Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 3957
View Jaime Battiste Profile
Lib. (NS)
Thank you.
I'm deeply honoured to be here today on this very exciting and historic day. In my language, the Mi'kmaq language, we would say gelu'lg na'gweg, meaning this is a “great day”. It's a great day for many reasons.
As someone who has been a member of the Indigenous Bar Association for more than 20 years, as a student and then coming back as an indigenous parliamentarian, I have often heard the advocacy and the dream that some day we would see an indigenous nominee to the Supreme Court of Canada. In fact, this is an important thing that the Indigenous Bar Association and the Canadian Bar Association have called for since 2005 when they said it was integral to Canada for us to advance indigenous law through these appointments. It's even more so with the TRC calls to action. Almost a quarter of the calls to action call for justice and equity for indigenous people within the legal system.
Minister Lametti, you spoke to the importance of having a justice system that reflects the Canadian public and how having indigenous laws enrich our Canadian justice system. I'm wondering if you could speak to the gravity of the historic moment that we're at today, where for so many years indigenous people have looked to Canadian laws, despite having their own indigenous laws, and saying they would trust these systems that have been created.
What do you think it means for the justice system today to have this historic day finally upon us?
View Jaime Battiste Profile
Lib. (NS)
I'd like to thank you both for those comments.
View Jaime Battiste Profile
Lib. (NS)
I have a point of order. I'm sorry, but we're not getting the translation. I see that she's speaking it, so it's probably a technical problem. I hear her translating but we don't get it in the earpiece.
View Lena Metlege Diab Profile
Lib. (NS)
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, Minister and Chairperson of the independent advisory board.
Mr. MacLauchlan, let me first thank you, and all the members of the independent advisory board, for the work you are doing regarding the appointment of justices to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Today is truly a historic day.
I want to turn my question, though, to the future. You spoke about the nomination process being, to use your word, an “episodic” appointment—English isn't my first language, but I like it—and that at the moment we probably have some time, until next time. You also spoke about the Honourable Kim Campbell as well as others talking about how it would be great to broaden it, so that lawyers and judges have more time to consider, but also give them, members of the public, parliamentarians and everybody more information on the role of the Supreme Court justice. You touched on that today in your opening remarks but also during questions from everybody around the table in terms of what the qualities are: professional, personal, the ability to communicate, bilingualism, etc.
I guess what I want to ask you about is the importance as well of the process of encouraging and including diverse candidates to be able to even consider themselves applying to this position. It is the highest court in the land. It would be similar to women or minorities or anybody applying to be members of Parliament. These are very respected positions that many people don't see themselves reflected in. I want to congratulate you today, because the more we can have a Supreme Court of Canada that reflects the population of Canadians, that is what we need to aim for.
Mr. MacLauchlan, in whatever time we have remaining, can you tell us what you anticipate that we could do? What are your recommendations?
Then, if we have time, Minister, what can you as the minister do, and what can we as parliamentarians do to help you?
View Lena Metlege Diab Profile
Lib. (NS)
Thank you to both of you.
View Ken McDonald Profile
Lib. (NL)
View Ken McDonald Profile
2022-08-19 15:39
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to say a big thank you to my colleague, the MP for Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, for asking me to fill in for him at this committee meeting today.
We've heard a lot today about one topic in particular, and that's the airline passenger bill of rights. That was pushed by a good friend of mine, a man by the name of Woodrow French, who lives not too far from my home. We live in the same town. He was at it for years. Finally a government listened, and that government was the Liberal government. I think it was Minister Garneau at the time.
To the officials, does the airline passenger bill of rights do what it was intended to do when it comes to protecting airline passengers? Should it be tweaked if it's not doing its intended end-of-the-day product, protection for anyone using our airlines, whether domestically or commercially?
View Ken McDonald Profile
Lib. (NL)
View Ken McDonald Profile
2022-08-19 15:41
Thank you for that.
Next, we hear a lot about mandates, whether it's vaccination mandates or masking mandates or anything else, from the Conservative side, who never, ever supported the introduction of any mandates whatsoever, whether it be masking or vaccination or travel restrictions. Do you believe that the mandates were necessary programs to bring in when COVID first struck our area here in Canada and any of the provinces? Do you think that because of the mandates we've managed to save thousands and thousands of lives? There are people still dying from COVID, but of course, as we know, when it first came to our country and exploded in many provinces, many people did die from the disease—probably people who shouldn't have died or wouldn't have died, only for COVID, which was the main contributor to it.
Do you think we should still pay attention to the public health officials who are recommending that we do this or we do that, or that it's time to drop this or drop that—in essence, I guess, at the end of the day, protecting Canadians' lives, whether they're coming from abroad, or travelling from province to province, or using any entity for travel, whether it be ferries, trains or planes?
View Stephen Ellis Profile
CPC (NS)
Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Deputy Minister, for being here.
As you may or may not know, I'm the member of Parliament for Cumberland—Colchester, and I represent many of the victims' families in this terrible occurrence in my riding.
The crux of this matter, of course, is related to not just accountability but also transparency and honesty. I guess the big question that I would suggest people really want to understand better is.... There are two parts. One, you said you were going to provide all of the information you can, which doesn't necessarily sound transparent to me. That's my judgment. Second, you talked about Chief Superintendent Leather being misunderstood.
Let's start with that, sir. Would you not expect that the lawyer cautioning Mr. Leather would make sure that he wanted to be understood, that that reactive versus proactive nature would be understood very clearly?
View Stephen Ellis Profile
CPC (NS)
Then, sir, how would you come to the conclusion that it was Chief Superintendent Leather who misunderstood the directions given to him?
View Stephen Ellis Profile
CPC (NS)
Sir, do you think it's possible that Chief Superintendent Leather understood the direction he was given and perhaps that there was interference here in getting the truth out? Are you saying you don't believe that, sir?
View Stephen Ellis Profile
CPC (NS)
It's interesting, sir, that you know that he misunderstood his directions—that's the unusual thing—but you don't know what he was thinking.
The second part of the question is this: How can the families of these victims be certain that there are no other documents being withheld by your department?
View Stephen Ellis Profile
CPC (NS)
Sir, we also know that you didn't report back to the committee originally. When you withheld documents, you didn't make them aware of that fact. Of course, you continue to talk about this voluminous number. That's fantastic. We understand there is a lot of documentation, but there is absolutely no assurance here for the victims' families to say that, yes, all of these documents have been produced and are going to be made available to the MCC.
How can you reassure us, sir, that this is going to happen? Can you?
View Rick Perkins Profile
CPC (NS)
Thank you.
I'd like to thank the witnesses, and in particular the Nova Scotia RCMP officers and civilian employees, for doing such an amazing job and having such great integrity for us through this process.
My first question is for Superintendent Campbell.
In my understanding, Minister Blair testified before this committee that on April 23 there was a cabinet meeting. We also know from emails that later that day Commissioner Lucki emailed the Nova Scotia team seeking the list of firearms found in the vehicle and said that the government was anxious for this. We also know that later that evening she provided that to a number of civilians and the chief of staff, the minister and five other government officials, none of whom work for the RCMP. My understanding is also that the SIRC clearance was to only share that information within the RCMP.
Do you have any idea what kind of political pressure the minister was under in order to go around the SIRC requirement and provide that information, contrary to the directive, outside the RCMP?
View Rick Perkins Profile
CPC (NS)
Thank you.
Ms. Scanlan, in your testimony, your interviews with the Mass Casualty Commission, you mentioned that you had regular contact with Dan Brien, who was media relations and issues management for the RCMP. Is that correct?
Results: 1 - 15 of 3957 | Page: 1 of 264

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data