came on this file, your office would be dealing with lost hard drives and USB sticks, and the breaches tended to be corporate mistakes. These were questions of corporate governance, the lack of protocols in the office. What we're dealing with is the emergence of surveillance capitalism, and it's a very different beast, where there's a direct corporate interference in the lives of citizens, which is profoundly undemocratic, by companies that have enormous powers. I'm getting to my point in a roundabout way. Is your role transforming from a regulator to an investigator? If that is the case, should we be rethinking how the office works and what your tools are? To ensure the privacy rights of Canadians in this world that is emerging around us, are the old tools sufficient?Crime and criminalityMeta Platforms Inc.Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActPrivacy and data protectionDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1555)[English]Right.I think what really surprised our committee when we started to delve into this case with the Cambridge Analytica scandal was how complex it was, how difficult it was for our parliamentary committee to get answers. You're dealing with, basically, dark data by people who work in a very different realm from ours in what we do as legislators. Christopher Wylie had stated that he felt that the U.K. ICO was very unprepared when it came to taking on Cambridge Analytica, because it did not have the experience of knowing how these players operated. Fortunately, the ICO in the U.K. did an excellent report. Putting it to you, in terms of the changing world we're dealing with of surveillance capitalism and particularly data mercenaries, some of whom we brought here, do you have the resources that are necessary to actually be able to play in that milieu, of having the technical people, the people who know how the hard drives are being misused, how data's being moved around? It's in a very different realm than anything we've dealt with in the past. Cambridge AnalyticaMeta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionSetting of standardsUnited KingdomDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1620)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to say at the outset how important the work of your office is. For too many years, we've been played for suckers by Silicon Valley, that it was about choice, that it was opt-in, opt-out. We could read the privacy provisions. It never respected the privacy provisions in building its models. What we've learned with Cambridge Analytica and Facebook is that this is not simply a question of the rights and the choices of consumers. This is about the democratic rights of citizens. It's about the questions of a nation state being able to actually ensure that its citizens can live in a world where they choose certain rights that are protected and inalienable, and one of those rights, as you said, is the right to be free from surveillance.I want to start off with a few simple questions. Your finding was that Facebook broke the law of Canada with its breach of PIPEDA. Is that correct?Meta Platforms Inc.Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1620)[English]As an officer of Parliament, you have been mandated to ensure compliance with PIPEDA. Was your report an opinion or is that a finding of fact by the officer in charge of representing the Parliament of Canada in preserving our laws?Meta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English]Facebook initially stated that you didn't have jurisdiction because you couldn't prove that the 620-some thousand Canadians who had their private information stolen were somehow affected. Didn't they then move on to say it was an opinion of yours and they'd take it under advisement? Where are they? Is this their opinion or that the fact that we don't have jurisdiction? What is Facebook's response to you on this?Meta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English]When we began our hearings, and I first wrote to you, it was the spring of 2018 when the Cambridge Analytica scandal had just blown up and we had found that 620-some thousand Canadians had their information taken. Facebook was made aware of that in 2015 and made no effort to tell Canadians. They said at the time when they came to our committee in 2018 that they had a very robust response. I'm flabbergasted that a company would look at a finding of law and say they simply don't recognize their jurisdiction.Are you aware of other examples of companies saying that in Canada?Meta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English]I was trying to think of a comparison. I was imagining when we have automobile recalls because of numerous accidents, that if an automobile company came back to you and said there are multiple accidents in Brazil, in the United States, in Britain, however, since you couldn't prove that anybody died on the highways of Canada, they don't recognize your role as a regulator to make them fix the fundamental problems in their vehicles. I want you to correct me if I'm wrong, because they said it would cost too much for them to comply with the laws respecting the rights of Canadians.Would that be a fair comparison?Meta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionSetting of standardsDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English] I'm not a lawyer but I'm thinking the basic concept of jurisdiction—and correct me if I'm wrong—means the country of Canada for which you are a regulator, and 620-some thousand Canadians had their data taken because of this breach. Facebook was aware for it for three years and made no effort to tell Canadians. Within the jurisdiction of Canada, they broke the law because they did not make any efforts to let any Canadian know they had been a subject of this breach.Is Facebook putting forward the position that jurisdiction only counts, only exists if you can prove that Facebook physically caused harm by its actions? Meta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1630)[English]You have jurisdiction because you're there to protect the rights of the citizens of our country as mandated by Parliament. Is that not how jurisdiction works, and your obligation is to protect our citizens whether—Meta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1630)[English]Thank you.DanielTherrienBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1700)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.I want to follow-up on your comments about accountability, because I'm trying to think of a similar situation where there is a corporate lack of accountability. Facebook has an enormously successful platform. It's used all over the world. It's making unprecedented money. It has no competition and yet, in this past year, the U.K. parliamentary committee has made a finding that it was a digital gangster and the privacy commissioner in New Zealand found it to be morally bankrupt. Facebook was denounced by the UN for complicity in the Myanmar genocide.It would seem to me that normal corporate practice would be to get on a goodwill tour and start to fix the problems and reassure people, yet Mr. Zuckerberg ignored his appearance at the International Grand Committee, and now we have your report coming out.Facebook said, “Thanks, but we don't want to spend any money to actually comply, so we'll just pretend you don't have jurisdiction over law.” You referred to its policy as an empty shell. I'm trying to figure out what is fundamentally wrong with Facebook. Is it the corporate culture, which I'm not asking you to venture in on, or is it that its fundamental business model, like the fundamental business model of surveillance capitalism, is based on ignoring the privacy rights of citizens, and it simply will not change a business model that has worked extremely well for it, even if it is breaking the law of Canada and numerous other jurisdictions?Meta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1700)[English]Finally, in order to prevent something like this in the future, so that when a Canadian regulator steps in and starts to investigate, because there will be other breaches—there could be other even more serious breaches—what tools are you asking for? You need to repeat it to our committee, so we can repeat it to the Parliament of Canada. W need to learn from the lessons of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, so we can protect the democratic and social rights of citizens who use online services.Meta Platforms Inc.Privacy and data protectionDanielTherrienDanielTherrien//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (0925)[English]Thank you very much, Madam Chair.Thank you to our witnesses. Your determination is inspiring, truly, and so is your courage. I also want to say thank you for your service.I'm going to start with Danielle. You talked about what happened or what didn't happen when you reported through the chain of command. I'm wondering, from your perspective, what should have happened? You also made reference to the fact that it was a slap on the wrist, and there didn't seem to be any record or understanding of what you had reported. Could you please explain that to me? It seems odd to me that there wouldn't at least be a paper trail.Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceOperation HonourSexual abuse and exploitationWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonDanielleDewitt//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0925)[English]You talked about the slide show, the Operation Honour annual exercise, and it sounded like checking boxes. Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceOperation HonourSexual abuse and exploitationWomenDanielleDewittDanielleDewitt//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0925)[English]Is that what it is?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceOperation HonourSexual abuse and exploitationWomenDanielleDewittDanielleDewitt//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0930)[English] I was going to ask you about women aboard ship. You're at close quarters, far away from a port. Have you any recommendations in regard to how you look after the safety of the women and the trans members of the crew?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceHarassmentNavyWomenDanielleDewittDanielleDewitt//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0930)[English]Okay. Thank you.Madame Douglas, I think in 2015 Madame Deschamps came to this committee and talked about how hopeful she was about Operation Honour. But here we are, five years later, and it doesn't feel as if we've made a lot of progress.You talked about only a few safe places, in terms of the bases. What stands in the way of making every base, every installation, a safe place, right across the board?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceOperation HonourSexual abuse and exploitationWomenDanielleDewittMichelleDouglas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0930)[English] Thank you. Madame Roy, you talked about the need for balance, more women in the military. What do you think are the main barriers to recruiting and retaining women who are lesbian, gay, transgender, two-spirit? What is the issue here in regard to why they don't come to the military and why they don't stay?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceMilitary recruitmentSexual minoritiesWomenMichelleDouglasMartineRoy//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0945)[English]There was some discussion of the reconciliation fund, the investment of $15 million to $25 million. You talked about training and you talked about a monument, but what does the training look like, in terms of the fund?Madam Chair, I have a question for you. Do you think we could have a screening of The Fruit Machine?Canadian ForcesDepartment of National DefenceEducation and trainingSexual minoritiesWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0945)[English]I would love to hear from more of you.KarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonMichelleDouglas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1150)[English]Thank you, Chair. With your permission I'd like to move from inquisition back to the matter at hand. My question to you, first of all, would be, what was the biggest challenge of implementing Bill C-76? What was the toughest part of it?C-76, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and other Acts and to make certain consequential amendmentsElectoral systemMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Chief Electoral OfficerLarryBagnellHon.YukonStéphanePerrault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1150)[English] I have some security questions, and I know Mr. Graham has too. I can do them now, but I have a funny feeling that they still might be better done in camera, because I want to drill down a bit. I'll leave that to the end, however, and we can make a determination.As much as the government gets credit for Bill C-76 and unravelling some of the ugliness that was in the “unfair elections act” that the previous government enacted, the way they did it was ham-fisted and borderline incompetent. However, am I correct in stating that the government, like the previous party in power, did not change the law regarding parties submitting receipts? It's my understanding that for years and years we've been trying to get to the point that parties should have to provide receipts in the same way candidates do when you are evaluating whether they are entitled to their subsidies. I can't think of the number right now off the top of my head, but $76 million comes to mind, though that could just be a number I'm pulling out of thin air. It's a huge amount of money that the parties get subsidies for, and they don't have to provide receipts. Is that still the case?C-76, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and other Acts and to make certain consequential amendmentsElectoral systemMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Chief Electoral OfficerStéphanePerraultStéphanePerrault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1150)[English]Yes, it is just unbelievable that we've gone through two regimes that changed the law and both have said no to parties having to provide receipts. How the heck do you get subsidy dollar one from the Canadian government without a receipt if they ask for it? This has to be the only example, and it's such an abomination in our democracy; it truly is. This is my last kick at this thing, which is why I'm going at it. This is just unacceptable. How many millions of that $76 million should not go to the political parties—my own included—when they're not even providing receipts? We do not know. I put the blame for this squarely with this government and the previous government, who refuse to hold themselves to the same account that they demand from everybody else who deals with government. If there's anything to write about in terms of big things that still need to be done to fix our democracy.... People think security, and that's legitimate, but accountability, folks: $76 million of subsidies goes to political parties with no receipts. Unbelievable.Now I want to turn to security, so I'll just ask the questions, Chair, and I'll leave it to you and the witnesses to determine whether we should stay in public or not.Right now, what do you see as the single biggest macro threat to our election?Disinformatione-SecurityMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Chief Electoral OfficerStéphanePerraultStéphanePerrault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]Where are we expecting these threats?Disinformatione-SecurityMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Chief Electoral OfficerStéphanePerraultStéphanePerrault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]Don't you need to know that, though?Disinformatione-SecurityMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Chief Electoral OfficerStéphanePerraultStéphanePerrault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]I see. I assume that there is a plan in place to be evaluating this question throughout the election. Then, I would also be interested in what your plans are for everybody to regroup after the election, in terms of security, to see what worked, what didn't work and how well we defended our system.Disinformatione-SecurityMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Chief Electoral OfficerStéphanePerraultStéphanePerrault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]Okay. Are you in consultation if not outright coordination with other allies that are facing the same problem? Disinformatione-SecurityMain estimates 2019-2020Office of the Chief Electoral OfficerStéphanePerraultStéphanePerrault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]—the Five Eyes?StéphanePerraultStéphanePerrault//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Excellency.LarryBagnellHon.YukonDavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English]I really liked your last answer. We went through a bit of a process in terms of how we got here, but when it came to the who, my comments are on record. Hearing your answer to the last question just reaffirms that in terms of which Canadians should be there and why. There's no better choice, and I'm really glad that you accepted.Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English]It's probably a big part of keeping you grounded.If I may, I have a couple of questions. One of the things that Parliament mandated you to do was to deal with the issue of no-shows. I wonder if you have gotten that far in your thinking. If so, where is that leading you? What are your thoughts on that?Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English]I realize that there was no mandate to compel. There was a bit of a disconnect in terms of the process between this committee, the government and Parliament. All of that is history now, but certainly from the committee's point of view, there was a desire that you do something to show this, including things like empty seats. Are you not considering that right now? Have you ruled it out?Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1240)[English]Yes. We don't want to give anyone an out.As you know, for a lot of us, the impetus for wanting this done was what happened the last time. Part of that was the all but refusal to find an agreement. If we don't get people there, we fail at the main objective. We can't have the kind of fulsome debate you were talking about if we don't have all the players.I hope that you give that as much study as possible. What we want to do is create, in our democracy, a situation in which, politically, someone cannot afford not to go. The hit for not going should be greater than any concern a person has about participating. Your being here and continuing to amplify this by letting people know it's coming plays into that very well.Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1245)[English]It's funny you say that, because that was going to be my next question. Having just been down in the U.S., I wonder if you know off the top of your head how they handle those things?Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020United States of AmericaDavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1245)[English]You haven't studied it enough yet.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1245)[English]That's fair enough. It's fine.One of the other things that came up when we held our hearings in preparation for our report was social media. I'm very much in your category, probably, in terms of trying to stay on top of these things. It was a real eye-opener for me. It was good having Mr. Nater beside me, as he better reflected the younger generation's view of these things.Wanting to addressing those social media platforms is so key now. What particular kinds of outreach have you done with them? Obviously there's the traditional kind, meeting with the networks and journalists in print and others. Then there are what we would call the other kinds, which are gaining in prominence.In terms of your consultation, I'm curious as to your approach in allowing them to have input, both at the front end and the back end, in terms of how well they did.Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020Media and the pressPublic consultationDavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1245)[English]You wear it with pride, I'll bet.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1245)[English]Those are some of the folks who come in to see us too.Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020Media and the pressPublic consultationDavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1245)[English]I hear you.I have two quick things. I know the chair is about to close in on me.I wanted to compliment you on the political choices—Megan Leslie, John Manley and Deb Grey. All of them would be seen as highly capable of being non-partisan, putting the interest of the election ahead of their own. They are all cross-party respected, so good choices there.Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1245)[English]I think you did an excellent job and succeeded.My last question—DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.LarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1250)[English]It is.When you're doing your review, will it go all the way to things like looking at whether your method of doing the production was the most effective?Leaders' Debates CommissionMain estimates 2019-2020LarryBagnellHon.YukonDavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1250)[English]That's excellent, great.Thank you so much, sir.Now my payout.DavidJohnstonThe Right Hon.LarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0920)[English] Thank you, Chair. I have to tell you this. You have a majority government, so why don't you pass a law that forbids flooding? That wouldn't impact the roads. Get with it.Voices: Oh, oh!Mr. David Christopherson: My apologies. The roads are really bad, but that's the least of some people's problems. I'm glad I got here, and I do appreciate your consideration.This is a really bad audit. I have to tell you that when I looked at what the week was going to be and I saw CMHC the other day, I thought, okay, that's going to be the rough one, and then we'll get Heritage, and everything will be all nice and we'll talk history and it will all be very good. In fact, it was quite the opposite. I was rather impressed with their audit the other day, and this is just an abysmal report.There's very little in here for anybody in management to be proud of—very little. The one little nugget I can throw out goes to National Defence, believe it or not, because in one area of data collection where we've been pounding on them—and they do have that message and that was reflected here—they did that right. One thing—one—was okay. Colleagues know that nothing incenses me more than previous audits finding the same problem and making the same recommendations, with the government making the same promises, while audit after audit it's not done. It's infuriating. That's where we are with this one.There were audits in 2003 and 2007. Paragraph 2.7 in our 2007 audit says, “...we concluded that Parks Canada's conservation efforts since 2003”, which was the earlier audit, “were not enough to ensure federal organizations conserved heritage properties.” Let's just jump ahead to see what the final mark was, if you will. The conclusion is on page 17, at paragraphs 2.76 and 2.77. This is the conclusion from the auditor: We concluded that Parks Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and National Defence did not work sufficiently to conserve the heritage value and extend the physical life of federal heritage properties. They did not have a full picture of their heritage properties; for example, information on the condition of their heritage properties was not current. The life of some federal properties was at risk—properties that are for the enjoyment of present and future generations of Canadians.Here's my first question, before we even get into the details. There were promises made, not by you individually but by the organizations and departments you represent. There were promises made in 2003 and not kept and promises made in 2007 and not kept. What on earth would have us believe that the promises you're making today you're actually going to honour? I want to hear from you.AccountabilityHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]I don't care. Somebody start talking.AlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertMichaelNadler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English]That's it? It's all because you didn't have enough money? I understand that's a biggie, and I would accept that maybe that's the main driver, but are you going to tell me that's the only reason things are in this abysmal condition? For that, I'm supposed to have comfort as a member of the public accounts committee that you're going to honour your commitments this time? It's all funding?AccountabilityHeritage sites and buildingsProperty managementReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaMichaelNadlerMichaelNadler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0925)[English] I'll be coming back to you. I gave you a chance; I'll be coming back. I want to hear from the other department heads.MichaelNadlerJodyThomas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English]Thanks, Chair.Actually, that provides me with a good segue into where I was going, because I agree with Mr. Arya; this is unsustainable. We're kidding ourselves here. At some point, we have to decide whether we pony up the money and tax citizens to make sure these buildings are kept the way the policy says or we cut back on what we designate. Ms. Thomas gave the example of hangars. Looking at it from a practical point of view, you do have to ask if that is a top priority. Even in some experiences here on the Hill, we've seen some examples over the years. So I agree that this..and I think maybe that's what we need to do. Let me say right up front that I agree that the bulk of the problem is money. I did not appreciate being told that this was the whole problem—I can come back to that in a minute—because the management here has been abysmal. That's the responsibility of the people sitting here, and your predecessors. The money part is ours. Either we make it a priority to make sure there's enough money there or we make sure that the work we designate we are going to fund—one or the other. I agree that at some point some government has to get on top of this and make some tough decisions about what we will do in terms of taxing and spending to keep our heritage alive. I think looking at Britain, which has a lot more experience than we do, is maybe a really good idea. At some point, we need to do that.I want to draw your attention, Chair, to paragraph 2.21 on page 4. I won't read the whole thing, even though I was going to because it deserves to be read out, but I want to read the last sentence: “We found, however, that the regional representatives we met knew the number and condition of the heritage properties that they were responsible for.” That speaks to the staff and to the dedication of people in the public sector who, by and large, overwhelmingly really do care about what they're doing. The people who are involved in heritage care about these buildings. They become part of their extended family. I appreciate that the auditor put that in there, because that's part of the backstop of this. If this is working at all, it's because of the individual people on the ground as opposed to some of the management decisions we've been seeing. I'm very pleased to see that the Auditor General is going to go back, because I do think we need to stay on top of this. It's just getting worse and worse, so your holding them to account, and our knowing that you are going back in, is very helpful.I'm running out of time, Chair, so I won't go to the actual page, but paragraph 2.35 talks about details being certified. Perhaps you will allow me to parenthetically ask the auditor what it means, exactly, that information has been certified. That's a fairly new expression for me in terms of these reports.AccountabilityHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertSusanGomez//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Yes. What does the term “certifications” mean there?AccountabilityHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaSusanGomezSusanGomez//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]And it ended up being wrong.AccountabilityHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaSusanGomezSusanGomez//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Yes. It ended up being wrong. So not only was it submitted—A—then it went through some process to get certification—B—and it was still wrong. Now I'm going to come back to the management. One of the things you're criticized for in this report is the information you give to Parliament and Canadians. That's not funding, that's competency. That's a question of making something a priority or not. Reporting to Parliament, whether you like it or not, is a pretty big priority, and that needs to be reflected here.I'll go to my question now, Chair, because I know you'll eventually throw the net on me. I'd like everybody, including the auditor, to answer this, if we have time.Where were the internal departmental audit committees? Where were they during all of this and where are they during all of this?AccountabilityHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaSusanGomezJodyThomas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English] Mr. Nadler.JodyThomasMichaelNadler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]I have a problem with that, but can I hear from the auditor, please?AccountabilityHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinStringerJeromeBerthelette//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]It seems to me they should at least be aware that they're not doing things right rather than just— JeromeBertheletteAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1000)[English]Yes, you did. I appreciate it.AlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1020)[English]Thank you, Chair.First of all, Mr. Stringer, I really appreciate your answers and your passion for your file. You know your file. You give enough push-back when we, especially me, go a little too far in not getting the facts right. It was very respectful and very forward-looking. I really appreciate your presence here today. You've done a good job. Thank you.Only 3% are non-active on the Defence side, and as somebody who has an armoury and is very proud of it, I'm.... You could have easily held up a paper and said, “You know, we just put x number of dollars into Hamilton Centre”, because I've probably benefited, and there are probably letters on record from me saying, “Hey, we need this kind of work done”, and it comes under operational more than heritage. I get all of this, which is why I think we need to do that larger overview. I have two really brief questions. One is just a factual question. Is there any jurisdiction or any money put in for aboriginal heritage preservation, or is that all left to the other department?Aboriginal policyHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-LambertRobChambers//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1020)[English]Were it to cross over to your responsibilities.... But what about just ponying money right up front for heritage? Do we recognize anywhere that there's aboriginal heritage that goes beyond what's around us right now?Mr. Nadler, quickly, and then I have one last question.Aboriginal policyHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaRobChambersMichaelNadler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1020)[English]Those are on their lands?Aboriginal policyHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaMichaelNadlerMichaelNadler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1020)[English]Thanks. It's an important part of our history.My last question is open-ended. Drawing on my experience.... I've been here before, municipally, provincially and now federally, and it's always the same thing. The community wants to save them; the citizens want to save them; and the local government or the government—in whatever order—just doesn't have the means.Does it make any practical sense for any of the political parties, or all of them, to put forward a platform for some kind of coordination in the next election? With all due respect to provincial jurisdiction and municipal rights—and again I've been there, and nobody embraces those more than I do—the buildings that we're talking about are in the same place, whether we're talking about the municipal government, the provincial government or the federal government. The building is still in the same place. It's the same one building.Is there any chance that we could have national, coordinated—not forcing anybody, and respecting rights—efforts so that all three entities that want to preserve a given entity could partner in that? Does that exist right now and it's just not working, or is what I'm suggesting just not practical?Federal-provincial-territorial relationsHeritage sites and buildingsReport 2, Conserving Federal Heritage Properties, of the Fall 2018 Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaMichaelNadlerAlexandraMendèsBrossard—Saint-Lambert//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (0920)[English] Thank you so much.I'll actually pick up on some of Mr. Virani's themes.When you're talking about data, it's so critical. I know you're doing an annual audit at B'nai Brith on anti-Semitic incidents. I think it's a challenge for a lot of NGOs and faith communities to have the resources to do this type of data collection, but I have read your report. When you're talking about anti-Semitic incidents rising to 2,041 in 2017, 80% of those were online.Mr. Matas, you talked about the gaps in criminal law, the tribunal, the AG's powers and everything. If you could follow that up with some more detailed information, that would be greatly appreciated. When we're talking about the detailed accounting of incidents, it's very important that we understand what's happening across the country. I certainly hear, and I'm sure my colleagues do too, of people who receive a threatening message on Facebook or other platforms. They go to the police and nothing really ends up happening. Sometimes it's a threat to that person's life. It's quite serious. That person's worried and concerned, and nothing actually ends up happening. The question I have for you is with respect to this incident breakdown that you've done. You have month by month in your report. Certainly all of them are very deeply concerning, but I just want to ask about one that happened in June because it seemed that you were able to get someone.... There was a Winnipeg man who received a Facebook message—it's quite vile so I won't read it into the record—from a fake profile that was later erased. When you're receiving the information that this has happened on Facebook, can you describe, then, what you're doing with that information? I'm wondering how it is that you are successful in getting this erased. The people who we haven't had at the committee yet, who are a key part of this, are, of course, police services across our country and the RCMP. We want to hear from them about the way they're handling each of those cases and the way they look at them. Our local police, I feel, simply don't have the tools necessary to be able to address these complaints when they come in. You have done this accounting and looked at these cases, so I wonder if you can speak to what happens when someone brings something they have received or see on social media to you.Crime reportingHate propagandaInformation collectionInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalBrianHerman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0925)[English] Thank you for that.Part of your report also speaks about deterring people. Right now, if I were to go to my local town of Windsor and walk down the street, I see bus shelters that have a lot of information about marijuana because obviously that's something that's been recent. There is a lot of public outreach education that's happening around different topics, but not this. I don't see things that are addressed to people who are online on how to use it against hate, how to report hate, what to do if they see something but also what if something happens to them.I wonder if you could each speak to how you think we can deter people by demonstrating that if you are involved in online hate, there are tangible consequences. Right now, to be quite honest, I don't think that a lot of people who are expressing this online are aware that what they're doing could be considered criminal behaviour.How can we address that to the general public to deter people from sending these messages, being in these spaces and spreading this hate?Crime preventionHate propagandaInformation disseminationInternetDavidMatasDavidMatas//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1010)[English]Thank you, all.There's a bit of a sense of urgency, given that we're up against the election coming this year. There have already been warnings about the play of anti-immigrant sentiment and white nationalism in the election process. We see this on the rise in Canada. It's extremely concerning, across our country.Mr. Singh, you mentioned the anonymity that exists online. The Globe and Mail did an article this week that was shocking. It's about an app called Discord—I'd never even heard of it—following a white nationalist group that was arming itself, meeting and training. This is extremely disturbing.Given that we're up against this kind of deadline, how important is it for us to act before the end of this Parliament, which we're quickly running out of runway on. Can you speak to the urgency to protect Canadians and the communities that you represent?Hate propagandaInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalMukhbirSingh//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1010)[English]Ms. Choo.MukhbirSinghQueenieChoo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1010)[English] Mr. Duodu.QueenieChooEmmanuelDuodu//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1010)[English]Thanks to all of you.EmmanuelDuoduAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1630)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.Thank you very much, Mr. Bettman. I want to continue on this theme. You've been there for 26 years and you've seen some changes in the game. We heard you comment that you're still waiting for more evidence, obviously, more decisive evidence about the link between concussions and some of the other symptoms that are experienced in CTE. That's evolving.However, you mentioned the implementation of rule 48, so I know that somewhere there was the interest and the engagement in current information to say that we want to do something to reduce the percentage of concussions, and this has proven successful, right? HockeyMild traumatic brain injuriesNational Hockey LeagueSetting of standardsSportsPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1635)[English]Maybe you can tell me a little about how you evolved to that point and where you see this being a progressive reality in reducing concussion. There is obviously more that's going to have to be done. Let me front-load my question and then I'll give you the rest of my time.With that, let's talk a bit about concussions and we understand now, obviously with rule 48, dangerous plays. What's the role of officiating in all of this when we change the game and keep core elements? I found it intriguing when you talked about keeping the core elements in the game, but we have seen the game change. We've veered away from fighters to skill.Because it's part of what this subcommittee does moving forward, what do you see? Should we have rules that just have automatic maximum penalties for certain types of plays? How do you see us moving forward?AccountabilityHockeyMild traumatic brain injuriesNational Hockey LeagueSetting of standardsSportsGaryBettmanGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1635)[English]Yes, and you have the rest of my time until the chair cuts you off.You go for it.GaryBettmanPeterFonsecaMississauga East—Cooksville//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1640)[English]You've mentioned something about blanket statements before.Do you mean blanket statements about hits to the head?AccountabilityHockeyMild traumatic brain injuriesNational Hockey LeagueSetting of standardsSportsPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1700)[English]Thank you.I just want to go back and clarify the issue of the concussion protocol. Did I understand correctly that with all hits to the head the concussion protocol kicks in, or are there still some exemptions?HockeyMedical examinationsMild traumatic brain injuriesNational Hockey LeagueSportsPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1700)[English]I get it.GaryBettmanGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1700)[English]Okay.GaryBettmanGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1700)[English]I just wasn't understanding from previous testimony—GaryBettmanGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1700)[English] No, that's okay. I guess this is my question.... We do have enough research now. We're not in a cave. I respect the candour. You need to keep the core elements of professional hockey and, in your opinion, those core elements and that physical contact are the essence of NHL hockey, the essence of this.... As you know, it's a profit-making sports enterprise. I understand that, but we know that it's evolving. We're teaching our kids. Our kids are learning. There's eventually going to be this gap because there is more research that's coming.The NFL has put research dollars into some vanguard research that's being done at the University of Calgary. Is that something the NHL would be interested in, maybe in conjunction with the players' association, to get some research that would help move along this evolution? Essentially, what will end up happening as younger players evolve and continue to be fans of the NHL is that the NHL will be dinosaurs and there will be this gap. You'll be long gone, Mr. Bettman, I'm sure, with all due respect. It's the legacy, the succession planning, right? Do you see merit to targeting and focusing on some type of research? What would the advantage be to having a government role?HockeyMild traumatic brain injuriesNational Hockey LeagueScientific research and scientistsSportsGaryBettmanGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1710)[English]Do you really believe there's going to be this organic reduction in fighting and this is going to be okay without any rule changes? At what point do you think that some rule changes are going to have to be established, like a new framework?HockeyMild traumatic brain injuriesNational Hockey LeagueSetting of standardsSportsViolence in sportsPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1710)[English]How often do you review the science, the research and concussion protocol?HockeyMild traumatic brain injuriesNational Hockey LeagueScientific research and scientistsSetting of standardsSportsGaryBettmanGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1710)[English] I noticed you referenced the Berlin consensus, but the research is actually there and more understood. I think the protocol that you're using isn't as up-to-date as the Berlin protocol. Do you have a committee?HockeyMild traumatic brain injuriesNational Hockey LeagueScientific research and scientistsSetting of standardsSportsGaryBettmanGaryBettman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1935)[English]Thank you, Chair.Thank you, Madam Clerk, for your time. This is very informative and very helpful. Thank you again. John and I were wondering whether any of your states have adopted the parallel chamber process.AustraliaParallel debating ChamberLarryBagnellHon.YukonClaressaSurtees//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1935)[English] Thank you.I have a couple of quick questions before I delve into a little more minutiae.Are they televised?AustraliaParallel debating ChamberTelevision broadcastingClaressaSurteesClaressaSurtees//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1935)[English] I used to be a deputy speaker, and tasks aren't all that onerous. You're doing a lot of the grunt work for the Speaker. On the big stuff, the Speaker calls the shots, as they should.You said that in this chamber, the Deputy Speaker is treated like the Speaker, and is the main official. I wonder, given the new responsibilities, did the Deputy Speaker get a pay increase when they upped the responsibilities?AustraliaIncome and wagesParallel debating ChamberClaressaSurteesClaressaSurtees//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1935)[English]Thank you.The terminology is interesting. The guillotining and time allocation remind me of when I was much younger, in the 1970s, with the auto workers. We called it guided democracy. Everybody has a term for the hand on the throat.The reason I raise this is that in my experience, governments will sometimes want to guillotine a bill because of the debate that's happening in the House, and the media attention, but at the end of the day, it's usually because of time management. The most expensive commodity for government vis-à-vis the House is House time. It's almost like an airport, where you have planes ready to take off. You have ministers lined up, all trying to cajole the House leader to get their bill in the House. It's often about that pressure, as opposed to the politics around the issue. There are exceptions.You said there was less guillotining by a big number. You also said that you didn't deal with contentious issues, as a rule, although you're starting to now. Were there that many non-contentious issues that required guillotining? Why? Was it time management or was it more small-p politics?AustraliaBillsParallel debating ChamberClaressaSurteesClaressaSurtees//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1940)[English]I have to say that, initially, I was attracted because of the non-partisan nature of the House. You wouldn't necessarily be giving the government more time, because that creates a political problem. You should have seen what we went through here around whether or not we would continue to sit on Fridays, and the fight's not over. These things have a significant impact.How do the rules of that chamber facilitate the contentious issues they're dealing with? Here's my thinking: If we follow the idea that government's motivated more by time management than by trying to extinguish backbenchers' rights to get up and have their say, then this chamber would not necessarily hand the government more time. You're going to use the same amount of time in the House. It does allow more debate by more members, but it's under a different set of rules. With it being so easy to collapse the chamber, for instance, how are you managing to deal with some of the contentious issues, where right from the get-go, you're not getting agreement on what time you're going to order coffee, let alone on any amendments?AustraliaParallel debating ChamberTime allocationClaressaSurteesClaressaSurtees//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1940)[English]Right. Very good. Thank you very much for the fulsome answers.ClaressaSurteesLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1540)[English]Thank you. I won't take too much time. I have a motion, but can I make a commercial announcement first? I have no pecuniary interest in this, but I implore my colleagues on the committee to watch the BBC television show Brexit. Our friend Zack Massingham makes an appearance as one of the central characters, and he certainly does not appear to be as tired and confused and memory-fogged as he did to us.AlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceMotionsBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesRajSainiKitchener Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1540)[English]I think it would be great to have Mr. Zack Massingham back to ask how he considers his portrayal.... BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1540)[English]Much more involved.Okay, I brought a notice of motion to the committee:That the Committee begin a study on the ethical aspects of artificial intelligence and algorithms.This was in response to our clerk, who said that in order to undertake this next round of witnesses, we needed an official motion. AlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceMotionsBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1540)[English]I'm very interested in following up on some of the discussions we've had in terms of the effect of how the algorithms in certain platforms are being used to distort public conversation and political discourse by moving people toward more and more extremist and false content, as opposed to being able to find accurate, credible sources. I think we have not really looked at some of those algorithms, particularly with YouTube—we have put a lot of attention into Facebook—but these algorithms are having a very distinct impact on civil discourse. It's worth knowing how they work. Of course, with the larger issues we talked about of AI and algorithms, I leave it to my colleagues around the table if they feel other witnesses should be drawn, but I think we have a pretty good list of witnesses and not much time. I'd say let's get down to it. AlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceMotionsBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1545)[English]Well I'm a firm believer in always having reports so we can show what our committees have done. I recognize that the clock is ticking, so I'm willing to bend on that. I agree with Mr. Erskine-Smith. This is about setting us up for the international grand committee so that we are fully prepared; we've had a chance to look at some other issues that we may bring to the table. To me, this is a good training session leading up to that.Then, out of that committee, there may be an international statement, or we may feel the need to follow up with a further report. I will take that after we have the international committee and find out what our colleagues around the world think. AlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]We also have students from the University of Haifa.BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]That's east of St. John's, I believe.BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1620)[English]Thank you, gentlemen.You're raising I think some very disturbing, broad questions that are so much beyond the scope of our committee and what we do as politicians. My day job is to get Mrs. O'Grady's hydro turned back on—her electricity. That's what keeps me elected.However, when we're talking AI with you, we're talking about the potential of mass dislocation of employment. What would that mean for society? We have not even had conversations around this. There's the human rights impact, particularly exporting AI to authoritarian regimes and what that would mean.For me, trying to understand it, there are the rights of citizens and personal autonomy. The argument we were sold—and I was a digital idealist at one point—was that we'd have self-regulation on the Internet and that would give consumers choice; people would make their decisions and they'd click the apps that they like. When we're dealing with AI, you have no ability as a citizen to challenge a decision that's been made, because it's been made by the algorithm. Whether or not we need to look at having regulation in place to protect the rights of citizens....Mr. Wagner, you wrote an article, “Ethics as an Escape from Regulation: From ethics-washing to ethics-shopping?”How do you see this issue?AlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBenWagner//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English]Thank you.I'm a music buff. Every morning I wake up, and YouTube has selected music for me. Their algorithms are pretty good, and I watch them. I'm also a World War II buff, and YouTube offers me all kinds of documentaries. I see some of these documentaries on the great historian David Irving, who is a notorious Holocaust denier, and they come up in my feed. Now, I have white hair; I know what David Irving is, but if I'm a high school student, I don't. It has a lot of likes because a lot of extremists are promoting it. The algorithm is pushing us towards seeing content that would otherwise be illegal. In terms of self-regulation, I look at what we have in Canada. In Canada, we have broadcast standards for media. That doesn't mean we don't have all manner of debate and crazy commentary, and people are free to do it, but if someone was on radio or television promoting a Holocaust denier, there would be consequences. When it's YouTube, we don't even have a proper vehicle to hold them to account.Again, in terms of the algorithms pushing us towards extremist content, do you believe that we should have some of the same kinds of legal obligations that are for regular broadcast media? You're broadcasting this. You have an obligation. You have to deal with this.AlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceBroadcastingBenWagnerBenWagner//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English]What about illegal content?AlgorithmsArtificial intelligenceBenWagnerBenWagner//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1700)[English] Thank you.Mr. Bengio, my riding is bigger than Great Britain, and I live in my car. My car is very helpful. It tells me when I'm tired, and it tells me when I need to take a break, but it's based on roads that don't look like roads in northern Ontario. I'm always moving into the centre lane to get around potholes, to get around animals and to get away from 18-wheelers. I start watching this monitor, and sometimes I'm five minutes from the house and it's saying I've already exceeded my safety capacity.I thought, well, it's just bothering me and bugging me. I'll break the glass. Then I read Shoshana Zuboff's book on surveillance capitalism and how all this will be added to my file at some point. This will be what I'm judged on.To me, it raises the question of the right of the citizen. The right of the citizen has personal autonomy and the right to make decisions. If I, as a citizen, get stopped by the police because I made a mistake, he or she judges me on that and I can still take it to some level of challenge in court if I'm that insistent. That is fair. That's the right of the citizen. Under the systems that are being set up, I have no rights based on what an algorithm designed by someone in California thinks a good roadway is.The question is, how do we reframe this discussion to talk about the rights of citizens to actually have accountability, so their personal autonomy can be protected and so decisions that are made are not arbitrary? When we are dealing with algorithms, we have yet to find a way to actually have the adjudication of our rights heard.Is that the role you see legislators taking on? Is it a regulatory body? How would we insist that, in the age of smart cities and surveillance capitalism, the citizen still has the ability to challenge and to be protected?AlgorithmsArtificial intelligencePrivacy and data protectionRegulationBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesYoshuaBengio//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1705)[English]Thank you.YoshuaBengioBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1350)[English]Ladies, I will ask you a simple question. Then I'll give you each a turn to comment on it in the time I have. I want to ask a little bit more about recognition by the state of sexual violence as violence. I would like to hear a little bit about the impact or the influence of the media in the rise of hatred, or in helping with your causes towards human rights for women specifically.The other thing I want to ask you about is this. Our Prime Minister announced about a year and a half ago that Canada was going to establish a corporate ombudsman for responsible enterprise. If Canada were to do something like that, would you think that women human rights defenders, and maybe the violence specifically experienced by them, such as sexual violence, should be specifically addressed in the mandate of an ombudsman? Let's start with Ms. Bouziri. Can you hear me?Civil and human rightsForeign policySexual abuse and exploitationViolence against womenWomenAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1350)[English]Okay.Ms. Chicaiza, perhaps I can ask you to comment. Do you think a corporate ombudsman for responsible enterprise for Canadian companies should specifically address women human rights defenders and/or sexual violence, or the violence they experience, in the mandate of the ombudsman in Canada dealing with corporate responsible enterprise of Canadian companies? What are your thoughts on how we could play a role in the oversight of our extractive industry that is based in Canada? Civil and human rightsForeign policySexual abuse and exploitationViolence against womenWomenAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1355)[English] Yes, go ahead and use up the time. Tell us what you think we need to know for Canada to move forward and help address this.Civil and human rightsForeign policySexual abuse and exploitationViolence against womenWomenHendBouziriHendBouziri//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1130)[English]Thank you, Chair.Speaker, it's good to see you again for the last go-around. It's the last go-around, guaranteed, at least between you and me. With any luck you'll be here many times again, Speaker, and I wish you well on that, but this is our last go.I know you'd be extremely disappointed if I didn't raise the issue, along with my good friend Mr. Graham, of PPS, but I will take your advice. Your comment at the end was that, if it's due to labour relations, we should do it in camera. It sounds as if we're going in camera anyway, and I will have a couple of questions and will ask for an update. We'll do that maybe in camera, Chair.I'll limit my remarks to some financial questions. In your presentation, a couple of pages in, you said that there's a $650,000 allocation to build on existing security investments at the vehicle screening facility, which we, of course, lovingly refer to as the car wash. Here's my question. The thing was designed, studied, built. By my recollection, there was at least one major upgrade. There may have been even more, but there was at least one major upgrade since then.Now we're looking at another $650,000, so my question is this. When is the darned thing going to be done, and why weren't the issues that are being addressed now not addressed in the beginning when the planning was done?Main estimates 2019-2020Parliamentary Protective ServiceSecurity servicesLarryBagnellHon.YukonGeoffReganHon.Halifax West//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]Fair enough, but my question was why this wasn't identified at the beginning when, I'm assuming, millions were spent to build it. Now we're having to come back a few years later and add $650,000 for video cameras, which sounds like sort of an obvious kind of thing if you're dealing with security.Again, help me to understand why we're having to spend this money now as opposed to it not being built into the original planning. Main estimates 2019-2020Parliamentary Protective ServiceSecurity servicesMarie-ClaudeCôtéMarie-ClaudeCôté//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]If I can, Speaker, I'll go to you. You raise these questions, but nobody is saying there was any kind of deficiency in the plan, the very question that I asked. There is no evidence of that. This is just new technology and an opportunity to up the game, and this is the cost of that. Is that correct?Nobody anywhere in the system—because brown envelopes exist—said there was a screw-up at the beginning and now we're having to fix it. This is for legitimate add-on security features as a result of new, evolving technology. Is that correct?House of CommonsMain estimates 2019-2020Security servicesMarie-ClaudeCôtéGeoffReganHon.Halifax West//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English] Okay. I'm satisfied.I'll move along. I don't know if this is in the documents we had here, but it must be available because the researchers provided us with a chart. Now it's main estimates to main estimates, as opposed to actuals to main estimates, let alone actuals to actuals. There are some big number differences and I'd like to ask some questions. In terms of rentals, the main estimates for 2018-19 were $75,000. I'm assuming this is thousands of dollars, I think. In the same category for 2019-20, it jumps to $500,000. Purchased repair and maintenance goes from $50,000 to $600,000. In professional and special services, it actually decreased, so that's a good thing. I want to be fair-minded. I'm asking you about these two huge increases. For that matter, I'm just noticing that transportation and communication jumped from $100,000 to $350,000. We have some huge increases in these three areas. Can you give me a little more detail as to why, please?Human resourcesMain estimates 2019-2020Parliamentary Protective ServiceGeoffReganHon.Halifax WestGeoffReganHon.Halifax West//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]Yes. GeoffReganHon.Halifax WestMarie-ClaudeCôté//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]Okay.Marie-ClaudeCôtéRobertGraham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]Pardon?RobertGrahamRobertGraham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]I really didn't ask.... Well, I asked about services. I understand that. You're good at explaining why it went down. I want to know why some went up from $75,000 to $500,000 and from $50,000 to $600,000. These are big numbers and you're telling me you don't have any idea at this meeting about these numbers?Main estimates 2019-2020Parliamentary Protective ServiceUtilitiesRobertGrahamRobertGraham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1140)[English]That would suggest we're doing something hugely different for a Canada Day than we have in the past; otherwise, it would have been built into your base, as such, for that line item. I'll accept that you don't have the exact details here, although I'm surprised you weren't prepared to answer questions like this, given that it's kind of obvious. Chair, I would ask that this supplementary information be provided to the committee as soon as possible.RobertGrahamLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1140)[English]Chair, in fairness, the rest of my time on the labour relations would best be done in camera.I thank you, and I thank the Speaker.RobertGrahamLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1140)[English]What's a normal...? Can you give us a ballpark figure?Committee businessAndrewLauzonAndrewLauzon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1140)[English]We need a number.Chair, we need a number.AndrewLauzonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1140)[English]That sounds good.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1140)[English]They'll get out—or somebody is not doing their job and somebody here next time will make sure they get them. Committee businessChrisBittleSt. CatharinesLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1140)[English]Oh, that does make a big difference.GeoffReganHon.Halifax WestLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1210)[English]Great, thank you.Marie-ClaudeCôtéRobertGraham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1210)[English]I appreciate that. Thank you for doing that so quickly.I have one follow-up. I don't know a lot about these things, but that seems to be an awful lot of money to develop a website.Main estimates 2019-2020Parliamentary Protective ServiceWeb sitesRobertGrahamRobertGraham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1210)[English]Yes, I think I would like to have a little further detail, if you would, just because the jump is so significant. I really didn't hear a fulsome enough answer to satisfy my curiosity. If you could do some more follow-up on detail, I would appreciate that.RobertGrahamRobertGraham//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1210)[English]Thank you, again, for getting it so quickly.Thank you very much, Chair.RobertGrahamLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (0945)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's the first opportunity that I've had since your public announcement. I just want to welcome you to what Nathan Cullen is now calling the “lame duck caucus”. I hope your retirement is as fruitful as you deserve. You've had a great career. We're very proud of the work you do.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English] I'm glad I got here. I was trapped in the traffic. I guess one of the bridges is shut down. I really wanted to be here for this one. I was very enthused to dig into this one and to get to this public meeting. The main reason is that this is a darn good report. There are some issues, and I think my two colleagues, Tom and Randeep, have done an excellent job of wading into the minutia of that, but I love it when the big problems are buried in the details of what we're working on. In the main, your biggest problem and your biggest deficiency wasn't even your fault. It has to do with the appointments process. The auditors, in the language they use, were practically swearing when they said things like “serious weaknesses”. However, it's not your fault. I think I got something from your opening remarks, but is that now resolved? Are you up to speed now on the board appointments?Canada Mortgage and Housing CorporationSpecial Examination Report - Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, of the 2018 Fall Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootDerekBallantyne//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English] That's good to hear. I have to tell you, this is not anything new. We've had it with previous governments. The appointments process is always a problem. There always tend to be bottlenecks, and you know—full confession—I can go back to when I was in provincial government and we had the same problem. We always seemed to be behind, and it always has such a major impact. At the centre, where these decisions are made, it ranks very low in terms of crisis problems, but in terms of the problems it manifests, it's huge. I don't know what the answer is, other than to keep underscoring it through reports like this, and politically underscoring it and holding the government to account in question period as to why these things aren't happening. When I first opened this, I thought, oh, it's CMHC—this is going to be going down the rabbit hole. This is going to get ugly, because there are so many moving parts and each piece needs to be analyzed so carefully. If there are problems anywhere, my experience is that a lot of it is due to lack of planning, lack of analysis and lack of risk assessment, which are all the areas you've done a pretty darn good job on.My opening—and I don't say this lightly, as people know—is that, in the main, given the responsibilities, the number of moving parts that you have to be responsible for and the in-depth thinking that needs to happen, I was fairly impressed with how well the operation has run. I really appreciate the questions of my colleagues, who have a much deeper background in these things. That's why it's good to have a good mix on the public accounts committee, so that we can all bring different perspectives. I'm curious. I noted with interest what it said on page 8 in paragraph 23 on board appointments. It struck me. It said:Further, anyone appointed as a director or president is required to divest themselves of any shares of lending institutions within three months of their appointment. These restrictions constrain appointments to the Board by limiting the pool of eligible candidates.That's pretty big. Senators don't even have to do that, but we won't go there, will we?How much does a board member make?Canada Mortgage and Housing CorporationSpecial Examination Report - Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, of the 2018 Fall Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaDerekBallantyneDerekBallantyne//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English]Yes, you should.DerekBallantyneDerekBallantyne//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0950)[English]I see you pointing somewhere.Canada Mortgage and Housing CorporationSpecial Examination Report - Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, of the 2018 Fall Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaDerekBallantyneEvanSiddall//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English] Yes.Canada Mortgage and Housing CorporationSpecial Examination Report - Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, of the 2018 Fall Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaEvanSiddallEvanSiddall//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]I get it. I understand why. It's great public policy, but from a practical level I'm wondering.... Either there should be a little less restriction or a little more money, but that's an awful lot. I mean, if you're retired and you're now sort of dabbling and recontributing based on your experience, I can see that, but somebody who's active in the middle of their career, the kind of sharp people that we're looking for.... Not that retirees aren't sharp, are they, Chair? No, they are very sharp.Nonetheless, you do want people who have various experiences in life.I see one of the assistant auditors general kind of nodding her head. Do you have any thoughts on this? Maybe you've had some chats. I don't know. It just seemed to me to be an awful lot to ask. It should be asked. It's good public policy, but boy, that's not much remuneration for giving up your whole investment package, which may be leading to your retirement. Can I hear further thoughts from the Auditor General side, please?Canada Mortgage and Housing CorporationSpecial Examination Report - Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, of the 2018 Fall Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaEvanSiddallDerekBallantyne//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]No, over here, please.DerekBallantyneClydeMacLellan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English] I don't mean this to be my attack day on the Senate, but you'd think that people at the level of the Senate would be expected to do the same thing and they don't. In fact, they can sit on boards, but again, we won't go there.Canada Mortgage and Housing CorporationSpecial Examination Report - Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, of the 2018 Fall Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaDerekBallantyneKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (0955)[English]Death, taxes and me in the Senate are three things you can guarantee.KevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1025)[English]I appreciate that. Thank you, Chair.Once again it falls to the NDP to defend poor government entities just trying to do their jobs and helping out Canadians. Oh man, it gets tiring.Voices: Oh, oh!Mr. David Christopherson: I appreciate the questions my colleagues are asking. They're obviously very intelligent and very insightful, but I want to draw back to the conclusion. With a grade 9 education, I rely on the auditors. I look at the conclusion on page 22. If there's anything serious to worry about—serious serious—I expect it to be here.What does it say in the conclusion? It says, “In our opinion, based on the criteria established, there was a significant deficiency”. Now, I underscore to colleagues that “significant deficiency”, in the world of auditors, that's swearing. I mean, that's strong language. There's a big difference between “significant deficiency” and “weakness” and “improvement needed”.I'll finish the quote. There was “a significant deficiency in the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation's corporate governance systems and practices,”—recognizing that they don't do the appointments, the government does—“but there was reasonable assurance that there were no significant deficiencies in the other systems and practices that we examined.” It continues: We concluded that except for this significant deficiency, the Corporation maintained its systems and practices during the period covered by the audit in a manner that provided the reasonable assurance required under section 138 of the Financial Administration Act.Hence my overview that I thought this was a fairly good report, and I want to focus, if I can—I only have a couple of seconds—back on the governance again, because that's the major issue here. I won't find the quote, but you made some reference that there were a couple of things the board could have done to offset that, and I'm curious as to what it is that they should have done, recognizing that they had a huge problem. They couldn't fix it directly in terms of appointments, but you suggested that there were some things they could have done but didn't. Would you articulate those for me in the moment or two that we have left?Canada Mortgage and Housing CorporationIndustrial trainingSpecial Examination Report - Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, of the 2018 Fall Reports of the Auditor General of CanadaKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—CrowfootLissaLamarche//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1025)[English]Great. Thanks.Thanks, Chair.LissaLamarcheKevinSorensonHon.Battle River—Crowfoot//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (0915)[English]Thank you, Madam Chair.Thank you all for being here. Thank you for your advocacy. It's very important. I'd like all three of our witnesses to jump in on these questions and see if we can put some things on the record that we can work on as a committee. First and foremost, the issue of women as caregivers, perhaps not fully engaged in paid work, is something that I'm very concerned about. The reality is that the work of women is underpaid very often. It is not valued as it should be. As a result, because of pay inequity and the lack of regard for caregivers, women very often in their senior years are faced with poverty and financial limitations. We have a drop-out provision in terms of employment insurance and caregiving. Would a drop-out provision for CPP be a way of addressing this issue of unpaid and undervalued work?Canada Pension PlanCaregivers and health care professionalsPovertySenior citizensWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonMichaelUdy//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0915)[English]Simply, the time that a woman is devoting to the very important work within the home or as a caregiver is not paid. As a result, her CPP does not accumulate in the same way as it does for someone who does paid work and accumulates pension benefits. Do we need a drop-out provision so that the time spent caregiving and the time spent raising a family is valued and is considered in terms of CPP?There's a second part to this, increasing the GIS. It's not enough for a woman who has done that caregiving. It's not enough for her to get by on.On those two pieces, do you have any thoughts?Canada Pension PlanCaregivers and health care professionalsPovertySenior citizensWomenMichaelUdyMichaelUdy//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0920)[English]Thank you very much.We talked about the fact that senior women don't have a great deal of access in terms of programming. One of the things that bothered me—I was a seniors critic and a veterans critic—was that government is using technology more and more. They're putting things online and the answer to someone who needs help is “Well, it's online”. To someone who is not literate in terms of that, that doesn't help.We have all of these 1-800 numbers, and if you sit there for 45 minutes listening to the recording, it finally drops off and you have to start all over again. I think this lack of human contact is problematic. Is there a role for the federal government in terms of re-establishing that human face to programs, the things that people need, so that they can access them as they did in the past?Government servicesMeals on wheelsPovertySenior citizensService deliveryWomenMichaelUdyLiaTsotsos//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0920)[English]How widespread is that kind of approach? You talked about it in Quebec, but does anyone know if it's something that is utilized in the other provinces and territories?Government servicesMeals on wheelsPovertySenior citizensService deliveryWomenVanessaHerrickVanessaHerrick//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0920)[English]Okay. Thank you. I think everyone has touched on the role of health professionals. One thing that concerns me very much is that there's a shortage of gerontologists. The needs of a senior change as the individual ages, and the medicine that worked five years ago may conflict with what is needed now. I'm thinking in terms of my own mom. Her general practitioner didn't seem to have any idea about what was happening to her and for all intents and purposes wasn't even listening. By the time someone who really was concerned—DoctorsEducation and trainingPovertySenior citizensWomenVanessaHerrickKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (0925)[English]—saw her, she was in distress. Is a need for better training for health care professionals something you see, or was my mother a special case?DoctorsEducation and trainingPovertySenior citizensWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1015)[English]Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to Colleen and Juliette.I think the issues you have touched on are very often overlooked. Juliette, I would truly appreciate it, if you did in fact consult with your peers to think about a drop-out provision for CPP, and also about the need to improve the guaranteed income supplement. We do indeed have too many seniors living in poverty.Colleen, concerning your issue about farm women, in my experience farm women contributed all of their lives—built the farm, made it possible for it to be a success—and then, when it came time, after a marriage breakup, to divide those assets, they were left out entirely. There has to be some equity for women. I think the judicial system is something we need to look at. Do courts treat women fairly in regard to the end of a marriage?Specifically in terms of women surviving on their own.... I guess, Juliette, this pertains to you. You said you had to leave your community. Of course there's the isolation. You had to manage on your own. In terms of managing, there's a housing issue. In terms of the availability and the cost of housing—at this point in time the cost of housing is incredibly high and housing is not available—I'm wondering about a housing policy to ensure that this doesn't make women even more vulnerable and contribute to their poverty.What would you like to see in terms of that basic need?HousingPovertySenior citizensWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonJulietteNoskey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (1600)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.I was looking forward to being here but, quite frankly, I am profoundly disappointed by this political wrangling. We have a flood crisis in this city. The water is at the door and you're wrangling about who does the best job or who has the best numbers. I want some clear answers. I spent five years in the Ministry of the Environment in Ontario under a minister who had incredible integrity. She walked the walk. I want people here to walk the walk and I do have some questions.Earlier this month we learned that Loblaws is being awarded $12 million from the low-carbon economy fund for refrigerator retrofits. Ideally, the grant should enable GHG reduction projects that would otherwise not be able to go forward without government assistance. Now, Loblaws is the bread price fixing king of the country and Galen Weston is probably the second richest person here. Why on earth would Loblaws qualify for retrofit? I understand this business about the government adding in to what they were going to do, but why didn't Loblaws simply do it all and that $12 million go somewhere else where there could have been a greater benefit?Climate change and global warmingDepartment of the EnvironmentLoblaw Companies LimitedLow Carbon Economy FundMain estimates 2019-2020JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityCatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1600)[English]Minister, I heard nothing but wrangling and nothing but promotion of self.Department of the EnvironmentMain estimates 2019-2020CatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa CentreCatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1600)[English]I think if Galen Weston can fix the price of bread, he can fix his refrigerators.I have another question. A recent Parks Canada Agency report found that 40% of the agency's real estate is in poor condition, with repairs being estimated at $9.5 million, plus an additional $3.3 billion estimated as being needed for climate change adaptation. We're hearing more and more about the need to adapt to what is coming, this tsunami of disasters.Budget 2019 doesn't allocate any new funds to either of these issues. I wonder if you could advise if Parks Canada has sufficient funding to make the necessary repairs and adapt to the climate change that we know is on the way?Climate change and global warmingGovernment facilitiesMain estimates 2019-2020Parks Canada AgencyCatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa CentreCatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1605)[English]However, $368 million ain't $9.5 billion. It seems there's going to be a shortfall here.Climate change and global warmingGovernment facilitiesMain estimates 2019-2020Parks Canada AgencyMichaelNadlerMichaelNadler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1605)[English]Thank you.Minister, I have been listening to the news. The Philippines are threatening to send back tankers full of garbage. I wonder if you've taken any steps to ensure that the manifestos of ships actually reflect the cargo, because the complaint is that instead of recyclables they're getting hideous waste that they simply cannot use. Has that particular situation crossed your desk?Department of the EnvironmentForeign policyMain estimates 2019-2020PhilippinesWaste managementMichaelNadlerCatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1640)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.I've been listening with great interest in regard to the various reports that are received. I have a question about the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development, who recently tabled two audits that found that the government does not have a complete inventory of fossil fuel subsidies and is not considering environmental factors on a basis equal to that for economic considerations, and that's troubling.When will the department be transparent about fossil fuel subsidies and phase them out?Department of the EnvironmentFossil fuelsGovernment assistanceMain estimates 2019-2020JohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityCatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1645)[English]Thank you, Minister.CatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa CentreCatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1645)[English]I do have another question.You mentioned phasing out coal. Does Canada still sell coal internationally?CoalDepartment of the EnvironmentMain estimates 2019-2020CatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa CentreCatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1645)[English]Thank you.You talked about the stewardship of plastic and the fact that we're drowning in plastic. Are you looking at stewardship in terms of packaging and the excessive packaging we see in virtually every part of this country? Department of the EnvironmentMain estimates 2019-2020PlasticsPollutionWaste managementJohnAldagCloverdale—Langley CityCatherineMcKennaHon.Ottawa Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (1345)[English]Thank you, Chair. For folks watching this at home, it's really difficult to follow some of the threads and where people are going here. First of all, the idea that we would call journalists here and somehow threaten their independence is completely false. No one has ever said that we would put journalists here. Certainly throughout the previous study with the former attorney general, there were no journalists called before this committee or ever put on a witness list to be called before this committee. I don't know where that idea was pulled from. This threat to the independence of our journalists and their integrity is completely and utterly false. It has not happened at other committees and it is not happening at this committee. I don't know where the idea even comes from that it's what we're here talking about.Also, I would like to talk about going to PROC. It is on Mr. Nicholson and Mr. Rankin personally that the Speaker will rule. This is not anything to do with this particular situation that we're talking about today. That's completely separate, so that's been brought up. There is no evidence of new safeguards. The current Attorney General has said that there's nothing to see here, that we're not investigating and that he believes the Prime Minister. Well, Canadians don't believe the Prime Minister because he's changing his story every single, solitary day. When you're changing your story, that creates doubt. That's not the opposition creating that doubt. That is the PMO themselves through their daily injury to themselves, to be quite honest.If you can imagine, Canadians would like better than just to take the Prime Minister at his word when we're talking about the independence of Supreme Court justice appointments. I'd also like to talk a bit about the process. This is the only process we have because there is no other process being offered. If you say that's flawed, then why is this the process you pursued under the previous attorney general's study? I don't understand that logic because there certainly was an alternative there. That alternative was to have an independent public inquiry, which we've been consistently calling for, and you said that the Prime Minister's Office has obviously decided it is not going to happen. You've done this before; there's a pattern here. On the idea that the process here is not the correct one, I don't follow that thread at all because it's not what the justice committee has previously done. There is certainly an opportunity for it to be studied here.On the PMO leaks—you know the behaviour of staff and the PMO around the scandal and now around this issue—that we need the PMO staff, everyone who is involved in this, to come before the committee. Quite frankly, why wouldn't they want to clear their own names? I don't understand. They've been named now in two major justice scandals, so why would they not want to come before this committee to clear their own names? Mr. Butts had that desire in the previous study, and that same opportunity should be afforded to them.The last thing I want to say is that this is the only process we have because there's no other process being put on the table. If there's another serious process that's being put on the table, please share it with us because that's certainly what we would like to see as well.In this particular case, there are 125,000 lawyers across the country who are saying that this needs to be investigated. I can't imagine that Liberals are going to say to those 125,000 lawyers, “We don't believe there's anything here to see.” I don't know if you've read their statement or if you've read their letter, but it's quite clear that they have deep concerns about what has happened.To Ms. Khalid, I would just like to say that it's a false argument to say that we either study the online hate or we do this. That's completely false, and there is no comparison of those two things. When you speak about women, I'm incredibly concerned about women. I'm concerned about women in our court system. They need to know that they're sitting in front of independently selected judges and that there are quality people who are applying because they're not afraid of having their names smeared. That's the way we can help women, and that's the way we can stand up for human rights in our country: by protecting the independence of our judicial system.Federal judgesFreedom of the pressInformation leaksOffice of the Prime MinisterPolitical appointmentsSupreme Court of CanadaAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1205)[English]Thank you very much.I've had the pleasure of getting to know David Lepofsky as a friend as well as a valuable resource for my work. I'm the critic for people living with disabilities and worked very hard on amendments for Bill C-81 with a variety of different advocates, but nobody stands out like David Lepofsky. I'll ask you to comment on that in a minute. I would love to see him in the Senate right now advocating the way that he tried to with this committee about the important amendments that are needed to Bill C-81. He recognizes them. He seems to have, people say, a legal mind, but I like to say it's a legal intuition. He understands how something needs to be applied. He can advance the application of a legal theory. I read your report, Ben, which is such an entertaining read. It was so easy to get through. It was really a pleasure for me. I congratulate you on that piece of work.When the Council of Canadians with Disabilities challenged VIA Rail in court about accessible passenger cars, that to me exemplified some of the work that he's done, the force of the advocacy that he had and how adamant he was that we could not have exemptions in Bill C-81. That's another aspect, that some of these federal jurisdictions like VIA Rail could be exempt and that you don't have the ability to appeal. I really hope he'll be able to come through with the Senate and that the Senate will recognize that these are absolute needs.Maybe you could talk about how, when you want to achieve something with a decision-making body, with someone who holds the power, sometimes people hold back on their advocacy work because they don't want to seem adversarial. They want to be friends and try to get on your side to get you to change your mind. I feel that David had this good instinct about that.Maybe you would like to comment on some of the experiences you had in putting this report together. Maybe you could talk about how you recognize some of those tightropes that people have to walk when they are advocates and are trying to help create change from within, and then seeing that it won't work that way, they have to take a harsher approach.Access for disabled peopleC-81, An Act to ensure a barrier-free CanadaCentennial Flame Research AwardPersons with disabilitiesBryanMayCambridgeBryanMayCambridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1105)[English]I'm good with that.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1115)[English]I'll pull them all together, if I can.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.Minister, thank you very much for attending again.I just want to say that, unlike some ministers past, not once have you played a game or taken the opportunity for scheduling changes in order to dodge or avoid the questions. Some of them have been pretty tough meetings. You were always willing to be accountable, and that's appreciated. Thank you, Minister. I want to ask one question, and then I want to turn to my colleague, Mr. Cullen, who is far more immersed in the minutiae of this and will ask far better questions than I would. However, I have one.On the protocol panel, I look at the five members: Clerk of the Privy Council, national security and intelligence adviser, deputy minister of this, deputy minister of that, and deputy minister of another. Every one of them is, of course, appointed by the executive. Parliament is much like my dad: Trust everyone, but always cut the cards.Assuming that nothing is going to change—we have a majority government that has decided this is the way we're going to do it, so this is the way we're going to do it—will there be built into the process an opportunity for Parliament to review the information this panel received and the actions they chose or did not choose to take?Electoral systemTask forcesLarryBagnellHon.YukonKarinaGouldHon.Burlington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]That sounds a little wishy-washy. They're reporting to whom? Either there's going to be a review by Parliament or there isn't. If they're going to issue a report—Electoral systemTask forcesKarinaGouldHon.BurlingtonKarinaGouldHon.Burlington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]All right. What about PROC?Electoral systemKarinaGouldHon.BurlingtonKarinaGouldHon.Burlington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]Yes, I understand that. We might need to have a little bit of a discussion about that. I can appreciate that. Again, I've spent some time in that world, but at the end of the day, they are guided by some pretty strong issues around intelligence, and that's not what we would be seeking. We would be seeking the information that was given and any action that was taken or not taken, as much as can be divulged. If it has to be a two-tier process and we get a report from our committee, fine, but—Electoral systemKarinaGouldHon.BurlingtonKarinaGouldHon.Burlington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]At the end of the day, that body should not be allowed to proceed when they're appointed solely by the executive without having, at the very least, a key scrutinizing process at the end to ensure they did what Parliament would expect, and if we can make any improvements going forward.Clearly, that's a little bit of work. Hopefully, we can tie that up before we rise in June, Mr. Chair.Electoral systemKarinaGouldHon.BurlingtonKarinaGouldHon.Burlington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1205)[English]That sounds good. We just need to nail down the details, Chair, but we can do that.Thanks, Minister.Now I'll pass it to my colleague Mr. Cullen.KarinaGouldHon.BurlingtonNathanCullenSkeena—Bulkley Valley//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1225)[English]That sounds good. We're getting our report translated.Committee businessLarryBagnellHon.YukonScottReidLanark—Frontenac—Kingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1225)[English]Chair, I know you're about to go to another notice of motion and engage in a debate. I'd just like the opportunity to formally submit a notice of motion, not to be debated today, but also to underscore that I'm just the vehicle for this. This is the work of a number of respected veteran parliamentarians who are looking for changes. Mr. Reid is among them. Hopefully we'll be able to give them an opportunity to have their thoughts aired. That's what this is about. For now, it's just a technicality. It's in both languages and it won't come up again until the next meeting. Thank you, Chair.Committee businessLarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (1005)[English]Thank you, Madam Chair.I want to begin by saying thank you to you. When I turned a certain age, someone said that women over 50 are invisible. Unfortunately, I think that may well be true. But you in your work are focusing on those women and I am very grateful.At one time I was the seniors critic for my party. I did a lot of research, and I know there's a great deal to do.I have a number of questions, and I hope that Madame Grenier, Madame Adewale and her lovely companion will feel free to jump in at any point. One thing that was talked about was the vulnerability of immigrant women, particularly those who arrive after age 40. The reality is that our pension system is set up to discriminate against them. There are deductions in regard to CPP that these women are subject to. If they're alone, then they're poor or, even worse, if they are sponsored by someone who is violent and abusive and uses that sponsorship as a weapon to continue that abuse, they're extremely vulnerable.There was a time when the whole pension issue was discussed. Of course, it was dismissed unceremoniously because, sadly enough, it touched on some very deep-seated prejudices within our communities. Could you comment on that?I also wonder if you could comment on the reality of discharge from hospital. This is particular to people who are suffering from mental illness. They're thrown out of hospital, and they have nowhere to go. You talked about safe, affordable housing, and we still don't have a national housing strategy. We lost it in 1993 federally, and we lost it again in Ontario in 1995. It ended. Affordable housing was gone from our social structures.I have lots of questions. Could you begin with those two questions? Please, feel free to jump in. I would love to hear from all three, if that's possible.Caregivers and health care professionalsEducation and trainingHousingImmigration and immigrantsPovertySenior citizensWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonAmandaGrenier//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1035)[English]Thank you, Madam Chair. I wanted to touch on two things just very quickly, because there's so much to discuss. The first is in regard to caregivers. We have a dropout provision for employment insurance, although it's certainly not long enough. What about a dropout provision for CPP, so that women are not being penalized for their undervalued and unpaid work? The second thing I wanted to shift over to is dental health and pharmacare, which are very important. Do they need to be a fixed part of our health care system, so that seniors, and women in particular, have access to that important dental care and the medicines they need? I mean universal pharmacare, not fiddling around pharmacare—real pharmacare that takes care of everyone. I'll throw that out to the panel.Caregivers and health care professionalsDental insurancePovertySenior citizensWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (0925)[English]Thank you all for being here this morning and for your presentations.Picking up on that threat, I think we saw this week an attempt by Facebook to address some of the groups in Canada that are sharing this information online. We saw the banning of individuals and groups, which I think was a very good move. It wasn't across all social media platforms, unfortunately. I think it was Facebook and Instagram that did that.To Mr. Fogel's point earlier, the depths that exist in the Internet, even within one platform itself.... There are just layers upon layers of social media giants trying to control this themselves. It really begs the question about how they can do this on their own without government intervention, without the Canadian government being a part of that and, I think, having some basic rules around what is acceptable and what isn't, some ground rules for platforms in our own country.You all spoke about Pittsburgh and the Christchurch shooting, and the extensive amount of Islamophobic and anti-Semitic material that had been posted by both of these individuals. I think Canadians are asking how it is happening that this is all being posted. Why is no one going to these individuals and stopping it at that point? Is this a failure of social media? Is this a failure of policy? They are also asking how it happens that people are out there sharing these volumes of information and no one is challenging it.I think Mr. Fogel spoke to this clearly, but I want to ask this to the other panellists: Do you think online platforms should be able to establish their own policies to address online hate, or do you believe that Canada should establish some ground rules as well?Communication controlHate propagandaInternetSetting of standardsSocial networking sitesAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalRyanWeston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Oh, I wasn't sure if you were saying it was up.AnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (0930)[English]Of course.ShimonKoffler FogelShimonKoffler Fogel//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1035)[English]Thank you, panellists, for being here today.One of the challenges in online space is that people see articles and published material and believe them to be true. They don't often look at the source. I think there is a general distrust in mainstream media in our country and there is such a significant need for media literacy for people. Mr. Cameron, you were talking a bit about education. I think a core piece of what we're looking at here is people understanding how to identify what is a legitimate piece of media and what is something that shares perhaps hateful messages and things on the Internet, and how to distinguish between those things and determine that.I don't think that people generally have those types of analytical skills. The members of Parliament who sit at this table receive many emails from constituents who send us a link to something and ask what it is about. We're often able to debunk it or say that it isn't a credible source, but it's a very significant challenge. I wonder if you could each speak to the role you think our education systems in Canada should play in combatting hate in general, but certainly online hate. I have two teenage sons, and I don't believe that our education system is keeping pace with the culture, specifically, the online activity and technology. Our kids are on platforms that we don't even know about. There are these corners of the Internet where they are sharing information, and there probably aren't many parents or adults who are even in those spaces. I wonder if you can talk about how our education system could address that, and how we can address that gap for adults as well. Most of us in this room saw the Internet come and we got onto Facebook and all these different platforms and used it for whichever purposes—sharing things with family and friends—but it certainly has grown to a place where even our understanding of what's there and what's happening there is very limited. I wonder if you can speak to the role you think education should play in this.Education and trainingHate propagandaInformation disseminationInternetAnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAlexNeve//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1040)[English]The anonymous element online, too, is something that's significant. People don't have their real name, they're under an alias or it's a bot. You don't even really know, at the end of the day, if that is really the person.Of course, we see horrible instances of this being used for trafficking, luring and all of these really sordid things, but when there isn't a clear identification even of who the person is, I don't know how you can attempt to stop them from what they're doing.Hate propagandaInformation disseminationInternetAndréSchuttenGeoffreyCameron//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1040)[English]Okay. I will go over to our guest in Toronto, then, quickly.AnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalShahenMirakian//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1740)[English]Thank you everyone for your intriguing contribution to this subject. You know that we're exploring what an effective means would be for the government to look at the emerging issues, with diagnosis, treatment and prevention. You can go off on all these different paths for each of those intriguing things. I appreciate the spirit of collaboration, and you understand how important that is in how we get what we know to trickle down.My first question will be for the CSA. Maybe everyone would like to weigh in on this.We know that our protective equipment, as we have it today, even as up to date as it is, doesn't reduce all the risks. As a matter of fact, this committee has heard that sometimes it makes athletes more vulnerable to serious injury—this gladiator effect, or this idea that you're invincible or that someone has this equipment on and can take a certain kind of hit. We can get into whole social theories of sport and all that stuff, but how do you think we proceed and balance that? What possibly could the context be? How could we measure and get a handle on both of those phenomenons? What do you suggest or see from your past experiences as a way that we should be moving forward?Mild traumatic brain injuriesSportsSports equipmentPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvillePatrickBishop//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1745)[English] Does anybody else want to weigh in on that?PatrickBishopJocelynEast//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1910)[English] Thank you very much for your presentations. I want to link this idea of funding and funding requirements to responsibilities. Maybe there is another opportunity as we create a requirement to adopt a concussion policy, which I'm really surprised hasn't been done yet. I'd like to come back to that. Could we also have reporting mechanisms so that we're making data collection a funding requirement? I guess I just want to better understand the status quo. If certain things are not being required now that I would have assumed were required, there are probably some other considerations that it would benefit our committee to know about, when we're doing recommendations. I'm just going to get it out front and then we can use up the rest of my time, because I would imagine you have some strong opinions about concussion guidelines not being required yet for funding from the Public Health Agency. I almost feel like we're at—I don't want to say cross-purposes, but we don't have this momentum. We're not all rowing the same way right now. If there is something the government can be doing to facilitate that, and I mean the federal government specifically, even if it means using certain terminology or something specific when dollars are rolled out or requiring some kind of accountability or transparency. I would like to hear about that from you.AccountabilityGovernment assistanceMild traumatic brain injuriesSportsPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleAndrewCampbell//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1915)[English]Do you think it has been too early up to this point to require a policy?Mild traumatic brain injuriesSportsGerryGallagherPeterFonsecaMississauga East—Cooksville//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1925)[English]We mentioned this at the end of our last meeting when we talked about the role of officiating. There is a role for officiating in the culture shift that needs to happen, but also when we're introducing new information. And even in education now, I'm thinking in our school system, for your games to be sanctioned the same pool of officials are qualified, whether they're doing the school hockey league or the minor hockey association. I feel that's untapped potential. I'd like to hear your ideas on that, or where you've identified some of the opportunities.Mild traumatic brain injuriesSportsSports officials and refereesPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleAndrewCampbell//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (1600)[English]Thank you all for being here during a very difficult time. This is a very serious issue that the NDP takes seriously. We're hopeful that the government will start to move on it because time is of the essence—which we heard from you, talking about Mr. McClean being a few weeks away from seeding and the significant investments that you've already put into this year's season. It's not something you can roll back the clock on at this point. We really do hope there are some measures that are put in place to help you.One of our members, Niki Ashton, is a member of Parliament for northern Manitoba. She expressed to me how worried she is for northern communities. I represent a rural riding, but in southwestern Ontario. We grow everything but canola. I recognize that northern and remote communities are especially vulnerable and farmers in those areas will be in difficult positions, too.Mr. Ruest, you said in your opening remarks that the issue here is how we can get to the bottom of the contaminant allegations. I'd like to hear from you about how you think we'd go about doing that. Secondary to that, what has the government told you that they're moving on in response to how you think we come to an end to this?Canola growingChinaExportsMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaJean-MarcRuest//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1600)[English]Have any of you heard from the minister or from the government that they will agree to a specific timeline, or that they will talk about some concrete steps that can be taken?Canola growingChinaExportsJean-MarcRuestJean-MarcRuest//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1600)[English]Viterra?Canola growingChinaExportsBernieMcCleanKyleJeworski//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1600)[English]Could you describe to us the level of communication that you're having with the government around this right now? It's such a serious issue, as my colleague raised. It's not something we've heard the government really speaking about. We've attempted in the NDP, along with other opposition parties, to bring this to the House. I'm just wondering if you could tell us what your communication level is with the government right now.Canola growingChinaExportsKyleJeworskiJean-MarcRuest//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1605)[English]Mr. McClean, you mentioned AgriStability. Could you speak about some of the other programs that you feel the government could implement immediately to offer some supports to farmers other than expanding the application process for AgriStability? What other tools could the government implement right now?Canola growingChinaExportsJean-MarcRuestMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1605)[English] Thank you.BernieMcCleanMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1615)[English]You can ask questions. Liberals ask questions.Canola growingChinaExportsTerrySheehanSault Ste. MarieTerrySheehanSault Ste. Marie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1535)[English]Thank you. I support my colleague on this issue, because getting the facts on the record as to whether or not there was an orchestrated campaign to interfere in a criminal prosecution is the issue that's right now dominating our country. It's making it impossible for my colleagues in the Liberal government to move forward, because we have not gotten clarity on this. This is a political crisis that is unprecedented. I've never seen anything like this. We've lost the Clerk of the Privy Council. We've lost the chief of staff to the Prime Minister. We've lost two of the most respected women cabinet members—the president of the Treasury Board and the former attorney general—as well as the former parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister. This is an issue that's not going away.I particularly note my colleague Mr. Erskine-Smith's comments in the Toronto Star, which I read, but also at the last committee, that he felt this was being handled by the justice committee. Well, the justice committee shut this down and did not allow further testimony. The only two key people from the Prime Minister's Office who testified both had to quit their jobs in disgrace. There are unanswered questions. There are questions about who in the office overstepped their ethical obligations. I also note that my colleague Mr. Erskine-Smith said that if there was new evidence to come forward, then it definitely would be within the purview of the ethics committee. Well, I certainly would suggest that after hearing the information brought forward by Ms. Wilson-Raybould, everything she said at the justice committee has been verified by her facts, and none of those facts have been contradicted by any other evidence.I also note that Mr. Butts' counter-evidence does not create a pattern or an image that these people were at personal loggerheads, that there was this conflict, that she was impossible to work with. I found that there was a great deal of respect, because she felt that she was working for the Prime Minister's interests. Her conversations in the text messages that Mr. Butts provided were very respectful. It was about whether or not there was interference in the rule of law. That's what we need to stay focused on, not a larger soap opera of he-said-she-said. Was there interference in the rule of law? This is a fundamental question that has to be above party lines here. I make that note as I received a letter this morning from Mr. Drago Kos of the OECD anti-bribery unit, who wrote to me to confirm that they are paying very close attention. They are paying very close attention because the government said that there would be a robust investigation at the justice committee, and then it was shut down. Mr. Kos has stated that the OECD would welcome any more information to be handed...because they are monitoring whether or not Canada has breached its international obligations. If Canada breaches its international obligations in a matter as serious as an international corruption trial, it will certainly put us on the list of outliers.It's well within the purview of the ethics committee, because we have obligations to oversee the Conflict of Interest Act and we have obligations in terms of the obligations of public office holders that we have to deal with. There are issues of the pressure and the lobbying that went on, into the Prime Minister's Office, that put key people in the Prime Minister's Office in, I think, very compromised positions. This is something that is within the purview of the ethics committee. I think we need to move on it. I think it's very unhelpful to have the mano-a-mano back and forth between the Prime Minister and the head of the opposition as to who's going to sue whom and who's more willing to stand up to the other guy. That is not helpful. I think the simplest thing—I don't care how long we sit—is to get the hearings done. Let's get a report. Let's restore it to the Canadian people so that we as a nation can decide, if there was a problem, whether there will be accountability. If there wasn't a problem, then we can move on.Committee businessCommittee witnessesCriminal prosecutionsMotionsOffice of the Prime MinisterPolitical influenceSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1545)[English]Thank you.Just to follow up with my colleague Mr. Erskine-Smith, whom I've never referred to as a minion.... I may have referred to some members of the justice committee as the PMO's House puppets, but I don't have such a good relationship with them as I have with my colleagues here, whom I have enormous respect for. So, we will maintain that respect. I can't remember if I made that comment or not, but it wasn't about my colleagues here.There are a couple of issues here. One is that I wrote the letter to the Ethics Commissioner, asking him to investigate under section 7. The Ethics Commissioner has very few tools to deal with something of this nature, and we have to be very clear about what powers the Ethics Commissioner has. We asked on the question of preferential treatment; that seemed to be an accurate reading. He came back and said that, no, he felt it was section 9. Now, section 9 is on financial interest, which has always been ruled as personal financial interest. Nobody is suggesting that the Prime Minister has shares in SNC-Lavalin. That's ridiculous.The decision by the Ethics Commissioner to go to section 9, to me, has raised a number of questions about the study, because he cannot deal with the issue that really matters to us, which is whether or not there was political interference in a prosecution. That's something he can't do.Second, he is off ill, and the Ethics Commissioner's office cannot release a report while he's off. Now we are told that the investigation is still ongoing, but that's not something.... With regard to an issue like this, if he's the one dealing with it and he's off, that's problematic. I just want to say that I was very surprised and thrown off to find that a cabinet minister's sister-in-law is the chief investigator for the Ethics Commissioner. Now, I totally expect and understand that this person recuses herself in this matter, but under the Conflict of Interest Act, where it defines relatives of public office holders, she fits the definition.I'm actually even considering formally requesting that they withdraw my request for an investigation because I don't have confidence. He cannot deal with the matter at hand.As to my colleague with all his many requests of who should appear, I've been here 15 years, and we have dealt with all manner of smut and corruption. We've never had a prime minister sit at a committee, so I was thinking, “Okay, well, I don't expect the Prime Minister to come for that.” As to whether Ms. Wilson-Raybould and Ms. Philpott have finished what they've had to say, that's not really the issue.The issue is that Ms. Wilson-Raybould in particular presented an enormous amount of evidence that we haven't gotten answers to. I don't know if we need to bring her back to get more evidence. She has laid out the evidence. You can't finish a trial or get to a conclusion unless that evidence is tested.A number of people are named in that, such as Ben Chin. As a public office holder, what he was doing was inappropriate, she says. Was he flying free as a bird and trying to intervene, or was he directed by the finance minister's office? That's the question that we need an answer to.Ms. Telford is quoted as saying that she doesn't believe in legalities. Well, she's the right hand of the Prime Minister. Anybody who's that close to the Prime Minister has to put legality and the law at the top of the list. Was she misquoted? I think she should have a right to respond, but we need to know about her role. There are also Mr. Marques and Mr. Bouchard.What was really disturbing in the evidence that Ms. Wilson-Raybould came forward with, which has never been contradicted by Mr. Wernick or Mr. Butts, is the attempt to get around the Attorney General to see if they could have, off the record...or just talk to her. They actually didn't say “off the record”, but they talked about getting around to talk to her. That would be extremely inappropriate, so I think these witnesses need to be called.If my colleague wants to move forward, we could pare down the list a little bit so that we're not being repetitive but we're focusing. If those questions are unanswered, we could go to a larger list. That's how we tend to do things at committee. Let's start with a few. If we can get answers, then that may.... If the Liberals are happy, we'll move on.Committee businessBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1550)[English]East of Rivière-du-Loup....NathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East YorkNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1555)[English]I just have to think that if what my honourable colleague said is clear, that if they had anything to contradict they would say it.... Katie Telford is on the record, according to the witness, saying that she wasn't interested in legalities because they were going to get this thing done. That's a serious charge to make against someone who is the Prime Minister's adviser. If she's not interested in contradicting it, then I guess we have to accept as true that she wasn't interested in legalities. If that's the case, she definitely needs to come before our committee, because she has obligations to uphold as a public office holder. I think it would be absolutely unacceptable that if Ms. Telford heard that testimony and isn't interested in contradicting it.... Then we have to assume it is true and we have to bring her to committee to ask how she can function in the Prime Minister's Office if issues of legality and interference in the rule of law are not something that's within the operating culture in that office. That, to me, is a question that now does need to be answered.Committee businessBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1555)[English]I put people on notice on April 2, on my motion:That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(h)(vi) and given the testimony provided by the former Attorney General of Canada, public office holders Katie Telford, Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister, and Ben Chin, Chief of Staff to the Minister of Finance, be invited before the Committee to answer questions related to their conduct in inappropriately pressuring the former Attorney General and members of her staff in order to secure a deferred prosecution agreement for SNC-Lavalin.I think this motion is important. It follows up on the work my colleague offered in the previous motion, but this is about the obligation that public office holders have to respect the rule of law. If we do not abide by that simple principle, then we are an outlier state, which is why the OECD right now is monitoring Canada. The roles of Katie Telford and Ben Chin have to be looked at, because the evidence.... My colleagues on the other side have clearly said they're not contradicting any of the evidence that Ms. Wilson-Raybould gave. Her evidence stands. Her evidence is that Ben Chin inappropriately approached her staff and attempted to pressure them on behalf of SNC-Lavalin to interfere with the public prosecution, and was told that this was unacceptable interference—which it is, under how our legal system is structured.The question we have to ask is whether Mr. Morneau was inappropriately pressuring. The evidence, which my Liberal colleagues seem to be willing to accept in Ms. Wilson-Raybould's testimony, is that she told the finance minister to back off, that this was inappropriate and that this would certainly be a violation of the law.The question about Ben Chin is what his obligation to his minister was. Was it to advise him on the obligations he has to meet the rule of law, to respect the rule of law, to know that he has no right to interfere with the Attorney General in attempting to interfere in this prosecution of a bribery case against SNC-Lavalin? Mr. Chin needs to be called here, not voluntarily, to say if he has anything to contradict. It's to ask him about whether he respects the code that he has been called to uphold.The same questions need to be applied to Ms. Katie Telford. The testimony we have received—which my colleagues on the Liberal side say is not being challenged—is that, in her pressure to Ms. Wilson-Raybould's office, she said they were not interested in legalities. That is a shocking statement to make. If the Prime Minister's chief adviser is not interested in whether they are breaking the law, then we are lawless. Was she doing that because the Prime Minister didn't care about the rule of law? We do not have the power at committee to bring in the Prime Minister. We had Mr. Butts come. Mr. Butts was forced to resign. Mr. Butts was forced to resign, he said, because he wanted to do a whole bunch of other things in life. But he was unable to contradict the testimony of Ms. Wilson-Raybould, where she said that Mr. Butts told her there was no way they were going to get through this without interference. Interference is interfering in the role of the public prosecutor.Ms. Telford has not come forward. Seemingly—if we take the argument of my colleagues on the Liberal side—there is no contesting from Ms. Telford as to whether she said that. They don't seem to be contesting that she said she wasn't interested in legalities. She, as a public office holder, has legal obligations to uphold. We, as a committee that oversees ethics and accountability in Parliament, must ask the Prime Minister's chief of staff to come and explain herself. Is there an outside chance that she was misquoted, or does the issue of the rule of law not matter in the Prime Minister's Office?Attorney General of CanadaChin, BenCommittee businessCommittee witnessesCriminal prosecutionsMotionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Telford, KatieBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]Just give me a second. I'm on a BlackBerry and it's sometimes slow.BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]Yes, I was going to read a quote from Ms. Philpott, but I was unable to bring it up. I've seen many scandals in my 15 years. I've seen people doing dumb things. I've seen people getting caught for taking money. I've seen people, mostly men—almost all men—doing dumb things sexually that they shouldn't have done. I've never, ever, seen two people resign from the highest positions that you can imagine in the country because of an issue of integrity. I was very struck by former minister Philpott, who had no need to give up her career for this, and who carries enormous weight in the communities I represent, I must say, for the work she did on Treaty 9. She said there are things that are bigger than your political career. It's about ethics, she said. It's about the Constitution; it's about integrity. After this scandal is all said and done, people will remember those statements and say that it is possible, within the Canadian parliamentary system, to do things with integrity, but sometimes it has a cost. In the case of Ms. Wilson-Raybould, she clearly did not have animosity with the Prime Minister's Office. She respected them, but she was willing to give that up. In the case of Ms. Philpott, she gave up the position of president of the Treasury Board, which is an extremely high honour, in order to say that it is about a larger principle, the rule of law.I appeal to my colleagues that this is about integrity, and it's hard. It's hard when it's your party that's in the vise grip and you are extremely loyal. Your party gets you elected. Your number one obligation is to the party that got you elected, but what you carry from that point on is your integrity. I've seen people give up their integrity because they think they're being loyal to their party, but at the end of the day what you carry through Parliament and through your career is that integrity. That's what you trade on, and that's what gets you out of trouble if you make mistakes. I would appeal to my colleagues, based on the very clear call of Ms. Philpott, that we do this and we do it right. Attorney General of CanadaChin, BenCommittee businessCommittee witnessesCriminal prosecutionsMotionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Telford, KatieBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]I would like a recorded vote. BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1630)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair.Thank you for this. I might be a boy from northern Ontario, but I spent many years in Toronto. I'm not all that focused on the privacy issue. I think this is probably the most valuable real estate in North America. Would that be an exaggeration?e-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionTorontoUrban community developmentWaterfrontBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBrianKelcey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1630)[English]I remember when Liberty Village was a whole bunch of broken-down old factories that punk bands like mine used to practice in, and now it's so hoity-toity. We thought we were at the end of the world when we used to have to go there or to Gooderham and Worts. That was considered the end of civilization, and now it is extremely valuable.Very few cities have that kind of real estate that hasn't been developed and is in the exact ideal location. When I'm looking at this project, I'm thinking that Waterfront Toronto is looking at a number of potential operations that could really vitalize the city, the way the revitalization of the docklands in New York and Brooklyn did. The question is, was it for 12 acres or was it for the whole enchilada? That, to me, is a pretty straightforward question. We asked Dan Doctoroff, and he said that it's in the RFP, that it was always for the whole thing, that's what Waterfront Toronto.... But I read the RFP and it said that it was for 12 acres. What was it? Was it 12 acres or was it for the whole thing?e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionTorontoUrban community developmentWaterfrontBrianKelceyBrianKelcey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1630)[English]It certainly gives you a good advantage if you have that. When they said it was always for the whole thing.... I mean, I look at the RFP and it's strictly for 12 acres.My concern is that.... The more questions I ask, the more I expect just straight-up answers if this is a straight-up deal. Waterfront Toronto and Dan Doctoroff were both adamant that this was the second-longest RFP, but the Auditor General said it was an extremely short RFP. I look at the RFP and it looks like 36 days.Both Waterfront Toronto and Sidewalk Labs kept rolling their eyes about “that crazy Auditor General's report”. Where did that come from? I mean, when the Auditor General does a report, we as officials pay really close attention. Did you have concerns raised out of the Auditor General's report?e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionSidewalk LabsTorontoUrban community developmentWaterfrontBrianKelceyBrianKelcey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1635)[English]The Auditor General's report said that Sidewalk received more than the others.e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionSidewalk LabsTorontoUrban community developmentWaterfrontBrianKelceyBrianKelcey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1635)[English]I'm not saying that. I never said that. I'm saying that when we see that the RFP is for 36 days and the Auditor General says it's extremely short, and then we're told it's the second-largest one ever and they don't know what the Auditor General was talking about, to me that raises questions.I'm running out of time here. Ms. Di Lorenzo is not here, but she wrote a letter to us to contradict Waterfront Toronto, because the other element is that we were told this had been very well vetted by the real estate committee. These aren't developers; these are people who want to make sure Toronto is getting the best bang for the buck, and she felt it shouldn't have been brought forward because they didn't have ample time.Right now I don't think any citizen should be trusting Google on anything till they prove their best interests, because of the corporate accountability problems they've been having. Given that it's a controversial project, and given that it's Google, we should be able to get really straight answers. A straight answer to whether there was a problem with the real estate review is yes or no. She felt there was undue pressure. The Auditor General talked about that. Do you feel that this kind of push to get this thing through dealmaking causes problems down the road for the legitimacy of this project?e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionSidewalk LabsTorontoUrban community developmentWaterfrontBrianKelceyBrianKelcey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1640)[English]Thank you very much.BrianKelceyBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1600)[English]I see a little bit extra. Don't I always say what a good chair you are? I'm not going to challenge the chair today.BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]Thank you, Chair.Thank you for this presentation.I deal with fraud all the time now in my offices. As they started out, you'd have had to be very naive to fall for the 419 scams, but they have become increasingly sophisticated. I've been shocked at how many people—in fact, many people probably never come forward—have been victims of these scams. The only way it seems that we're stopping them is literally when the bank teller says no. People transferring funds to relatives who are in jail someplace, people transferring money to someone they want to marry who doesn't exist, people transferring funds because they're afraid the CRA is going to arrest them—they are becoming increasingly sophisticated. Their power comes from this. If you have one point of information on someone, it's a long shot; if you you have two points, you're getting very good; if you have three points of information on someone, you're getting very dead-eye accurate. With AI, with the ability to glean stuff off the net, more and more of this fraud is going to take place. It seems to me, in the work that I do in my MP's office, that often the only thing that stops it is a bank teller saying, “I think you're a victim of fraud here.” What mechanisms are there in the industry to start to deal with the growing sophistication of targeting people for fraud?Allegations of fraud and fraude-Governmente-SecurityPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesAngelinaMason//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]Last year, 90,000 Simplii Financial and BMO customers were affected by a breach of personal financial information. Customers reported that they received conflicting answers about the timing and the scope of the breach, which was worrying. Was that breach by a malevolent outside actor? What was the nature of the fraud that citizens were affected by?Banks and bankinge-Governmente-SecurityPrivacy and data protectionAngelinaMasonAngelinaMason//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English] I must confess, I don't keep my money in the bank. I'm in a caisse populaire, but I've been the victim of a few fraud instances, and I'm amazed when they contact me immediately and say that something happened on my card. That level of speed is very interesting. Is that part of this whole move towards increasing the technological ability to intervene to stop fraud?Banks and bankinge-Governmente-SecurityPrivacy and data protectionAngelinaMasonAngelinaMason//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]RBC was named—I think it was in the New York Times—in one of the Facebook app issues. Because of their app, they were given preferred access, which gave them the ability to read private messages on Facebook. RBC said they never had that access. Facebook said they did. The Privacy Commissioner is investigating. Does the Canadian Bankers Association look into these issues to be able to reassure customers that this kind of undue personal information is not being accessed by a bank?Banks and bankinge-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionAngelinaMasonAngelinaMason//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]All right.Part of our work here is about protecting the privacy rights of citizens and private data. I note that, I think, CIBC and RBC at least have noted in their privacy policies that data can be transferred, processed or stored outside of Canada. That raises questions for our committee in terms of trying to ensure the protection of financial data. Do you have a policy on trying to ensure the data is kept in Canada, where at least with our privacy laws and national standards we would know that the private information will be kept private?e-GovernmentForeign countriesPrivacy and data protectionMarinaMandalAngelinaMason//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]In the U.S., does that data come under the Patriot Act?Data sharinge-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionAngelinaMasonAngelinaMason//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]Yes, I've dealt with a number of citizens who were born in the U.S., and there was the whole tax issue in the United States, which was demanding that they pay taxes. We had citizens who had lived here for 40 or 50 years and were concerned. Are they made aware that their data may be held in the United States under the Patriot Act when they sign up for an account?Data sharinge-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionAngelinaMasonAngelinaMason//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]Thank you very much. AngelinaMasonBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1635)[English] Thank you.Canadians have enormous respect for Statistics Canada, but when Statistics Canada decided to share financial data to get better information, there was a huge blowback, which suggests Canadians are very particular about this kind of integration of financial information with government. Where do you stand on that? Are you sensitive to the fact that people don't want that kind of deep integration between their personal financial information and government, even if it's anonymized?Data sharinge-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesAngelinaMason//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1640)[English]Thank you. It's actually very reassuring to hear that, because we certainly heard from many citizens who were deeply concerned.I just want to end with what I began the conversation on, which was the issue of fraud. We've been studying here the danger and the power of AI, which is going to start to transform all manner of online life. There are deep fakes, and the ability to target better and better by getting more and more personal information, which is why breaches of personal information are so dangerous in this age.I'm interested in training. If you're at a bank and someone makes a lot of inappropriate transactions because they have a gambling addiction, that's not necessarily illegal, but someone else may come in and want to make all kinds of withdrawals in order to pay for someone who doesn't exist who's running a criminal gang in eastern Europe, because they're being suckered. Someone may have a deep fake video that's saying they need this money, but they're in Europe.There are all manner of new elements that we haven't dealt with before. In terms of training your staff, because it's your front line that's going to deal with a lot of this, how is that being done? Are tellers being trained? Are you monitoring at the teller gate?Banks and bankinge-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionWork-based trainingAngelinaMasonAngelinaMason//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English] I think it's an excellent motion. I'm interested in having YouTube here on a number of issues. I'm wondering if we can have it say “and issues relating to YouTube” so that we're not strictly—Committee businessBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]There may be other issues that we may want to ask about.NathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East YorkNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1650)[English]Yes, I think it's easiest to go with this. The door is open. We don't need to establish it like a full-out study.Committee businessBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesPeterKentHon.Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1650)[English]The door may take us to a number of places. Let's go with this and then we'll see where we go.Committee businessPeterKentHon.ThornhillBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1330)[English]Thank you.What was the name of that social media program you just said?Civil and human rightsPhilippinesSocial networking sitesWomenAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1330)[English]Is that something the international women's community, women human rights defenders in other areas, are in a better position to help with? What kind of social media controls are there? It would seem to me that you are more vulnerable speaking up in the country but that if you have an international community that remains vigilant as well, there might be an opportunity there. I don't know if that's the case or if it's really controlled?Civil and human rightsPhilippinesSocial networking sitesWomenTeresita QuintosDelesTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1330)[English]Yes.Teresita QuintosDelesTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]We're trying to look at this through a lens of what things Canada can do to be more proactive with. I'm not sure what the role of the UN Commission on Human Rights is at this point. Do you think there are ways that we can support that or are there opportunities in—I don't know—legal defence? Ms. Teresita Quintos Deles: Just—Ms. Cheryl Hardcastle: Sorry to cut you off. If this president isn't respecting the rule of law, is that a waste of the limited resources you have then?Civil and human rightsForeign policyPhilippinesWomenTeresita QuintosDelesTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]Okay.Teresita QuintosDelesTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]Yes, exactly.Teresita QuintosDelesTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]Yes.Teresita QuintosDelesTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English] What about the media and its role, or are they complicit in some of this? I'm just finding it hard to believe that a president like this can just come in and everyone is so shocked by his conduct.Somewhere there was....Go ahead.Civil and human rightsMedia and the pressPhilippinesWomenTeresita QuintosDelesTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]Right.Teresita QuintosDelesTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1335)[English]I have one minute.I think you were going to tell us a little bit more about the vilification. If we get an international community together, is that something that social media can actually counter very effectively then?Civil and human rightsPhilippinesSocial networking sitesWomenTeresita QuintosDelesTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1355)[English]Thanks.It's such a privilege to be with you today because you're really expressing things so well. We've heard from other human rights defenders as well, and you're really getting to the heart of something that is universal. One of the things that intrigued me was when you talked about how Canada is supporting women and livelihood programs, and how what we're looking at is something bigger here. Do you have a suggestion as to how Canada could segue into addressing those bigger issues? I know I had asked you a little bit before about legal support. I'm trying to think of what there could possibly be that is appropriate in our international regime as well.Civil and human rightsForeign policyPhilippinesWomenAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanTeresita QuintosDeles//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1400)[English]Thank you.Teresita QuintosDelesAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—Nepean//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1730)[English]Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Ambrosie, for setting out your statement and your stance for us here. I wonder if you can help us understand a bit better the situation with the CFL. Why has the CFL failed to acknowledge, or refrained from acknowledging, the link between concussions and brain disease?BrainFootballHuman diseases and disordersMild traumatic brain injuriesSportsPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleRandyAmbrosie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1735)[English]If I may follow up, then, my time is more limited than that of the other members on the committee, so bear with me. Do you feel as if that response, though, is sufficient now, given that every year that goes by we have substantive evidence and substantive science that adds to that. You mentioned the Berlin conference. It was cutting edge. We've had witnesses that tell us that Canada punches above its weight. The NFL is putting significant investments into vanguard scientists who are Canadian, out of Calgary. I'm just wondering if the CFL has committed to contributing to advancing the science, and if so, in what way. Has it been helping with a brain registry, or has it been funding...? Perhaps you could tell us some of the ways you think you'll be able to contribute if you can't match dollar for dollar what the NFL is doing, and I understand that.BrainFootballHuman diseases and disordersMild traumatic brain injuriesSportsRandyAmbrosieRandyAmbrosie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1735)[English]Can we maybe have that list tabled for the committee, then?RandyAmbrosieRandyAmbrosie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1735)[English]It would be great if you could do that.Do you think you might join the NFL in its research?FootballMedical researchMild traumatic brain injuriesSportsRandyAmbrosieRandyAmbrosie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1735)[English]Do you think there's a government role in orchestrating those kinds of joint ventures, or something, or being a part of that? Do you see potential there, or would you rather see the government involved in something separate and let the sporting community do their thing? I heard you kind of saying you want us to work together, but then I kind of hear.... Maybe you could clarify that or help us understand how you think our role can advance understanding.Mild traumatic brain injuriesSportsRandyAmbrosieRandyAmbrosie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1740)[English]Absolutely. You're talking about culture. What do you believe is the role of officiating in that culture? I heard you talk about rule changes. In other sports, we hear people say, “Let them play,” or, “That was an illegal hit. Why is that player not on the bench?” There are all kinds of examples. Tell me a bit about the role of officiating in your culture change, and what you see.Mild traumatic brain injuriesSportsSports officials and refereesRandyAmbrosieRandyAmbrosie//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1840)[English]Thank you very much, doctors.Dr. Gordon, can you tell us a little bit more about what evidence you've gathered and how responsive you've been able to be with rules so that you can reduce injury, for instance, the zero tolerance that rugby has done for the head hits, and the volley ball? What are your steps, and what was your evidence?Mild traumatic brain injuriesSoccerSportsPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleKevinGordon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1845)[English]Thank you.I have time to hear more from both of you about baseline testing recommendations. The COC has recommendations but different organizations take a different approach.Are we ready to decisively recommend that we need baseline testing or is that also part and parcel of the research that we need to be doing, in terms of concussion in sport?Medical examinationsMild traumatic brain injuriesSportsKevinGordonKevinGordon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1845)[English] Was Canada Soccer involved directly with developing the soccer component of the guidelines? Were you involved in developing the soccer component of the—Canada SoccerGuidelinesMild traumatic brain injuriesSoccerSportsKevinGordonKevinGordon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1845)[English]Okay, so is there a bit of a gap in understanding? Is this just a matter of interpretation, or is it a matter of not enough knowledge, and not just enough resources? Is the issue miscommunication, or is the issue—Medical examinationsMild traumatic brain injuriesSoccerSportsKevinGordonKevinGordon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1850)[English]Yes.KevinGordonKevinGordon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1850)[English]Yes, exactly.KevinGordonKevinGordon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1850)[English]Thanks.KevinGordonPeterFonsecaMississauga East—Cooksville//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1910)[English] Thank you, Mr. Chair.I agree, and your comments are really intriguing. That's part of what we're doing here. Some of it seems almost like a culture change and a little more of a philosophical approach to sport, like not glorifying certain things. Other aspects of the study are more logistical, like about data collection. Who should be doing data collection? Is it something that should be done by team and sport organizations, or do you think that's something that should be for the doctor, the medical professional who is issuing the clearance, or both? How do you do it right now? How about you both tell me how you do it right now? How does it work?Information collectionMild traumatic brain injuriesSportsPeterFonsecaMississauga East—CooksvilleKevinGordon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1535)[English]Thank you, Chair.I don't want to take any time from this important meeting, but I will be bringing forward a motion for debate on Thursday:That, pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(h)(vi) and given the testimony provided by the former Attorney General of Canada, public office holders Katie Telford, Chief of Staff to the Prime Minister, and Ben Chin, Chief of Staff to the Minister of Finance, be invited before the Committee to answer questions related to their conduct in inappropriately pressuring the former Attorney General and members of her staff in order to secure a deferred prosecution agreement for SNC-Lavalin.Attorney General of CanadaChin, BenCommittee businessCommittee witnessesCriminal prosecutionsNotice of motionPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Telford, KatieBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1535)[English]I'd like to just put it to a vote. Committee businessBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesPeterKentHon.Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1535)[English]I could bring it forward off the floor.Committee businessNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East YorkNathanielErskine-SmithBeaches—East York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1535)[English]Even if I do it orally?Committee businessBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1535)[English]Okay.MichaelMacPhersonBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]Thank you, gentlemen, for coming here today and participating in our study.Mr. Brodhead, you were with Infrastructure Canada before you went to Sidewalk Labs. What was the nature of your communication with Sidewalk Labs Alphabet while you were working for the federal government?Conflict of intereste-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesJohnBrodhead//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]Did they contact you when you were at Indigenous Services?Conflict of intereste-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionJohnBrodheadJohnBrodhead//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]Was that the bridge, then, for you to go and work for them?Conflict of intereste-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionJohnBrodheadJohnBrodhead//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]Thank you.I think one of the concerns we have is that certainly the Prime Minister has been very close on this project. When I read the Auditor General's report—I might be reading a different Auditor General's report than my colleagues were asking about—I see that the Auditor General noted that one of the problems with this process was that the communications and consultations that should have been done at other levels were being done at a very high political level. Who was doing that behind the scenes consultation at a high political level?e-GovernmentGovernment contractsLobbying and lobbyistsPrivacy and data protectionWaterfrontJohnBrodheadJohnBrodhead//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]Mr. Doctoroff.JohnBrodheadDanDoctoroff//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1600)[English]So it was somebody mysterious?This is the Auditor General; this isn't me. You're telling me you don't know who was handling this?e-GovernmentGovernment contractsLobbying and lobbyistsPrivacy and data protectionWaterfrontDanDoctoroffMicahLasher//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]Okay. Maybe I don't know where the Auditor General got her facts from. That's strange. We'll have to wonder about that.The Auditor General found Waterfront Toronto emails that said the board was being strongly urged by the federal government to authorize that framework agreement and to put pressure on. Who from the federal government was doing that pressure?Mr. Brodhead.e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPolitical influencePrivacy and data protectionWaterfrontMicahLasherJohnBrodhead//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]Okay.We got a letter recently from Julie Di Lorenzo, who was on the real estate board. She was contradicting Waterfront Toronto. She was saying that, contrary to the claims made, there were many IREC meetings prior to the vote on the framework agreement. She said that was false. She said this was a complex, lengthy document. She was given only four business days to review, assess and seek out counsel. Three days after receiving the framework agreement at the IREC, there was the meeting, at which she would not move this agreement forward to the board with approval.Who was putting the pressure on to get this thing through? Come on, you know people. They're working for your project.e-GovernmentGovernment contractsLobbying and lobbyistsPrivacy and data protectionWaterfrontJohnBrodheadDanDoctoroff//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]Okay.She said they made a false statement to our committee. That, to me, is serious, because this committee is actually like being in court. You have to tell the truth. If she said that there were no meetings and that's why she would not bring it forward....I'm running out of time, here.The Auditor General found that Waterfront Toronto gave information prior to the RFP. They gave more information for your bid than for the other competing bids. Who was giving it from Waterfront Toronto to you, prior to that bid?e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionWaterfrontDanDoctoroffMicahLasher//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]Well, that's great—MicahLasherMicahLasher//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]Why would the Auditor General say that?I guess the thing I find hard to believe.... In Canada we treat our auditor generals like Supreme Court justices—well, not the way you guys treat Supreme Court justices. Sorry, maybe I'll retract that.When an auditor general comes out with a report, it's damn serious. When the Auditor General says that you have more information than others do, and you tell me, “oh, we got a one-page map,” I find it hard to believe that the Auditor General would make note of that and think that it was unfair.e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionWaterfrontMicahLasherMicahLasher//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]The facts are in the Auditor General's report.e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionWaterfrontMicahLasherMicahLasher//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]I'm running out of time here.I have one last question. Mr. Doctoroff, you said it was the second-largest RFP in Waterfront Toronto history. Waterfront Toronto said the same thing. We were all scratching our heads, because the Auditor General said the opposite. Again, we have the Auditor General, who you guys keep saying is just making stuff up out of thin air.In the RFP, it was from March 17 to April 27. I'm not a big developer, but that seems like a really short timeline. How do you say that's the second-longest thing you've ever seen, when the RFP was from March 17 to April 27?e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionWaterfrontMicahLasherDanDoctoroff//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1605)[English]And you got it five-and-half months.... The Auditor General said that it was an extremely short time. She said public art projects take about five times as long as what you went through. I just wonder how all this happened and you don't know who was talking behind the scenes to help you. I'm confused.e-GovernmentGovernment contractsLobbying and lobbyistsPrivacy and data protectionWaterfrontDanDoctoroffDanDoctoroff//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1610)[English]Thank you.DanDoctoroffBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1625)[English]Do I get to respond?AdamVaughanSpadina—Fort YorkAdamVaughanSpadina—Fort York//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1630)[English]Chair, you asked us what we thought. I'd prefer to just end the round so we could get to committee business, because there's some other stuff that needs to get done this evening. I feel we're doing well if we finish the round and then go to committee business. I know my colleagues have a meeting to go to, as well.BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesFrankBaylisPierrefonds—Dollard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1630)[English]You keep giving your questions away, so—BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesFrankBaylisPierrefonds—Dollard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1630)[English]Stop whining to me now, Frank.FrankBaylisPierrefonds—DollardFrankBaylisPierrefonds—Dollard//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]Mr. Brodhead, when you were with Infrastructure Canada, what was your contact with Waterfront Toronto?Conflict of intereste-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesJohnBrodhead//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]Were you talking with them about the Toronto Expo bid?Conflict of intereste-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionJohnBrodheadJohnBrodhead//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]I spoke with people who were involved in the Toronto Expo bid, and they said there was discussion about the possibility of using Waterfront, but after the new government came in, there was a real chill because the Prime Minister's Office was very much interested in the Google deal. That's what they told me, so I was wondering if you were involved in those discussions.Conflict of intereste-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionJohnBrodheadJohnBrodhead//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]Mr. Doctoroff, you said that someone reached out. Was it Will Fleissig who reached out?Conflict of intereste-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionJohnBrodheadDanDoctoroff//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]Will Fleissig's office reached out in 2016.Conflict of intereste-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionDanDoctoroffMicahLasher//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]There were frequent communications. You were provided surveys, drawings and topographic illustrations. You signed a non-disclosure agreement. This was all prior to the RFP, so don't you feel you were getting an extra advantage?e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionMicahLasherMicahLasher//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]So there could have been 52 other companies that got this.e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionMicahLasherMicahLasher//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]It is conceivable, because Eric Schmidt said they were really looking for someone to “give us a city and put us in charge,” and they gave you the city of Toronto.A voice: No.Mr. Charlie Angus: He did also say—I'm not quoting the Auditor General here, but your boss, so you're going to have to trust what he said—that this project “may require substantial forbearances from existing laws and regulations.”As a legislator—and we're looking at probably the most prime real estate in North America—when a company wins a bid and says it wants to be exempted from laws, I have to ask myself what laws you are being to exempted from if we're going to give you the city.e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionMicahLasherDanDoctoroff//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1645)[English]Thank God for something there. That's good.What about those laws that he expects to be given forbearances from? I don't know real estate deals that come in and say, “We want to be exempted from Canadian law.” What are the laws you don't like here?e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionDanDoctoroffDanDoctoroff//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1650)[English]I'll repeat: “substantial forbearances from existing laws and regulations.” Everybody would love that if they were trying to get real estate deals.e-GovernmentGovernment contractsPrivacy and data protectionDanDoctoroffDanDoctoroff//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1650)[English]I represent a mill town, so I'm totally into this.DanDoctoroffDanDoctoroff//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1650)[English]I just can't imagine that Eric was thinking about my mill workers when he said that, but I'm totally into the wood, man. I'm totally there.DanDoctoroffBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1350)[English]Thank you. I'll ask my question of both of you. Perhaps we'll start with you, Ms. Nasir, because you're here, for probably about three minutes, and then the other three minutes will go to you, Ms. Hossain. I would like to ask you about the politicization of the judiciary—the court cases and the court decisions that are made—and then about other things that are happening politically, such as supporting or closing down organizations that advance women's human rights. Is there a connection there? What can Canada's role be in helping to advance it, if we're using the United Nations or the high commission? Should we be directly supporting bilateral relationships at a more regional or local level? Should we be concentrating politically, or is the judiciary also an issue that needs to be looked at?BangladeshCivil and human rightsForeign policyHuman rights organizationsPakistanWomenAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanAsiyaNasir//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1350)[English] Ms. Hossain.AsiyaNasirSaraHossain//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP): (1010)[Translation]Thank you, Madam Chair.[English]I have so many questions. I'm going to try to be succinct.I want to thank you for coming back; this is very kind. Thank you for the work that you do. It is so important. I want to come back to the recommendation in regard to the Canada health transfer and the fact that it needs to be increased. There needs to be more money, because we're heading into the peak of the baby boom generation. I recognize that you want the increase to go to $167 billion. Should there be strings attached? Provincial governments are notorious for taking money and then giving it away as tax breaks or spending it in ways that do not meet the intent, so should there be strings attached to that funding?Canada Health TransferPovertySenior citizensWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonGisèleTassé-Goodman//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1010)[English]Should we see the protections that we see in Quebec in other provinces as well, protections for that funding for seniors' health?Canada Health TransferPovertySenior citizensWomenGisèleTassé-GoodmanPhilippePoirier-Monette//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1010)[English]Thank you.Do we have our guests back?PhilippePoirier-MonetteKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1010)[English]Okay, thank you.I have so many questions. I'm very interested in the concern about the OAS and the GIS. First and foremost, back in the 1990s—and I think this is approximate—we spent about 3.4% of GDP on OAS. Then we saw an increasing baby boom generation, so by about 2010 we were up to about 3.9%, and fear reigned in the land. These are figures from the Parliamentary Budget Officer. The Parliamentary Budget Officer was very clear that by 2030 that percentage of GDP would come back to less than 2.6% because there would be fewer and fewer seniors. Therefore, increasing the OAS, according to research and the Parliamentary Budget Officer of the day, was a reasonable thing. I thank you for that suggestion. Do you support that notion?Second, in 2012, if we had increased the GIS by $1 billion—and I want to remind you that it sounds like a lot of money, but a billion dollars in the federal budget is very insignificant, really—that would have lifted all seniors out of poverty. Is there any sense of how much would be needed now in order to raise all seniors, including the majority of seniors who are women, out of poverty?Guaranteed Income SupplementIncome securityMarket basket measureOld Age SecurityPovertySenior citizensWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1015)[English]It is for Krista James. KarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonKristaJames//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1120)[English]Thank you very much. I have a question for each of you. I'll be succinct.I want to say congratulations to each and every one of you. Tomorrow, I hope, is not the last time you will take a seat in the House of Commons. I have great faith in you, and I look forward to your taking your places as leaders. I'll start with Hannah. You talked about this Canadian mining operation. We have laws in Canada about the conduct of mining companies. Are these laws being ignored?Aboriginal peoplesDaughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsMining industryWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonHannahMartin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1125)[English]Thank you very much.HannahMartinIreneMathyssenLondon—Fanshawe//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1125)[English]Zola, you talked about women and their access to services. You touched on the fact that housing and transportation are very difficult to come by. We have a housing crisis. In your opinion, or as you have seen it, do we need a national housing strategy so that we don't have this crisis and this terrible burden on all people, but women in particular?Daughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsHousingWomenIreneMathyssenLondon—FanshaweNokuzolaNcube//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1125)[English]Okay. Do we need a national housing strategy?Daughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsHousingWomenNokuzolaNcubeNokuzolaNcube//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1145)[English]Thank you. Thank you for bringing these very divergent but important perspectives. Ideally, that's what parliamentarians are supposed to do: bring their community to this place and allow this place to make good decisions about that community. Congratulations, and thank you.Again, I have so many questions. Immaculée, you talked about the recognition of foreign credentials. Are your parents experiencing difficult barriers? Is it too slow a process? Is it too ponderous and unfair?Daughters of the VoteEducation and trainingGovernment and politicsRefugeesWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonImmaculeeKalimurhima//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1145)[English]Okay. Thank you.Megan, you talked about the institutionalization of human beings. We heard very recently about forced sterilization of indigenous women. We were horrified by it, but it's a reality. Despite the fact that indigenous people are 5% of the population, they make up 30% of those who are incarcerated. I understand your frustration. I wanted to get to what you talked about in terms of home care for those who are vulnerable, and making it part of the social fabric through the health care system. I've had experience with community living. It matter what happens to those challenged individuals. Could you describe what you see in terms of the social agencies becoming part of the health care system?Daughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsHealth care systemWomenImmaculeeKalimurhimaMeganLinton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1145)[English] Thank you.Phoenix, with regard to your experience as a transgender woman in sport, I think we regard it as something where there aren't too many people in your situation, but I wondered about it. Is there a significant number? Also, what kind of awareness is beginning in terms of the work that needs to be done to meet your needs and respect that community?Daughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsSexual minoritiesSportsWomenMeganLintonPhoenixNakagawa//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1150)[English]Thank you.PhoenixNakagawaKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1150)[English] I know. I'm sorry. I wanted to talk to Valérie.KarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1210)[English] Thank you, Madam Chair.And thank you to you. You are incredible. You've shown courage. This is highly emotional, and I truly think that there isn't a woman on the planet who hasn't been inappropriately harassed. It's just a reality, and it seems so ingrained in our society. We have to address it. We have to end it.I wonder—and each of you is certainly welcome to respond—how we can raise awareness and how we can address this. As recently as within the last few weeks or days, we've heard that women are unreliable. They are emotional. They are hysterical. They're not team players. You can't rely on what they have to say when they raise issues. How do we face that head-on? Quite honestly, that drives women out of the political arena. It drives them out of professional jobs. What is your advice to us?Daughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsSexual abuse and exploitationWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonCorinaPicui//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1210)[English]One of the things you've all touched on is the reality of poverty and how poverty impacts women. We need a national housing strategy. If women didn't have to worry about housing themselves and their children, would they be more able to defend against what is unacceptable in terms of social harassment?Daughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsHousingPovertyWomenCharlotteScott-FraterCorinaPicui//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1210)[English]Thank you.Do I still have a little bit of time?CorinaPicuiKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1210)[English]Corina, you talked about indigenous families. One of the realities is—and others have mentioned it—that families get pulled apart when there is poverty and violence and difficulty. Do we need to have a support system in place to keep families together so that they can maintain language and thrive as a family?Aboriginal peoplesDaughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonCorinaPicui//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1220)[English]This is a great question. In regard to parity, it's absolutely essential. We need that 51% or 52% of the population to have a voice. I introduced a bill some time ago that demanded fifty-fifty in public corporations, in the hope that it would pass and then spread to the private sector. It did not pass. It was voted down. I still think that's essential.I have to say that in the first government of which I was a member, the effort was made to have 50% representation in cabinet. It was very important. In the party that I am a member of, since 1970 there has been a policy that any nomination meeting has to include parity, and women have to be looked at as candidates in winning and winnable ridings. This is absolutely critical. Daughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsSexual discriminationWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1225)[English]I have to say we're very proud in my party to have Romeo Saganash. He was one of the writers of this piece of legislation, and you're absolutely right that it has to be a part of everything we do. We have to make it integral to our decision-making and respectful of the needs of indigenous people.Almost 10 years ago, I was on this committee and we travelled and talked to indigenous women about the reality of their communities. We went to the north. We talked to Inuit women. I wanted to come back to this. In regard to their needs and the needs of their families, they said, “We know what has to be done.” That's how we respect the entire issue of reconciliation. We listen to the people who have experienced a trauma and we respect their solutions.Aboriginal peoplesDaughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsUnited Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous PeoplesWomenKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—LondonHannahMartin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Irene Mathyssen: (1230)[English]Thank you very much, Charlotte. I want you to know that some years ago, we did have a national housing strategy. It was terminated in 1993. It utilized CMHC revenues in order to build co-op and not-for-profit housing. I have 14 co-ops and not-for-profit housing projects in my riding alone. The Government of Ontario, between 1990 and 1995, built 50,000 units, and they became communities; they're very important communities. We have to get back to that. We have to make sure that the funding is there, that the vision is there, that the capacity is there and that the will to invest in that housing comes from the federal government, and not in some distant future. We have to start now, because in the last 20 years, the erosion of housing has been criminal. There are a million people who suffer because they don't have adequate housing, and we have to change that.Daughters of the VoteGovernment and politicsHousingWomenCharlotteScott-FraterKarenVecchioElgin—Middlesex—London//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1745)[English]We'll all get one, right?RobertKitchenSouris—Moose MountainSwapnaMylabathula//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1755)[English]Thank you, Chair.Thank you very much. This is really intriguing. I like seeing how you laid out that our national strategy has to address not just prevention and not just looking at this as a public health issue; there's also the issue of diagnosis. The issue of research comes in, because if you don't have enough research, you can't diagnose. It's not just about prevention; it's also about treatment, innovative forms of treatment, and being cutting edge on those innovative forms of treatment. I read the word cloud you had at the beginning. If you listened to some of the testimony, you will know that there is a gap in availability of treatment when it comes to some of the more complex emotional trauma symptoms and the physical symptoms. I'd like to hear a little bit more from you about how you think that works in a national strategy, when we're still dealing with issues like the one you mentioned, that of harmonizing how we track concussions and exchanging information. Mild traumatic brain injuriesSportsRobertKitchenSouris—Moose MountainSwapnaMylabathula//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1800)[English] Thank you.Yes, I think that's a given. That's part of our role here, to make sure it is orchestrated at all levels. This leads me to the real question of.... I know you're familiar with Parachute. How can we enhance that, make it mandatory? Or maybe you think I'm misguided to be.... I'm trying to use something we already know, like Parachute, that tries to take all of the cutting-edge information and have one place that we can move out from. It's ultimately voluntary. If you are a member of an organization that requires you to do that.... It's not the same thing as what you're asking. You're saying that you expect that the federal government, in our strategy, would be pointing at certain things and making them mandatory. I would like to hear you stress that a bit more, because we hear this in very serious areas of policy development. Even international human rights issues can be voluntary. Can you articulate that a bit more and maybe explain where you think we can springboard off Parachute?Mild traumatic brain injuriesParachuteSportsSwapnaMylabathulaSwapnaMylabathula//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1830)[English]Thank you very much.I'll try to be quick. I know this is an emerging issue, and it's quickly evolving, so I don't think we have the best template for how we would roll out these protocols that you're talking about. You mentioned the governmental concussion board in your conclusion. I envision something more like a commissioner or a secretariat with an administrative body behind it. However, the point, actually, is more about....Because it is publicly funded, I want to go back to the Canadian concussion strategy that was developed by Parachute. In Ontario, there is Rowan's Law, which has a mandatory protocol. Could Ontario's law be implemented using Parachute's Canadian concussion guidelines, or are there some gaps? Is there a contradictory area?Mild traumatic brain injuriesRowan's Law (Concussion Safety)SportsRobertKitchenSouris—Moose MountainSwapnaMylabathula//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1835)[English]Perfect. Thanks. SwapnaMylabathulaRobertKitchenSouris—Moose Mountain//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1915)[English]How much time do I have, a minute or two? RobertKitchenSouris—Moose MountainRobertKitchenSouris—Moose Mountain//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1915)[English] I appreciate that.You know, Gord—if I can call you Gord—your conviction is so admirable. I don't want to get choked up, and we're going to try to keep it up here, but we get it. Also, as you know, Rowan's story and your passion for this really have motivated this a lot. It's a huge part of what we're doing here in talking about the federal role.If we could just kind of riff on that a bit, as you did very well a minute ago, what do you think is the federal role? Should each province have its own Rowan's Law to roll something out regionally and provincially and then have a federal...? I'm just assuming, because you mentioned your professional career, that you must have some bureaucratic insights on where we should be maximizing what we do as we move forward.Mild traumatic brain injuriesSportsRobertKitchenSouris—Moose MountainGordonStringer//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (1315)[English] I'd like to speak to this motion. The NDP has been committed to getting to the truth on this. I think that's been clear from our efforts throughout this entire thing. We've repeatedly called for a public independent inquiry because of what happened at the justice committee and what we have seen happening with the Ethics Commissioner, which is beyond the scope of what the Ethics Commissioner can do. We believe that to get to the truth, we need a public independent inquiry. We're using all the tools we can to get to the truth. We participated in the justice committee; I sat at the justice committee process. We called for the Ethics Commissioner to investigate. Now we're here supporting this motion at the ethics committee. It's obvious to us and to Canadians that the Liberals are using their power to silence the former attorney general and the former president of the Treasury Board. For some reason, Mr. Chair, the Liberals do not want this story to be heard.I've heard it repeated by my Liberal colleagues here, and by others throughout their party, that Ms. Wilson-Raybould has already had her opportunity. I've heard them say that she has had four hours to have her say and that's good enough for them. They've actually made a decision—Committee businessPhilpott, JanePrime MinisterReferences to membersSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Trudeau, JustinWilson-Raybould, JodyBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1315)[English]Okay. I'm going to move an amendment at the end of my—BobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1315)[English]I am.We've heard these lines repeated that Jody Wilson-Raybould had four hours to have her say and that this was good enough. Now the Liberals have made up their minds. They think everything she had to say is out, which we know isn't true, because we know that she herself, Ms. Wilson-Raybould, has said both publicly and in writing that she has more to say, and now Jane Philpott, in the article in Maclean's, has indicated that she also has some things to contribute to this conversation. Canadians want to hear what they have to say.This isn't good enough for Canadians. Every place I go in my riding of Essex, people are talking about this. To think that this is just somehow an Ottawa bubble story and that no one is paying attention to it, because it's too difficult to understand all the moving pieces, which I, frankly, understand, because this story has been changing every single day.... People are talking about it. I went to the post office and a lady was talking to me about it in there. She knew Jody Wilson-Raybould's name and Jane Philpott's name and was using them, saying, “We want them to speak the truth”. I was in airport security yesterday to come here, and the screener was talking to me about this. They want these women to come and speak. People who typically don't pay attention to politics are gripped by this story. To see the budget come and go and no one is even talking about the budget tells us that Canadians are not ready to let this story go. The motion before us today is about getting to the truth. We're willing to use all the tools available. If the Prime Minister at this point won't do the right thing and expand the waiver, which is what's being asked, to expand the scope of the order in council, then we have to have a full public inquiry. At the very least, he has to let these former cabinet ministers speak because of the indication they have given that they would like to speak and that they have something substantive to contribute to the story.When Jane Philpott, last week, said that there is much more to the SNC-Lavalin affair and that Canadians have concerns about the government's attempts to shut down the story, that rang true to me. I can tell from the op-ed this morning that my colleague Mr. Erskine-Smith feels the same way, that it rang true, that people are talking about this and want the truth. As elected officials, that's the obligation we have. Our obligation isn't to the party we represent. It's actually to our constituents and to Canadians as a whole when we're sitting in committee.I want to talk a little bit about the justice committee and what happened there. A lot of people told us that they felt that it was the best place for the study for the truth to come out, but the Liberals were quite clear that they had no desire to see that happen at the justice committee. They used every tool available to them to shut down the debate, to shut down the conversation and to essentially end the study. We don't have an ongoing study anymore at the justice committee to get to the bottom of this, and that's concerning, because this isn't just about Canada. The OECD is watching what we're doing here. Our minister had to provide a letter saying that yes, we will have a robust investigation at the justice committee. Well, that's no longer happening, so what is the response to the globe right now about our trying to pull our own weight and stick to the international commitments we've made, not just in words but in writing, and the standard we are held to? We can't just skate away from them. The ethics committee is another opportunity for a study that would satisfy the global community and let it know that our commitments are serious and that we take them seriously. On the justice committee, the Liberal majority, in my opinion, did not act in good faith. The NDP moved three motions to have Jody Wilson-Raybould testify again, on February 27, March 6 and March 13, and was consistently voted down and ignored. This is another opportunity for the Liberals to understand that this isn't a story that's going away. Canadians want the truth. This is another opportunity to get to that truth. Ms. Wilson-Raybould was repeatedly denied the opportunity to return to the justice committee, even though we saw the former Privy Council clerk, Michael Wernick, come back, and he refuted the testimony she had given. Fundamentally, that's unfair. She has a right of reply. It's just a fundamental unfairness that she was not able to come back and address the comments made about her. I hope that her colleagues who sit on this committee see that for the injustice it was and that she deserves a right to speak to what was said about her.(1320)We moved motions to hear from everyone implicated in her testimony, and these were consistently voted down. We heard from three people out of 11. There are still other players named in this who need the opportunity to come forward to speak and to clear their own names, because some pretty incriminating things were said about them. I'm sure those people do not want this to follow their careers either and would welcome the opportunity to come before this committee to air the truth. I'm talking about people at the highest levels. We're talking about four resignations. We're talking about the former attorney general's chief of staff. We're talking about the current chief of staff to the Prime Minister. We're talking about two PMO staff members who are still sitting there. I would imagine that they would like the opportunity to come before the committee. I hope you'll extend that to them, because, at a bare minimum, in terms of fairness and as a courtesy, I think they deserve that as well.What happened? We saw what happened. The Liberals voted to shut down the debate. They adjourned the debate. Again, last week, they shut down the entire study. Now there's nothing happening at the justice committee. We saw a letter come from Ms. Wilson–Raybould to the justice committee last week in direct response to questions asked by Mr. Rankin during her testimony. She will provide some of the documents and text messages that were requested of her. She alluded to a report in her letter. There is no such report. There's no report to come from the justice committee, because the Liberal members on the justice committee shut down any opportunity for that. There's nothing going forward there.Again, we have to understand that Ms. Wilson–Raybould will only be addressing in her response those direct questions asked of her. The question I think is outstanding is why the Liberal members on that committee did not want to get to the truth. I hope the Liberal members on this committee, who hold the majority here, are seriously considering what has been happening around our country and the fact that this isn't going away. Every single day there's a new bombshell coming out on this. The best path for all of us is to go to the truth. When the truth comes out, we can deal with the fallout from it. I sincerely hope there won't be a movement to adjourn, there won't be a movement to go in camera and there won't be an attempt to once again put things behind closed doors, which Canadians are strongly indicating they do not want to see.I want to address a comment made that's been a theme, a very horrible theme in this entire thing, which has been the attempt to smear these very credible, intelligent women. We saw a smear campaign against Ms. Wilson–Raybould, which continued yesterday in this debacle, about her being difficult to work with. If she is so difficult to work with, why was the Prime Minister offering her the indigenous file, which, by his own admission, is the most important relationship that exists? It doesn't hold water that she is difficult, but we're going to give her the best file, the most important file, we have. This doesn't add up, and Canadians can see through these attempts.What Ms. Sgro said shocked people on the weekend, when she said that she wanted Ms. Wilson–Raybould and Ms. Philpott to “put up or shut up.” First of all, I don't know who speaks to their colleagues that way. I can tell you that my colleagues in the New Democratic Party would never speak to me in that manner. That's misogynistic. That's sexist. Coming from a woman, a senior woman, it is even more shocking. I hope you'll address this issue with your colleague. She needs to issue an apology, and I don't think an apology just to the people she was discussing, but to women parliamentarians. We have 26% women sitting in this Parliament. How on earth are we going to attract strong, intelligent women to this Parliament if the message is that if you don't go along with your party, if you don't protect the Prime Minister, you had better shut up? The interpretation I got wasn't “put up or shut up”; it was “shut up or we'll find a way to shut you up.” Women in Canada will not tolerate that, so I hope you'll address that with your colleague. I hope she will retract that statement and understand the impact it has on young women who are going to be filling our Parliament in another week during Daughters of the Vote. I implore you, as colleagues, to please address that issue within your caucus and with Ms. Sgro directly.These comments tell Canadians that the Liberals are more interested in protecting the Prime Minister than in finding the truth. Your political future, my political future, are not more important than the truth. I think what Mr. Erskine–Smith wrote in his op-ed today was basically that we are here to get to the truth. We are not here to serve the parties we're in. We can disagree with the parties we're in. We can do so in a respectful way. We can do so in a way that's in line with our party values, but when we try to block the truth from Canadians and block our colleagues from being able to speak that truth, there's something fundamentally wrong. I really implore you today to support this.(1325) I mentioned at the justice committee last week that the Liberal Party campaigned on transparency and accountability. This is not transparency and accountability. You can't continue to say one thing and do another, because it's putting a lot of doubt in the minds of Canadians about what is happening here. We're talking about corporations having access to the Prime Minister's Office and being able to write laws. Then, when they can't use those laws, the Prime Minister uses his power to pressure the one person who can change her mind and do so. This is serious and Canadians understand this. I think it would be a grave mistake for the Liberal members to think that Canadians don't understand what this is all about. This is the fear that Canadians have. When a constituent walks into my office because their application for EI has been refused because they wrote one thing incorrectly in their application, that's not fair. They're coming to me for help. How do I then turn around and say to those constituents, “Well, guess what? There are different rules that apply to you and that apply to the Prime Minister of Canada.” That's the message you're sending to Canadians—that they have to do all the right things and can't even breach anything or be in view of breaching anything or they'll be prevented from receiving the services they are owed, when you have the Prime Minister doing the exact opposite. I really implore you to take that seriously because that is what Canadians are paying attention to. I want to talk about the oath because there's been a lot of discussion about the oath that Jody Wilson–Raybould and Dr. Philpott took. There's been a lot of speculation that they could stand up in Parliament and use their parliamentary privilege. You're asking them to take an incredible risk on something that hasn't been tested to that length. These are professional, intelligent, strong women, and I don't blame them for not wanting to take a risk that they'll wear for the rest of their lives. It's disgraceful that you're asking them to do that.There's one person who can change this.First, I'll get back to the oath. I want to read the following section of the oath. The reason I think we heard Ms. Philpott say she's taking it seriously and why Jody Wilson–Raybould is taking it so seriously is this: I shall keep secret all matters committed and revealed to me in this capacity, or that shall be secretly treated of in Council. Generally, in all things I shall do as a faithful and true servant ought to do for Her Majesty. So help me God.This is something they take incredibly seriously and you're asking them to break it. The New Democrats and I are asking you to go to your Prime Minister and have him, with the stroke of pen—he could do it right now or right after this meeting—expand the order in council and lift the waiver and let them say what they've indicated strongly they want to say. Why are you asking them to jeopardize themselves, to jeopardize their careers, to jeopardize their oath and potentially be under some type of legal case following their standing up?I don't understand that. Again, as a colleague, I don't know how you can impose that on your own colleague, in your own caucus, and say, “I'm going to prevent you from speaking the truth.” I would not go to the Prime Minister and say that. I just can't comprehend that. I think it's very unfortunate. I believe there are a lot of Liberal members who don't believe this is the proper path either. I implore you in this particular motion to expand the order in council and stop asking Jody Wilson–Raybould and Jane Philpott to break everything they've said they cannot do, but that you instead go back and do the one thing they're asking you to do. That's to expand the order in council so they can speak. It's so simple. Fundamentally, it's fair. I think that Canadians understand that and I think all of you, I hope, understand it.I'll leave it at that, but I would like to introduce my amendment at this point, Mr. Chair, if I can read it into the record. It's being distributed.The amendment is that paragraph (A) of the motion be replaced with the following:That the motion be amended by replacing the words “A. Immediately begin a study of the ongoing corruption scandal involving the Prime Minister;” with the words “A, Immediately begin a study, pursuant to Standing Order 108 (3)(h)(vi), to review any federal legislation, regulation or Standing Order which impacts the ethical standards of public office holders as it relates to the question of exerting inappropriate pressure on the Attorney General of Canada, for political or other reasons, with respect to decisions regarding whether to proceed with a criminal prosecution, and that a vote on this motion be conducted while the Committee is open to the public;”.(1330) I think this speaks to the mandate of this committee. There has been some confusion among the public about whether or not the ethics committee is the appropriate place, whether it's the mandate of this committee, which the New Democrats strongly feel it is.I think this amendment offers some clarity. The last part of the amendment talks about the vote being open to the public. Canadians have been clear that they don't support the efforts of the Liberal government to bring things behind closed doors and to keep them from Canadians. That's the rationale we're offering here in having the vote in public and being transparent to Canadians. Committee businessMotionsOathsPhilpott, JanePrime MinisterReferences to membersSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Trudeau, JustinWaiver of responsibilityWilson-Raybould, JodyBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1425)[English] Thank you, Mr. Chair.I want to address some of the things that have been said by my colleague, first of all, about how this particular committee is maybe not the appropriate place. I want to again reiterate that the ethics committee deals with lobbying. At the heart of this story what we are talking about is extensive lobbying by SNC to influence the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance and Michael Wernick to intervene and to go to the former attorney general to pressure her to change her mind. Lobbying is absolutely within the scope of this committee, and I believe it really does firmly belong in this committee as a study.Committees may not be the best place to hear this, and I completely agree that the gold standard is a full public independent inquiry, but if the Prime Minister were going to do that, he would have already initiated it. We are seeing clearly that that is not going to happen. If it were going to happen, we'd have it launched. This is seven weeks of torture for Liberals. Every single day the story changes and becomes worse. If you truly believe that the Prime Minister wants to have a full independent public inquiry, we would already see evidence of that. Canadians would already see that, so I agree with you that committees aren't the best place but this is the only place we currently have to be able to have a forum, to create space for people to be able to speak who very publicly have indicated that they would like the opportunity to do so. It may not be the best but it's the only option before us right now, as parliamentarians.Before I leave committees, I have to say that the justice committee has been very clear. The study is done. There is no further conversation or study. There have been multiple attempts to bring this back to the justice committee, which have been voted down by members of the justice committee. No one in Canada believes that the justice committee is going to revisit that, and I say that as a member of the justice committee, as vice-chair of the justice committee. There is absolutely no indication that they will entertain any further conversation.The letter from Ms. Wilson-Raybould to the justice committee is very narrow in what it represents. She was asked a direct question by Mr. Rankin during her testimony, and the letter she has sent is a response to that direct question. It's very limited. I do not believe that we will anticipate some big long full statement from her coming to the committee. She has indicated that she will provide the text messages and the emails as requested of her by Mr. Rankin. That is what we can expect to see inside of that communication, if you will, but that communication will land at the justice committee and nothing will be done with it. There is no study that indicates that something must be done with it. There is no will to do anything with it. It will come, but how meaningful will that be if there is simply a letter that becomes public?What I think is going to happen is that it will raise even more questions than we currently have. The idea that this letter is going to clear everything up.... I think that is not the case at all, and it is being taken out of context in the spirit that it was delivered. She even references a report. There is no report. There is no study at the justice committee, so there is no report to come forward. The justice committee is not going to revisit it. I think Canadians understand that and see that clearly and, as a member of that committee, I'm telling you that I do not believe there will be any further efforts at the justice committee in terms of this particular focus.So we land back at the ethics committee, which is just another space for us to have this study, and it's entirely appropriate to have that here, regardless of what she may say. If there is an order in council for this committee, then I'm certain that Liberal members can go to the Prime Minister and say we need an order in council for the ethics committee and we need him to expand it and not limit it in a way that leaves so many questions unanswered. Your own members are going out publicly saying there are things to say beyond this scope, so please let us say them. I think in the interest of fairness that you should pursue the study here. You should allow the study here—that is really what we're talking about; let's be honest—because you hold the majority of votes, and we can all count. Ultimately you're holding the fate of this truth coming to light for Canadians in your vote today, because the justice committee will not revisit this. There have been multiple attempts by the opposition parties there to see that happen. What other options are we left with? There are other committees on which Liberals have majorities, where you will continue to listen to, I think, very reasonable arguments that any reasonable Canadian can see a path forward on and yet vote along your party lines in order to support your Prime Minister and keep the truth from Canadians.(1430) I would like you to consider those things, because I really believe that all that we have at this point is this committee. The Liberals have been out and talking about parliamentary privilege and saying, “they can just stand up” and “they can just say this”.... If you really want them to be able to speak their truth, if you really want them to have a space, here it is. We're offering it to you on a silver platter. We're saying that here's the space for something you're telling Canadians you want. You want them to be able to speak. You would like that to be able to happen. Here it is, all packaged up for you to be able to say, “Yes, we also would like our colleagues to be able to have an opportunity to speak, and yes, we would like the truth for Canadians.”Committee businessInquiries and public inquiriesLobbying and lobbyistsPhilpott, JanePolitical influencePrime MinisterReferences to membersSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Trudeau, JustinWilson-Raybould, JodyBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1435)[English]I just want to put onto the record that the chair of the justice committee, Anthony Housefather, has written an op-ed in the National Post, commenting on the fact that he has drawn his conclusions already on the justice committee.I want to offer that as further evidence that there will be no further action at the justice committee. I still feel it's quite inappropriate for a chair, who is meant to be impartial in the House of Commons, to be writing publicly about what I would say is an ongoing issue here on the Hill, in general. Certainly through his going public and writing this op-ed, he is making quite clear to Canadians that it won't return. How could it possibly return with his comments being made quite publicly, and the fact that he has now drawn the conclusion that it's done? I just want to put onto the record that it will not be returning to justice, and if it does, it will just have all of these things swirling around it about the Liberals on the committee already having made up their minds, and the chair being quite public about his personal opinions. Committee businessHousefather, AnthonyPhilpott, JanePolitical influencePrime MinisterReferences to membersSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Trudeau, JustinWilson-Raybould, JodyBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1440)[English]I call for a recorded vote.(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 3 [See Minutes of Proceedings])Committee businessDecisions in committeeMotionsPhilpott, JanePolitical influencePrime MinisterRecorded divisionsReferences to membersSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Trudeau, JustinWilson-Raybould, JodyBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern RockiesBobZimmerPrince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1340)[English]Thank you very much.I'll ask both of you, Ms. Quirós and Ms. Chavez, to think a bit more about how amnesty gives strength to these perpetrators, and to think about what motivates this hatred towards women. You can speak to Guatemala and Nicaragua. We hear so much speech targeted against women. I'm wondering if over the years this has escalated because of profit, because of power and because of these megaprojects. Or am I missing something? It seems that women's rights and reproductive rights have been taken away and that there is just outright hatred for women. Think about those things.I have another point. Earlier, I think it was you, Lolita, who spoke about how the government has not provided official reports about violence. While we're talking about reporting on violence, are there ways that Canada can work better and make recommendations?I made all these points to you right now because I won't speak again. We'll have you take up the rest of my time. Maybe we can start with you, Lolita. You can have three minutes, and then the next three minutes will go to Ana. Thank you.Civil and human rightsForeign policyWomenAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanAura LolitaChavez Ixcaquic//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1345)[English]Thank you.Ana.Aura LolitaChavez IxcaquicAnaQuirós Víquez//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall (Hamilton Mountain, NDP): (1155)[English]I'd like to thank everybody for coming here today. It's very informative. I'm kind of mixed up in terms of some of the past testimony and what I'm hearing today, so I want to ask Mr. Lewis a question. Are we talking about skilled tradespeople or skilled labour? We're not just talking about having bodies.HamiltonLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoBryanMayCambridgeMarkLewis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1155)[English]Okay. As Mr. Vaccaro mentioned, you can call them skilled workers and you can call them semi-skilled workers, whatever you want, but they are tradesmen, and you're talking about the same thing. You need people who are trained in those categories.HamiltonLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoMarkLewisJoeVaccaro//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1155)[English]Thank you.My next important question is for BuildForce. I have a document here from the Library of Parliament. I understand that in January 2019, BuildForce Canada, a national construction industry association, included data and projections for the greater Toronto area. This report says, “The report also considered the demand for and supply of labour in the GTA. It concluded that in the residential sector, 'established patterns of recruiting and mobility are sufficient to meet job requirements' in all construction related occupations in 2019 and beyond.” Further, it also says, “In non-residential construction, demand in 2019 was higher for almost all occupations, with the report stating that 'employers will need to compete' for additional qualified workers 'to meet any increase' in construction. However, like the residential sector, by 2021, the labour supply of almost all occupations was projected to be sufficient.”I am hearing something different today. Can you explain that?HamiltonLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoJoeVaccaroBillFerreira//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1200)[English]I have one more question in my two minutes, Mr. Lewis. My understanding is that national mobility is a huge issue across Canada. There is no incentive for any skilled tradesman to come to another project or go to another province because there's no incentive for him to write off the taxes or anything. Let's say he goes from B.C. to Ontario, to the Toronto or Hamilton area, and makes $1,000 a week, but it costs him $400 or $500 for expenses. Is that a problem?HamiltonLabour force mobilityLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoBillFerreiraMarkLewis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1200)[English]My last question is for anybody who wants to answer it.MarkLewisBryanMayCambridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1200)[English]The writer of this motion, Mr. Peter Fonseca, made a recommendation that he would like to see, which is to see “the Atlantic immigration pilot project, as a template, and the use of permanent immigration to assist in addressing this huge challenge.”Do you agree that the Atlantic immigration pilot project should be used here? That's for anybody.The Chair: A very brief answer, pleaseHamiltonImmigration and immigrantsLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoBryanMayCambridgeLeahNord//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1235)[English]Thank you.Going back to the apprenticeships, you made a very, very good point. I know when I was younger, when I went to high school, you could go the academic way or you could go into construction. It would start off at grade 9. Grades 9, 10 and 11, you went into the shops. My understanding, as you just said, is that it's too late now. The education system has gotten out of that.Have you talked to our provincial counterparts about that, and are they willing to make any kind of adjustments?HamiltonLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoYoung peopleBryanMayCambridgeMarkLewis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1240)[English]Do you feel that for the future we're meeting our requirements for apprenticeships, or do we see those falling for the future?ApprenticeshipsHamiltonLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoRickMartinsBryanMayCambridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1250)[English]Thanks.On the language issue, most job sites do have a bit of a common language that we use. Do you know what I mean?Madam Nord, one of the things that you commented on was the Atlantic immigration pilot program. You said yes, and then you got cut off. I wonder if you can expand on that, because there's no labour market impact assessment that's done on that. Would that be harmful in the greater Toronto and Hamilton area if we didn't have an impact assessment, if we brought that pilot project in here? Do you know if there's any update, if there are pros or cons on the pilot program?HamiltonImmigration and immigrantsLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoBryanMayCambridgeLeahNord//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1250)[English] But we're talking about skilled tradesmen—HamiltonLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoLeahNordLeahNord//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1250)[English]—or tradespeople, about bringing them in and not just having a company say, “I need a body, so I'm going to use the Atlantic system”, or just, “Come on in. You don't have any skills. I just need something to lower our wage.”HamiltonImmigration and immigrantsLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoLeahNordLeahNord//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1250)[English]So you don't see any harm in that?HamiltonImmigration and immigrantsLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoLeahNordLeahNord//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88780ScottDuvallScott-DuvallHamilton MountainNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/43/DuvallScott_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Scott Duvall: (1250)[English]Do you agree with that assessment, Mr. Lewis?HamiltonLabour shortageM-190Private Members' MotionsSkilled workers and skilled tradesTorontoLeahNordMarkLewis//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1130)[English] Thanks, Chair. Deputy Speaker, thanks so much for attending today.You and I have similar experience in this place. You arrived in the 39th Parliament in 2006, and I got here in the 38th Parliament, just 18 months before you, so most of our experience is the same.Again, to speak to my experience in coming to this, I've also been a House leader in opposition at Queen's Park, but I was also a part of the House management committee when we were in government. I served a stint as deputy leader, trying to be a referee, similar to you. I think I have a good feel, from all sides, for the concerns and the opportunities.Let me just say that since this first came on our radar a few years ago when we started to do a review, you and Frank and Mr. Reid and a few others—Mr. Simms—have really taken this to heart. I've had an interest in it, but some of you have gone further and done the research on it. I only say that to reflect on having been here long enough to see enough things come to life and then go away, then come to life and go away again. However, I think this has some legs. This has captured our attention. We've continued to work on it and people have taken it to heart. If I can be so bold, albeit I won't be here, my gut tells me that this is going to come to be and that it's going to be a good thing. It's a question of how we do it and the process.If I could jump ahead in my thinking, I think a trial is going to be a definite component of this, because nobody is going to want to go too fast, too far. I appreciate your recognizing the politics of this, because there are two sides of it. One is the most efficient way to give all members as much participation as possible, particularly in light of our being in a number of eras where more and more power is devolving to the PMO. That's not just to the executive, but concentrated in the PMO. If I can make a shot for my motion coming up that speaks to our taking back control of hiring our own agents, I will remind people that we still allow the executive to do the hiring process for someone like our Auditor General. It's our Auditor General, but we let the executive, a subset of Parliament, do the hiring process. That's except for the night before when there's a quick little, “Hey, are you okay with Bob Smith?”, and that's it. That's the extent of consultation. To heck with that; we own it.To me, this is another aspect of trying to reach out and grab back what the historical purpose of Parliament and individual members were. I would emphasize that no one speaks better to this than Mr. Reid, in terms of both his longevity here, which surpasses ours, and from his interest and being a historian in his own right. I do think that a trial is going to be a component. That's the one side of it.The politics of it on the other hand—and I'm glad you touched on it because we have to deal with that too—is that the government wants as much time as possible to get its bills through so that it can say, “Yes, we allowed lots of debate.” Mr. Simms, I think you nailed it right on. The government gets kind of screwed both ways: If you don't allow debate then you're being undemocratic, and if you don't get bills passed, you're being ineffective. Good luck trying to work your way through that.When we put this in place, we're going to need to be cognizant of that. That's why I'm really happy we are talking, for now, that this is looked at from the view of enhancing, and I would say returning backbench members to their rightful place as important members. We're not supposed to be here just echoing what our leaders tell us to say or to vote the way that our whips say, although that's what we do a lot of the time. We on this committee should be doing everything we can to enhance and preserve the role of individual members, which historically has been going the wrong way.This was a really good presentation, by the way. Thank you.Parallel debating ChamberLarryBagnellHon.YukonBruceStantonSimcoe North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1130)[English]I liked what you said in noting that we need to reflect on our initial raison d'être. If we stay on that point and let the government of the day, regardless of who it is, know that this is not about trying to play any games with that timing, but rather enhancing the backbench.... Whether it will eventually get into that, remains to be seen.I will ask you a question. I'm clearing my throat, Scotty. Some hon. members: Oh, oh!Mr. David Christopherson: I found it curious that you mentioned ministers. Could you expand on that a bit? As you know, we separate that pretty clearly here, and yet you're bringing.... That brings back some interesting points. Ministers of the Crown—and I've sat as a minister, provincially—are still members in their own right, with constituencies and constituents and the politics of getting re-elected. What are your thoughts on how we would sort of break with our tradition, or are we better to stay with keeping the ministers out of it because that system works best for us? What are your thoughts, Bruce?Cabinet ministersParallel debating ChamberBruceStantonSimcoe NorthBruceStantonSimcoe North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]So you think that is something we should at least consider even in the initial trial process?Cabinet ministersParallel debating ChamberBruceStantonSimcoe NorthBruceStantonSimcoe North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]I'm probably out of time.BruceStantonSimcoe NorthLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1135)[English]Thanks, Chair.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]Just to follow up, we've been talking around it, but I really want your perspective because, in your capacity as Deputy Speaker, you've spent more time than most of us thinking of this place holistically—every day, it's your job—and how things move and what's doable and what isn't. I think it's fair to say that there is a lot of interest and a fair bit of support, and some of us are actually excited about this as a positive move forward. All of that is to say that it looks as if, right now, Chair, at least at this committee, if we could find the sweet spot, I think we're in a position, I would hope, to put together a report that actually moves this forward.My question to you is this: In the real world of how this place actually operates, the question is ideally, within that context, for those of us who want this to happen, what do you think we should shoot for in this Parliament? Do you think there is enough time that we could actually get into the details? Should we spend more time now drilling down on details to get it as close to ready as possible, and then ask the House to endorse it, and then carry that over? Or do you think that, given the realities—and you and I have been through a number of Parliaments now—that we're better off to just wrap up this report and give a favourable recommendation to the next Parliament?I sense that you're enthusiastic toward this as an idea, as many of us are. So that was a long way to ask what you think is the best we could do in this Parliament with this committee, given that we probably have majority support across all three of the recognized parties to do something. What do you think that something is? What's the most ambitious thing we could do to see this come to light, given that we're into the silly season, we're running out of runway, but we do have time?Give us your thoughts, sir.Parallel debating ChamberLarryBagnellHon.YukonBruceStantonSimcoe North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]So as much as possible, tee up the next Parliament—Parallel debating ChamberBruceStantonSimcoe NorthBruceStantonSimcoe North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]—and if they, in the majority, are as enthusiastic, they would have something to work with.Parallel debating ChamberBruceStantonSimcoe NorthBruceStantonSimcoe North//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1200)[English]Excellent, that's a great contribution to this discussion. Thank you so much, Deputy. BruceStantonSimcoe NorthLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1215)[English]Our lobbying worked.MichelPatriceLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1230)[English] Thanks, Chair. I'm glad you asked that question, because it's quite germane to the point.Before I do that, though, I do want to just give us all a little pat on the back—nobody else can do it; I can tell you that. We started out getting a report on West Block. We became alarmed at the lack of MP input. We were determined, ourselves, at this committee, that it was going to change in the future, and we made a decision that we were going to make an overture to BOIE. Each of us was then asked to go back and lobby our respective whips and members of BOIE. It would seem that was effective, based on what I'm hearing now, that there was constant talk about “PROC, PROC, PROC”. That's good. I'd just start out by congratulating the chair and the committee on being able to do this. Having been around for a while, I can tell you it's pretty big, in the world of moving government and decision-making, that we've been able to insert ourselves in the way we need to.That being said, based on your last answer, though, it seems to me that we should be pushing for a little more clarity. The very question the chair asked is the one that was on my mind. I thought the combination Speaker/BOIE was the end of the road. I thought, “They make the decision; that's it.” Now I'm hearing it's not quite that simple, because at least the government—in its capacity to allocate money but recognizing that Parliament, and not the executive, controls the purse strings at the end of the day, though they can ask for money, as they will do tonight.... It's Parliament that says, “Yes, you can have the money”, or, “No, you can't have the money.” We see what goes down, down in the States, when that kind of thing gets challenged.Then there is, as you've mentioned, the National Capital Commission. It gets its oar in the water. There's something called FHBRO or something close to that. It gets its oar in the water. Now we're putting our oar in the water. I think, Chair, that we should ask the staff to come back and give us a flowchart, as well as they understand it. I see the look on your face, and that's why I want it. The fact that it's nebulous leaves us out in nowhere land. We can think we're an important part of this, but we're all politicians. We can make something something or we can make something nothing, starting with the same something—it just depends on what we want to do with it.I would like to see that clarity. Doing that, Chair, I think would allow this committee to establish the exact role of that integrated working group. To me, their reporting, if you will, or their advice goes to BOIE, yet I think we should still maintain that the group come in to meet with PROC, I guess as a separate entity. We could even define it as a subcommittee of this committee to make sure that it still stays here. The fact is the parties get to pick who they're sending. Again we're now back into the executive structure of how this place runs, potentially leaving ordinary members once out, meaning they get to pick who those people are. They may or may not be the ones the rest of us would see as the best representatives of our interests. I'd still like to see some kind of line item—not so much on accountability but on input and dialogue—between that integrated working group and this group.To put all of that in a nutshell, I'd like to see, as well as can be determined—the fact that it's not clear is one reason I want to see it—the flowchart of decision-making. In that I would ask you to include where you see the working group or where BOIE sees the working group. Then, Chair, we'll have an opportunity to delve into the details of that. I was surprised. I'll tell you I was a bit surprised that BOIE said, “We have decided.” I'm okay, because I think it's a good move, but I was hoping we were establishing the kind of working relationship in which it would say, “This is where we're thinking of going. Does this satisfy your needs?”To me, there still needs to be a clarification of the relationship between BOIE and final decision-making, the integrated working group, and PROC, and how they actually fit into an actual process.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectLarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1235)[English]Well, yes. That's why I said, Chair, that I heard there were at least four entities—FHBRO; the government, meaning the executive; the National Capital Commission; and the Speaker/BOIE. Then you could add PROC to that. We have our oar in the water, so that's five players. Again, the fact that you can't make it clear is my point. I'm not expecting it to come back such that you need to go and figure out how this works; I want to see it right now. If it's a bit of a web or unclear, I'd like to see that reflected so that we can help provide clarity, because it's in the clarity that we'll actually determine whether we get meaningful input or not. That's kind of where I am right now, Chair. I hope that provides focus for when we next take up this issue. Thank you.Thank you very much for your presentation.Centre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectLarryBagnellHon.YukonMichelPatrice//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1235)[English]Yes. Add everybody who has a say in the decision-making and in what order.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1235)[English]And the media.JohnNaterPerth—WellingtonJohnNaterPerth—Wellington//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1255)[English]Especially a few days after the shooting.ScottReidLanark—Frontenac—KingstonScottReidLanark—Frontenac—Kingston//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1255)[English]I'm sorry, Chair, but I want to come back to this. If I'm too far off, I'll of course follow your guidance to get back, but I am really disturbed to hear this. I understand the practical reasons why. I accept that, but here's the thing. In this day and age, not only a government building but the premier government building on Parliament Hill, one of the buildings used for spouses—meaning the public—is not accessible. We deliberately designed, built and designated a room for Canadian citizens to use. In this case it's a spouses lounge, but it could be anything, and if you have any kind of disability regarding mobility, you can't get in there. I'm sorry, but I find that unacceptable. Either we bite the bullet and spend the money that it takes to make it accessible or we don't use it for a public space, and we use it for some other capacity. To say that we had no other choice but to go ahead and create a space that disabled Canadians can't get to.... In this case, it might even directly be a member or a member's spouse, partner or parent, which is what the room is designated for, and if they aren't perfectly able-bodied, they can't use it. I have trouble with it. Maybe that's just me, but I am having trouble with that. Again, I understand the practicality. I am not faulting anyone per se, but in allowing a space for the public or for anybody, any person at all—visitor, worker, member, family, whoever—that is not accessible, we've made a major blunder. All it's going to take is one spouse or partner to make an issue out of it, and we have no defence. I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that if that happened we'd quickly shut it down and find another space.Again, I'll just leave with colleagues one of these forward headaches that won't be mine. Voices: Oh, oh!Mr. David Christopherson: I urge all of you to give some thought to the idea that we've done something and allowed something—and now we're aware of it—that makes no sense given current laws and attitudes, especially around equality. Thanks. Access for disabled peopleCentre BlockParliament Buildings Renovation ProjectLarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1300)[English]So moved.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1305)[English]Mr. Chair, I have a reminder. We mentioned it at our informal luncheon. I mentioned it at our formal meeting. Again, I just want to remind members that public accounts is still very interested in getting a couple of standing order changes to improve and beef up the ability of public accounts to do their oversight. I just want to put it on a future list that at some point in the near future I'm hoping that we'll receive a report from public accounts in terms of a couple of standing order changes that, in an ideal world, would get unanimity and get through the House quickly. As you're thinking through things we want to work on, there's at least one meeting there that I'm hoping will happen in April or in May at the latest.Committee businessLarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1305)[English]We should go there.Committee businessLarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1305)[English]I could move it.Some hon. members: Oh, oh!Committee businessLarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse (Windsor West, NDP): (1425)[English]Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks for the opportunity to be here. I think it's a good opportunity to bring forward something that's timely for not only this committee but also others with regard to non-tariff barriers that are put in front of Canadian businesses, and in this case a number of different independent members of the canola industry. I think that's where there is some government responsibility to act.The suggestion to bring in the appropriate ministers fits within some of the things that need to be looked at. The non-tariff barriers affect everything, but we have a supply chain that needs to be looked at as well if alternative markets need to be considered in this. As well, if government policy has impacted the market.... They have had a lot of investment. This is no accident and it's been well spoken to in terms of the planning and production with regard to not only the planting but also penetrating the market to be successful. You can't just flip that around rather quickly. In fact, the supply chain elements remind me of the auto industry that was active and engaged, because in terms of the standards and quality expectations, there is very little forgiveness.I think a lot of Canadians would be sympathetic to the plight of these people. It's not just a matter of doing something different really quickly, and I don't think we want to. We have actually invested and strategically come into an industry that we can be proud of. We hope the government's reaction to this will be unified and will support our farmers at the end of the day. If some subsequent action needs to take place, it affects everything from borrowing and lending, and it affects equipment that's been purchased and mortgaged and amortized, as well as food safety in this country, in terms of planning. I think this is a good start and I think a lot of industries would be very sympathetic, because it's not just a simple matter of getting something from the ground to somebody else across the world really simply. This is a fully engaged industry that we should be proud of. Canola growingChinaExportsRichardson International LimitedMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1435)[English]Yes. If the amendment is to drop the Minister of Foreign Affairs, I won't be supporting that, so I'd like to make sure we have two separate votes on that. I think it's a little bit naive to have a complete review of this without the Minister of Foreign Affairs as part of it. I want to be clear on that and to have those two separate votes. I'll support the motion with the deletion, but again, on the same point, I think the international affairs minister should be part of this. It makes a lot of sense.I want to clarify that when we go to a vote, there will be two votes: one on the amendment to the main motion and then the main motion itself.Committee businessMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaSukhDhaliwalSurrey—Newton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1435)[English]I'll leave it to you, Mr. Chair, but that seems like a new motion.Wouldn't it be, if it's an amendment to a motion, deleting item “c.”, inserting a new date, and then adding “officials”? It's more procedure to me. That's what I think the intent is, but I'll leave it to you. I just want to make sure that two votes take place here. I don't want to spend a lot of time on it, but that we agree we should have.... I have no objection—Committee businessMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1435)[English] That is my point of order, though, because really we're talking about a whole new motion here. If we just vote on the amendment, it's been altered significantly and it doesn't include the Minister of International Trade Diversification, which was in the original motion. My question is a procedural one, because three-quarters of the main motion is now changed to a new motion.Committee businessSukhDhaliwalSurrey—NewtonMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1435)[English]I'm sorry. I stand corrected. Committee businessMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1440)[English]We don't have any of that in front of us. That's not what he said. Committee businessMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaKylePetersonNewmarket—Aurora//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1445)[English]I'd like a recorded vote.Canola growingChinaExportsRichardson International LimitedMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1445)[English]I'd like to move that motion—RandyHobackPrince AlbertSukhDhaliwalSurrey—Newton//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/9137BrianMasseBrian-MasseWindsor WestNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/MasseBrian_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Brian Masse: (1450)[English]Just for clarification, moving another motion to have the Minister of Foreign Affairs attend is redundant now, because it was excluded in the previous one that we actually had a separate vote on. However, the New Democrats want it to be clear that we believe that's an essential part of the hearings. You're having a number of different parties come in, and the non-tariff barriers are just as important as anything else. Really, we already dealt with that in the first defeat of the motion.Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, for your time.MarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (1310)[English]Mr. Chair, the point in time we have arrived at is one filled with questions. There are half-truths. There are changing stories. People around the country are watching what's happening and, unfortunately, today they don't have answers to many of the questions they are posing. Ms. Wilson-Raybould has been asked to come back and testify. If the Liberals don't want to hold an independent public inquiry, which is something on which we've been clear that we believe is an important step, then they must allow this committee to do its work and that means inviting Ms. Wilson-Raybould back. The Clerk of the Privy Council, Michael Wernick, was allowed to come back and rebut testimony, and Canadians are viewing his return as being fair in the same way that they're viewing Ms. Wilson-Raybould's return as being fair and an important part of the rest of this story. To be quite honest, it's categorically unfair not to extend her the same courtesy.She has also said herself that she would like the order in council amended so that she can speak to the matters after January 14. I will quote from her testimony here at the justice committee on February 27, in which she said:My narrative stops here. I must reiterate to the committee my concern, outlined in the letter to the chair yesterday. That is that Order in Council 2019-0105 addresses only my time as the Attorney General of Canada and therefore does nothing to release me from restrictions that apply to my communications while I proudly served as the Minister of Veterans Affairs and in relation to my resignation from that post or my presentation to cabinet after I resigned.Those are her own words about her desire to be able to speak about what happened past that period.Mr. Butts' and Mr. Wernick's testimony was, at times, inconsistent with what we heard from the former attorney general, and it's imperative that she have the opportunity to address these points in the same way that was afforded to Mr. Wernick. Liberals really need to treat this with the seriousness it deserves. It can't be something that is pushed to the side under the guise that this is typically discussed in camera, or the fact that it hasn't happened before. We are in uncharted waters here in what's taking place around this particular issue, and so we need to behave appropriately, in a way that will reflect that, and that means having her come back to the committee.This is something that New Democrats have heard when we've been in our constituencies the past couple of weeks. It certainly has been dominating headlines across the country. All of the major news outlets are writing stories on the fact that we don't have the full truth, and that is because we don't have testimony about the period of time that Ms. Wilson-Raybould simply cannot speak about.This is about transparency. This is about accountability. These are things that the Liberal government ran on, as the Liberal members know well here at the committee, and this is a test of that. This is a test of whether those are just words or whether there's actually meaning behind those words, and today is an opportunity for the Liberals on the committee to revisit having her come before the committee, and the importance of that to Canadians.I can tell you that we New Democrats are being flooded with people coming to our offices. I've had people walking into my office talking about what is happening and asking questions that we simply don't have answers to. That's what we're seeking to do here: to be able to have this lifted off her so that she can speak, as she has indicated publicly and here at the committee that she has a desire to do.Canadians want the other half of the story from her, and she deserves an opportunity in the same way that Mr. Wernick had, to come and speak to what has been said about her and to things that she has not had the privilege to be able to speak about.Last, the committee must recognize that there is a degree of urgency around this, and there is no good reason that can be presented today for why Ms. Wilson-Raybould can't return to the committee to testify. Criminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.AnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1325)[English]Can we have a recorded vote, please?Criminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.AnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalMichaelBarrettLeeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1530)[English] Thank you. Mr. Wernick, I'm looking at your statement. I find it pretty thin gruel given the fact that five former attorneys general have asked for an RCMP investigation. Former Liberal attorney general Michael Bryant said he's never seen such “brazen” and “reckless” interference in an independent prosecution. We've had two cabinet ministers resign, and Ms. Philpott saying she had constitutional and ethical obligations in the face of political interference. You are one of the key political actors in this, Mr. Wernick, and yet I find what's missing from here is any attempt to explain what happened in that key meeting of December 19. We asked Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould on record if you threatened her. She said she wasn't threatened once, she was threatened three times by you. Then she said that you wanted to find a way to talk directly to the prosecutor, which would be the direct interference in the prosecution case. She warned you that you were on dangerous ground. How come you haven't even tried to rebut her testimony?Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Wilson-Raybould, JodyMurrayRankinVictoriaMichaelWernick//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1530)[English]I put it to you, Mr. Wernick. You're asked about threatening the attorney general; you're asked about treading on dangerous ground, and you tell our committee, “I wasn't wearing a wire” and, “Sorry, I don't remember.”Mr. Wernick, that is not a credible answer. You are the Clerk of the Privy Council. If you come to a meeting and you can't remember threatening the Attorney General and you tell us, “Sorry, I wasn't wearing a wire”, I suggest, Mr. Wernick, that the brazen and reckless interference referred to by five former attorneys general refers directly to you. If you cannot answer that question, you have no business being in that job.Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Wilson-Raybould, JodyMichaelWernickMichaelWernick//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1530)[English]But you don't remember. You told us you don't remember; you weren't wearing a wire—Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Wilson-Raybould, JodyMichaelWernickMichaelWernick//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1530)[English]So now you remember.I will end on this. She said she expected the Saturday night massacre, which is a reference to Richard Milhous Nixon and the firing of the special prosecutor. Lo and behold, she was replaced two weeks later.I think Ms. Wilson-Raybould's testimony is very credible. I'm very sad that you get a second kick at the can and she's not been given a chance to rebut what you're saying today.The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Angus—Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.Wilson-Raybould, JodyMichaelWernickMichaelWernick//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1550)[English]Finally, Mr. Butts claimed that there was new evidence, which would be reason to intervene in a public prosecution but, Mr. Wernick, you said that this new evidence consisted of SNC's share price. When the Prime Minister's Office wrote that legislation, it specifically exempted the economic argument. Ms. Wilson-Raybould was very clear that this could not be, and yet you believe that if it's something that you think can happen, “Well, we'll just make it happen.” If “economic argument” was written by the Prime Minister's Office as not allowable, how do you get to claim that's new? That's not new evidence. That's new opinion.Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsDecision-making processPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.MurrayRankinVictoriaMichaelWernick//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1550)[English]But it could be perfectly fine if used in an election. You would use it to—Mr. Michael Wernick: If I could finish the question—Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsDecision-making processPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.MichaelWernickAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP): (1140)[English]The question that's been put forward to us by the evidence of Ms. Wilson-Raybould is a concerted campaign of interference in the independence of the Public Prosecution Service by your office. That's the question before us. Her testimony provides us a picture. We have Mr. Marques and Mr. Bouchard wanting an informal reach-out to the prosecutor to go around her. She said that this would be political interference. Ben Chin says it's about the Quebec election, which would be a completely inappropriate thing for someone from your office to say. Bill Morneau, after being lobbied, pushed her, and she told him to back off. The Clerk of the Privy Council had numerous conversations, in one of which she said she was threatened three times, including when he said that you don't want to be on the wrong side of this prime minister. The Prime Minister said, according to her testimony, that he wanted action because he was the MP for Papineau. Katie Telford, according to Ms. Wilson-Raybould, said she wasn't interested in legalities, and she has you on the record as saying that you don't like the law because it's a Harper law, and then, further, that we don't get through this without intervention. How can you then tell us this was he-said-she-said, and not a concerted campaign that you were involved in to intervene and override the decisions being taken by the Attorney General of Canada?Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.AnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]But you said to Jess Prince that we don't get through this without some interference.Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]When Ms. Wilson-Raybould testified, she was very believable to Canadians. You did not agree to go under oath, so the question is, is she wrong? Did she make that up?Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]But I'm not getting an answer here. You may have explained it—Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]—but I don't understand, because, as you say—Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]With respect, she either lied or she didn't—Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.GeraldButtsAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]It's about her credibility.Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]Okay.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]I see.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]I'm not asking you to call someone names; I'm asking whether there was interference, because facts, my friend, as you said—Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English] —facts are very stubborn. It's not just her. Ms Philpott said, “I have lost confidence.... I must abide by my...ethical...and constitutional obligations” because of the allegations of interference by your office. “There can be a cost to acting on one's principles, but there is a bigger cost to abandoning them.” Is Ms. Philpott not understanding this either?Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1145)[English]Thank you.GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1205)[English]Thank you. I want to follow up on what my colleague started.On September 21, she stated that this decision was no longer hers because the issue had been filed in court. It was no longer possible. You tell us that you just became aware that her mind was made up last week. I find that surprising.On November 22, the PM asked Mr. Bouchard to meet. She told him that they needed to stop, yet you're just now aware of this.On December 5, she said, she met with you at the Château Laurier. She said: “Gerry then took over the conversation and said how we need a solution.... He said I needed to find a solution.” That's where she said that you didn't like the law because it was a Harper law.On December 7, she receives a letter from the PM and says that this is before the court.On December 18, there's an urgent meeting, where you said that there was no solution that did not involve interference and Katie Telford said, “we don't want to debate legalities anymore.”On December 19, Mr. Wernick pressured her to speak to the prosecutor, and she said that at that point she was “waiting for the other shoe to drop”, and the other shoe did drop. She was let go. She asked you when she was being let go whether or not this had to do with SNC, and you asked her if this was questioning the integrity of the Prime Minister. How is it possible that you could run an office with that many people pressuring the Attorney General, and now you're surprised and didn't know what was going on around you? How can you—Mr. Gerald Butts: That's not my—Mr. Charlie Angus: —be credible to us when Ms. Wilson-Raybould gave us such clear, consistent testimony of a pattern of interference in an independent prosecution?Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.AnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1205)[English]Just in fairness, I just want this on the record—GeraldButtsGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1205)[English]But I have a right to ask, because—GeraldButtsAnthonyHousefatherMount Royal//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. Charlie Angus: (1205)[English]Did she tell the truth, yes or no? That is the question. It's not whether you're trying to be mean to her. That is not the question. If she told us the truth, then your testimony and the testimony and the credibility of the Prime Minister's Office is in question. That is the question today.Attorney General of CanadaCriminal prosecutionsPolitical influenceRemediation agreementsSNC-Lavalin Group Inc.AnthonyHousefatherMount RoyalGeraldButts//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins—James Bay, NDP)): (1530)[English] Good afternoon. We're going to begin.[Translation] I would like to make an announcement first. There has been an uprising and I am the new captain of this committee. The anarchists have arrived. An hon. member: Temporarily. [English]The Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): Welcome, my friends, to the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. This is meeting 139, pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(h)(vii), for the study of the privacy of digital government services.Today, we have two groups of witnesses. We have, from the Herjavec Group, Matthew Anthony, the vice-president, incident response and threat analysis, and Ira Goldstein, senior vice-president of corporate development. We also have, from SecureKey Technologies Inc., Andre Boysen, chief information officer, and Rene McIver, chief security officer.Each group will have 10 minutes to present. We are pretty reasonable here, but when you get close to the 10 minutes, I will start to jump up and down very loudly, not to distract you, but just to let you know. Then our first round of questions will go for seven minutes and then we will go to a five-minute round. Is the Herjavec Group ready to begin?e-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionIraGoldstein//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1540)[English]Thank you very much.We'll go to SecureKey Technologies, please.MatthewAnthonyReneMcIver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1550)[Translation]We will start the round of questions.Ms. Fortier, go ahead.ReneMcIverMonaFortierOttawa—Vanier//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1600)[English]Thank you.AndreBoysenAndreBoysen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1600)[English]Mr. Kent, I'm going to have to take one minute of her time off yours. Is that okay?MonaFortierOttawa—VanierPeterKentHon.Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1600)[English]Continue, continue.PeterKentHon.ThornhillPeterKentHon.Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1605)[English]Thank you very much. I'll now speak for seven minute. Just to be fair, I will put the gavel beside the clerk and if I go over the time, he will hit me with it.I find this fascinating, and Mr. Anthony seemed to tread lightly. I find that very surprising. I used to be a digital believer, and in the digital believing world things were going to be better, we were going to move faster. The longer I am in this job, the more wary I get. I think “tread lightly” is a very interesting example. I just want to talk a bit about my sense of how Canadians see privacy and digital innovation. I was talking with tech people in the U.S. and they were marvelling about and saying that we really take this stuff seriously. We had a serious digital copyright battle that involved citizens and letter writing campaigns. The net-throttling issue was a big issue. It was Canada that did the first investigation of Facebook, but at the same time, as Mr. Boysen has pointed out, people here hate identity cards. I think of my voters and they would be up in arms over this. We look at Statistics Canada as a good example of how not to do this. Statistics Canada has a worldwide reputation and the trust of Canadians. They thought they were doing something in the public interest, but it struck Canadians the wrong way.What would your advice be to a government that may think that gathering more information is in the best interest? You talked about the danger of the opportunities they say will emerge from increased efficiencies from mining, aggregating and sharing data, but you're saying that we need to require evidence to show that. What are the parameters we need to be looking at on this?e-GovernmentInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionMatthewAnthonyMatthewAnthony//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1610)[English]Yes.MatthewAnthonyMatthewAnthony//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1610)[English]Thank you.Mr. Boysen, I was interested in what you were talking about with the example of the banks. If I don't like the banks.... Actually, I go to my credit union, the Caisse populaire—Banks and bankinge-GovernmentPrivacy and data protectionMatthewAnthonyAndreBoysen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1610)[English]—and I have good service, and if I have a problem, they call me right away and we deal with that.Our committee has spent a lot of time looking at how we access online. We don't have choice. This is what we found with Facebook, and this is what we're finding with Google. We've begun to talk about the issue of antitrust, which is not generally in the realm of our committee, but for the rights of citizens and protecting data.... I mean, if you have a problem with Facebook, what are you going to do? You can't do anything. You can't go to WhatsApp, because it's controlled by them. They control all the other avenues.In terms of overall public policy, do you feel that the issue of having not enough choice in how we engage online and in how our private information is collected and used by the data-opolies has a negative effect overall on where we're moving?Banks and bankingConsumers and consumer protectione-GovernmentInformation collectionPrivacy and data protectionAndreBoysenAndreBoysen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1615)[English]I have to stop you there so that I can end five seconds short of my time, just to put that on the record.Some hon. members: Oh, oh!The Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): Mr. Saini.AndreBoysenRajSainiKitchener Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1620)[English]You have one minute left.AndreBoysenAndreBoysen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1620)[English]You have 15 seconds, but I'm being nice tonight.RajSainiKitchener CentreRajSainiKitchener Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1620)[English]Thank you.RajSainiKitchener CentreReneMcIver//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1620)[Translation]We'll continue with Mr. Gourde for five minutes.ReneMcIverJacquesGourdeLévis—Lotbinière//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1625)[English] Thank you.AndreBoysenAndreBoysen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1625)[English]All right, thank you.I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Graham.AndreBoysenDavid de BurghGrahamLaurentides—Labelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1625)[English]Yes, it was a good answer. That's why I've been so reasonable.David de BurghGrahamLaurentides—LabelleDavid de BurghGrahamLaurentides—Labelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1630)[English]Five minutes.David de BurghGrahamLaurentides—LabelleDavid de BurghGrahamLaurentides—Labelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1630)[English]Yes. Is that okay? You're doing so well.David de BurghGrahamLaurentides—LabelleDavid de BurghGrahamLaurentides—Labelle//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1630)[English]I know you do, but I have to give them to Mr. Kent.David de BurghGrahamLaurentides—LabellePeterKentHon.Thornhill//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1635)[English]This is the final round.Mr. Saini is beginning.AndreBoysenRajSainiKitchener Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1640)[English]Thank you very much.I have a deep feeling that my colleague Mr. Graham would like to filibuster if he could, because he's really got a lot to say. I would normally like to continue, but we do have an agreement on Thursdays that for people who are going to head out for flights, we end after this round.I want to thank you very much. This has been a fascinating discussion with really excellent information. If you have things that you think we should be looking at, or if you're checking our testimony in that regard, certainly feel free to write our committee because we will be preparing a report.Go ahead, Mr. Saini.AndreBoysenRajSainiKitchener Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25470CharlieAngusCharlie-AngusTimmins—James BayNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/44/AngusCharlie_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Mr. Charlie Angus): (1640)[English]The meeting is adjourned.AndreBoysen//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey (Essex, NDP): (1550)[English]Thank you so much for appearing here today. A lot of the work we do here at the trade committee is about looking at the components of trade agreements, and trying to understand how that language is interpreted by your businesses and working people on the ground, in a lot of different sectors. You mentioned the federal strategy, which I think is a very important piece. We have to go back to the beginning of the negotiation of these deals, include you in the room and talk about the unique needs you have, in order to be able to service the very large percentage of SMEs—I think someone mentioned 98%—in Quebec. That is not unique to Quebec. It's across all of the provinces.The opportunity in trade in the future is in SMEs. I'd like to ask you how you think the government could better share the details of trade agreements with you, to understand and interpret them, and to include you in that process from the beginning, so that your needs are being addressed when they're at the negotiating table. I would ask that of all three of you. Could you expand your thoughts on that?Maybe we could start with Ms. Chee.Small and medium-sized enterprisesStatisticsMarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaMelissaChee//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1555)[English]Thank you. MelissaCheeMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1555)[English]Go ahead, Mr. Jobin. MarkEykingHon.Sydney—VictoriaGuyJobin//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/88745TraceyRamseyTracey-RamseyEssexNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/RamseyTracey_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Tracey Ramsey: (1555)[English] Yes. Thank you.GuyJobinMarkEykingHon.Sydney—Victoria//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle (Windsor—Tecumseh, NDP): (1335)[English]Ms. Htusan, if you hang on for a minute, I just want to speak to Ms. Castillo, because we're on the subject of El Bus TV.Very quickly, Ms. Castillo, where do your journalists get their information? What are their sources?Could also clarify. Are these journalists mostly young students? Are they volunteers?El Bus TVFreedom of the pressMedia and the pressVenezuelaAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanLaura HelenaCastillo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English]Thank you, Ms. Castillo.Ms. Htusan, I'd like to ask you about the ethnic media, the local media within Myanmar. My understanding is that there's little to none left.Is that the scenario?Freedom of the pressMedia and the pressMyanmarLaura HelenaCastilloEstherHtusan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1340)[English] That brings me to my next question.What is the best source of information now coming from Rakhine State? Freedom of the pressMedia and the pressMyanmarEstherHtusanEstherHtusan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1355)[English]This question is for both of you. Perhaps we will start with you, Ms. Castillo, for about a minute, and then we'll move over to you, Ms. Htusan. I want to understand your thoughts about some of the measures to protect journalists. As you know, Reporters Without Borders, for example, called for the United Nations to create a special adviser for protection for journalists who would report to the Secretary-General. There are other organizations that perhaps have mechanisms. What are your thoughts on that? We'll start with you, Ms. Castillo.Freedom of the pressInternational relationsMedia and the pressAnitaVandenbeldOttawa West—NepeanLaura HelenaCastillo//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/89012CherylHardcastleCheryl-HardcastleWindsor—TecumsehNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/HardcastleCheryl_NDP.jpgInterventionMs. Cheryl Hardcastle: (1355)[English]Yes. I'm taking it that you agree there should be a special position within the United Nations, then, that deals with and reports on the protection of journalists.Ms. Htusan, can I hear your thoughts on some of the mechanisms that we could put in place or that could be enhanced?Freedom of the pressInternational relationsMedia and the pressLaura HelenaCastilloEstherHtusan//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson (Hamilton Centre, NDP): (1125)[English]Thank you, Chair.Thank you very much for your presentation. It was not only informative but enjoyable. I wish you all the best in your retirement. As somebody else getting ready to join that club, I wish you a good one. LarryBagnellHon.YukonDavidNatzler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1125)[English]Well, I'm not, and neither is my family. All good things come to an end. I have three questions. I'll outline them, and you can answer them as you feel would be best. The first one, in no particular order, is about the slots. You said there were x number of speaking spots, or slots. Who fills those?One of the controversies that we continue to have is the expanding power of whips' offices over individual members. Questions and everything else are preordained by the whip and the Speaker, who in some cases are acting like a traffic cop rather than using their discretion as to who gets to speak. I would be interested in your comments on that.Two, what changes to your standing orders, as you can recall, did you have to make to bring about the chamber and to find its place in the organization of things? Lastly, you made reference to the agenda today. I think you said there were five things. How does the agenda get set?Parallel debating ChamberUnited KingdomDavidNatzlerDavidNatzler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1125)[English]That's very Canadian of you.DavidNatzlerDavidNatzler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1130)[English]I have one last question.Was it unanimous to create your Standing Order No. 10?Parallel debating ChamberUnited KingdomDavidNatzlerDavidNatzler//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1130)[English] Very good. That's good for me in this round, Chair. Thank you.DavidNatzlerLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English] So you think. That's as far as you know.Voices: Oh, oh!AndréGagnonAndréGagnon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1155)[English]You're well on your way to 45 years in your own right—not bad.AndréGagnonAndréGagnon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1250)[English]Why is he here?LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1250)[English]Yes, it was on the chamber. Okay, fine.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1250)[English]I mentioned at an earlier gathering that in terms of the Standing Orders, the public accounts committee may be looking at forwarding a recommendation for change to this committee. The meeting before this one was public accounts. I asked again if a majority is interested in getting those changes through. There is, so I would expect that shortly after we get back we will be receiving a request from that committee to look at some standing order changes vis-à-vis public accounts. It's not complicated and it shouldn't take a lot of time.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1250)[English]Yes, I can. There are two changes. One is to insert into the mandate the word “non-partisan” to make it clear that public accounts is a different creature because of its oversight responsibilities. Then the second one is to ensure that we don't repeat the absolute democratic nightmare that we went though—I won't say when—when a new government came in and wiped out all of the work that was being done by the public accounts committee. There's a lot of tracking that goes on. There are commitments that are made from departments when they come, and some of those have timelines that can take up to a couple of years to be fulfilled. We have a system now that allows us to track every utterance, every promise and every commitment made, and we were halfway through developing some draft reports when all of that was just wiped out, based on the argument from the new members that they didn't know anything about it, so they weren't going to deal with it.We want to bring in some changes so that no government can ever do that again when it comes to the oversight capacity of public accounts to hold the government of the day to account.Those are the two major items.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1255)[English]All right. As fortune would have it, I've been tasked with bringing back the recommendations to the committee, so I'll get on that post-haste and see if I can meet that deadline.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/25489DavidChristophersonDavid-ChristophersonHamilton CentreNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/ChristophersonDavid_NDP.jpgInterventionMr. David Christopherson: (1255)[English]We're on it, Chair.LarryBagnellHon.YukonLarryBagnellHon.Yukon//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)): (0850)[English] Good morning and welcome to the 133rd meeting of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. This is a televised meeting.Today we will continue our study of the challenges faced by senior women with a focus on the factors contributing to their poverty and vulnerability. For this meeting, we are very pleased to welcome, from l'Association québécoise de défense des droits des personnes retraitées et préretraitées, Luce Bernier, president, and Geneviève Tremblay-Racette, director. We also have, from Réseau FADOQ, Danis Prud'homme, general manager, provincial secretariat and Philippe Poirier-Monette, collective rights adviser, provincial secretariat. I'll now turn to Luce Bernier for her opening statement. You have seven minutes. We're cutting back. Go ahead for seven minutes, s'il vous plaît.PovertySenior citizensWomenLuceBernier//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0900)[English] We are just past seven minutes, and I wondered if you would like one minute to—LuceBernierLuceBernier//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0900)[English]Thank you so much, and thank you for your patience.Now we'll have Monsieur Danis Prud'homme for seven minutes, please.LuceBernierDanisPrud'homme//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0910)[Translation]Thank you.[English] Thank you very much, and thank you for being so good about the time.We're going to proceed to questions now. We have a seven-minute round, and the first questioner is Madame Sidhu.DanisPrud'hommeSoniaSidhuBrampton South//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0915)[Translation]Thank you.[English]Madam Harder, go ahead, please. You have seven minutes.LuceBernierRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0930)[English]Thank you, Madam Harder— RachaelHarderLethbridgeEmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-Laurent//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0930)[English]Yes, we have a point of order from Ms. Lambropoulos.Committee businessPoints of orderTerryDuguidWinnipeg SouthEmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-Laurent//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0930)[English]Thank you.I do want to remind you, Ms. Harder, that your motion has to do with bringing the minister to this committee. You need to restrict your comments to that motion.Committee businessPoints of orderEmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-LaurentRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0930)[English]Thank you. You did do that, and—Committee businessPoints of orderRachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0930)[English]Thank you, but if—RachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0930)[English]Thank you very much. I do appreciate your concern, and certainly we did come to hear the witnesses, but Ms. Harder is within her rights to continue with her motion.Continue, please.Committee businessPoints of orderRachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0930)[English]I'm sorry. I have another point of order.Mrs. Zahid.Committee businessPoints of orderRachaelHarderLethbridgeSalmaZahidScarborough Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0930)[English]I'm sorry, Mrs. Zahid. She is indeed within her rights.Committee businessPoints of orderSalmaZahidScarborough CentreRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0935)[English]Yes. I would appreciate it, though, Ms. Harder, if you would continue and wrap up quickly.Committee businessRachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0940)[English]Ms. Harder, you seem to be getting rather repetitive here. Again, I would like you to wrap up as quickly as you can.Committee businessRachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0940)[English]Could you wrap up quickly, please?Committee businessRachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0940)[English] Thank you very much, Ms. Harder.Committee businessRachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0940)[English]Thank you.We'll go to Mrs. Zahid, please.RachaelHarderLethbridgeSalmaZahidScarborough Centre//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0940)[English]Thank you very much, Mrs. Zahid.Mrs. Zahid has moved an amendment.We'll go to Ms. Leitch, please.SalmaZahidScarborough CentreK. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—Grey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0940)[English]We're debating the amendment.SalmaZahidScarborough CentreK. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—Grey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0940)[English]We have to discuss the amendment.Hon. K. Kellie Leitch: No problem.The Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): Okay.Is there further discussion on the amendment, please?Ms. Harder.K. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—GreyRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]Thank you.On the amendment, we have Ms. Lambropoulos.RachaelHarderLethbridgeEmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-Laurent//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]Thank you.To the amendment, Ms. Harder.EmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-LaurentRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]I would hope that all members of this committee would be respectful of each other and respectful of our witnesses.RachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]Ms. Lambropoulos, are you prepared to withdraw your comment in regard to Ms. Harder? Are you prepared to apologize?RachaelHarderLethbridgeEmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-Laurent//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]I would very much like this to be a positive exchange.An hon. member: [Inaudible—Editor]RachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English] Ms. Harder has the floor. I would like her to continue, please.EmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-LaurentRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]Madam Harder, are you making a supplementary amendment?RachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]Okay. Thank you.Is there any discussion?RachaelHarderLethbridgeEmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-Laurent//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]All right. We can indeed.(Subamendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])The Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): Now we need to go to a vote on the amendment.(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])The Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): Now, on the main motion as amended....Yes, Ms. Harder.Committee witnessesMinister for Women and Gender EqualityMotionsEmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-LaurentRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]Oh, yes. Certainly—RachaelHarderLethbridgeRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0945)[English]Okay. To the main motion as amended, then, go ahead, Ms. Leitch.RachaelHarderLethbridgeK. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—Grey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0950)[English]Thank you, Ms. Leitch.Ms. Harder, do you want to speak to the motion?K. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—GreyRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (0950)[English]Thank you, Ms. Harder.I would like to have a recorded vote on the motion as amended, please.(Motion as amended agreed to: yeas 5; nays 2)The Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): Thank you very much to our witnesses. We appreciate your being here.I would like to suspend, please.(0955)(1000)Committee witnessesDecisions in committeeMinister for Women and Gender EqualityMotionsRecorded divisionsRachaelHarderLethbridgeIreneMathyssenLondon—Fanshawe//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1000)[English] I would like to welcome everyone back to the 133rd meeting of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women. I would also like to say thank you to our witnesses: Luce Bernier, Geneviève Tremblay-Racette, Monsieur Danis Prud'homme and Philippe Poirier-Monette. We did not have time to complete questions, and I wonder whether the committee would like those witnesses to return for further questions.PovertySenior citizensWomenIreneMathyssenLondon—FanshaweEvaNassifVimy//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1000)[English]Is everyone in agreement?Some hon. members: Agreed.The Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): Thank you. I will ask the clerk to see if they can return. Now, for our second panel, we have, as individuals, Madame Catherine Twinn with us in the room; and Madame Madeleine Bélanger by video conference from Quebec. Also, from CARP, the Canadian Association for Retired Persons, we have Madame Wanda Morris and Madame Laura Kadowaki, both coming through video conference. Welcome. Ms. Twinn, I believe you wanted to proceed with a video.PovertySenior citizensWomenEvaNassifVimyCatherineTwinn//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1005)[English]Thank you very much. Do we have unanimous consent to see the English-only videos?Some hon. members: Agreed.The Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): Everyone is in agreement. Thank you. I believe we'll need some time to set up the video. We'll suspend for a minute and give our technicians time to set up the video.(1005)(1010)PovertySenior citizensWomenCatherineTwinnIreneMathyssenLondon—Fanshawe//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1010)[English]I would like to begin with an opening statement. Ms. Morris, you have seven minutes, please.IreneMathyssenLondon—FanshaweWandaMorris//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1015)[English]I'm sorry. Apparently our interpretation is not working properly.Okay, go ahead.WandaMorrisWandaMorris//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1015)[English]Thank you.We are at the end of the seven minutes. Hopefully, you can finish your remarks during the questions.I'd like to go to Madame Madeleine Bélanger, s'il vous plaît.LauraKadowakiMadeleineBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1025)[Translation]Thank you, Ms. Bélanger.[English] I am so sorry, but we are at seven minutes. Hopefully you'll be able to continue during the question period and hear from our committee. MadeleineBélangerMadeleineBélanger//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1025)[English]Now, we need to go to Ms. Twinn, but before we do, we have unanimous consent for Ms. Twinn to provide two videos. Apparently, there is also a PowerPoint presentation in English only. Do we have unanimous consent to see the PowerPoint as well, or is it the committee's preference to see only the videos? I am in your hands. Would you like to see the PowerPoint and the videos?Some hon. members: Agreed.The Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): Everyone is okay with that. Thank you.Ms. Twinn, could you proceed, please?PovertySenior citizensWomenMadeleineBélangerCatherineTwinn//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1030)[English]If you could conclude so we could have time for questions.... I would like to give the committee the opportunity to pursue this further with you. With the indulgence of the committee, if you could end there, we'll go to our questioners and hopefully you'll be able to expand on your remarks.CatherineTwinnCatherineTwinn//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1035)[English]Thank you. We are limited in time, so we'll begin round one, for five minutes—CatherineTwinnSoniaSidhuBrampton South//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1035)[English]Thank you. That's very kind.We'll begin with Ms. Lambropoulos.CatherineTwinnEmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-Laurent//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1040)[English] I'm sorry. We're at five minutes, but I thank you for your indulgence. Now for five minutes we have Ms. Harder, please.EmmanuellaLambropoulosSaint-LaurentRachaelHarderLethbridge//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1045)[English]Ms. Leitch, you have one minute.RachaelHarderLethbridgeK. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—Grey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1045)[English]Thank you, Ms. Leitch. I'm very sorry, but we are at the end of our time here. K. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—GreyK. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—Grey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1045)[English]We have to vacate the room because time is up.K. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—GreyK. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—Grey//www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/members/764IreneMathyssenIrene-MathyssenLondon—FanshaweNew Democratic Party CaucusOntario//www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Parliamentarians/Images/OfficialMPPhotos/42/MathyssenIrene_NDP.jpgInterventionThe Vice-Chair (Ms. Irene Mathyssen): (1045)[English]I would like to ask the committee whether we should invite the witnesses back so that we can in fact have the questions we would like to ask of them.PovertySenior citizensWomenK. KellieLeitchHon.Simcoe—GreyEvaNassifVimyINTERVENTIONParliament and SessionDiscussed TopicProcedural TermCommitteePerson SpeakingProvince / TerritoryCaucusParticipation TypeSearchResults per pageOrder byTarget search languageSide by SideMaximum returned rowsPagePUBLICATION TYPE