SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 72

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 16, 2022 11:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 72 - May/16/22
The Deputy Speaker
  • May/16/22 3:36:48 p.m.
  • Watch
I am now ready to rule on the question of privilege raised on May 5, 2022, by the member for Simcoe—Grey concerning alleged ministerial interference in the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. When presenting his question of privilege, the member explained that he had received an email chain meant for members of the Liberal Party in connection with the preparation of instructions for the draft of the committee's report. While recognizing that this is normal party practice, he said that he was concerned to learn that the staff of the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship was actively involved in drafting these directives. The member alleged that such interference in the work of the committee meant that ministerial staff were trying to steer the direction and manipulate the analyst's work. In his opinion, he believed that this is contempt of Parliament. For his part, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader remarked that it is normal for the political staff of a parliamentary secretary who is a member of the committee to provide advice on a report in order to ensure an approach consistent with governmental policies. He argued that they are merely suggestions and not an attempt to constrain the members or dictate the work of the committee's analyst. The parliamentary secretary suggested that it is premature to raise this question of privilege since the committee has not presented a report to that effect. The crux of the problem raised by the member for Simcoe—Grey is that the minister's political staff participating in the discussions about the committee's report supposedly somehow deprives the House and, by extension, the committee of its right to govern its own proceedings, as mentioned by the member for Salaberry—Suroît. The Chair takes every allegation of interference in the proceedings of the House and its committees seriously, and it analyzes each case based on the facts presented to it. In this case, the situation described by the member does not seem highly unusual when a committee reviews a study, begins to plan the drafting of the report and discusses possible instructions. The members of a committee can consult stakeholders, interest groups and even their political colleagues before formulating their recommendations. It is not immediately obvious to the Chair how such discussions could constitute a breach of members' privileges, especially since there is no indication of confidential information's being shared or of threats or intimidation. A committee that deems it appropriate to submit certain problematic aspects to the Chair's attention can follow the normal process by presenting a report to the House. It is therefore impossible for me conclude that there has been a breach of the rights of the House or that a contempt has been committed. I therefore consider the matter closed. I thank the member for the intervention.
482 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border