44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 20, 2023 11:00AM
- Mar/20/23 1:58:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to the NDP House leader's speech, and I am interested in the motion and debate that will take place on what they are going to put forward tomorrow.
Today, we are talking about the Conservative opposition day motion, and that is to have the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Katie Telford, testify at committee on what she knew, when she knew it and whether the Prime Minister was briefed on that.
My question is very clear, it will not take much time and we will be able to get to the next item on the rubric at 2 p.m., right on time, because he can answer yes or no. Will the NDP members be propping up a corrupt government, or will they be on the side of Canadians and voting for the Prime Minister's chief of staff to testify, yes or no?
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 2:23:26 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today, I am announcing that the Conservative Party is willing to let all its staff testify about Beijing's interference. The members of the Liberal team, a party that received help from Beijing, should do exactly the same thing.
Katie Telford was in charge of the Prime Minister's leadership campaign and headed several campaigns for the Liberal Party during two elections that we know were subject to interference.
Will the NDP leader let her testify, yes or no?
81 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 2:24:54 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we now know, from leaked intelligence reports, that the Liberal Party received help in multiple elections from the Communist government in Beijing, which wanted to keep the Prime Minister in place. We know that his top campaign officials, such as Katie Telford, would have been aware of this help, and we need to know exactly what she knew and what the Prime Minister knew. Only she can answer these questions, but only the leader of the NDP will decide. He has the deciding vote.
The question is this: Will he help his boss, the Prime Minister, cover up, or will he vote for the Prime Minister's chief of staff to testify? Which is it?
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 2:35:45 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it has been weeks and more than 20 hours of talking out the clock in the cover-up from the government. Liberal MPs will do anything possible to keep the Prime Minister's chief of staff from testifying at the House affairs committee on what she knew about Beijing's election interference. Instead of the NDP showing some courage and standing up against the cover-up, it is no surprise that it looks like they are going to support it.
Will the Prime Minister stop stonewalling to allow his chief of staff to testify before members of Parliament, yes or no?
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 2:39:01 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will tell everyone what obstruction looks like. When I was the critic, and I was trying to deal with the then Conservative government, Justice Iacobucci and Justice O'Connor critically called for the establishment of an independent oversight mechanism filled with parliamentarians that could look into every aspect of government.
What did the opposition leader do when he was minister of democratic reforms? He did nothing.
He did not take action on that. We did. This means that members of Parliament from every single party have the opportunity to look into every aspect of this matter. We have offered witnesses. We have had many ministers testify.
What is their interest? Partisan—
115 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 2:39:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, what we have received is horrific partisanship from the government House leader and the Liberals. They appointed a family friend of the Prime Minister, a board member on the Beijing-funded Trudeau Foundation, to advise the Prime Minister on whether he maybe should, probably, might, could have a public inquiry.
We are looking for a public inquiry for Canadians, and we are looking for the Prime Minister's chief of staff to testify at committee.
Why will the Liberals and their NDP coalition partners not allow the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Katie Telford, to testify?
99 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 2:41:03 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, by interfering in Canada's electoral system, Beijing's Communist Party is subverting our democracy. As parliamentarians, all of us should be seized with this unacceptable affront.
There is someone in Canada who knows full well what may have happened. She was in charge of the current Prime Minister's election campaign and is currently the Prime Minister's chief of staff. We want to hear from her in committee. We know that the government does not want her to testify.
My question is for one member of the government coalition, the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie. Will he rise in the House and tell his constituents that he will vote in favour of complete freedom and, above all, full transparency in this matter and allow Ms. Telford to appear before the committee?
138 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 2:42:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the minister is a seasoned parliamentarian and an honourable man.
What does he have to say about the fact that his government members talked non-stop, while saying nothing at all, for over 20 hours to prevent democracy from working?
The minister is a strong supporter of full and complete democracy, especially parliamentary democracy. The chief of staff, Ms. Telford, knows things that Canadians want to know about what happened with the regime in Beijing. Will the minister allow her to testify in parliamentary committee, yes or no?
91 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 2:48:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the motion in front of the House today orders the Prime Minister's chief of staff to testify about Beijing's foreign interference in front of committee.
It is clear the government will be voting against the motion, but the government and its party cannot carry the House alone. It is not clear whether its confidence and supply partner, the NDP, will be voting for or against the motion.
The public has a right to know before the vote. Could the government tell us if its confidence-and-supply partner will be voting for or against the motion?
100 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 3:57:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I was very clear in my speech. The leader of His Majesty's loyal opposition has always been very clear on this point. We fully support an independent public inquiry that has subpoena power. We would not be in this particular situation if the justice assigned to the public inquiry could subpoena the Prime Minister and Katie Telford. We would not be in this mess.
To answer the member's question, yes, that is the ultimate outcome that we as Canada's Conservatives would like to see, but until such time as that becomes reality, if at all, we need to have Katie Telford testify.
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 4:12:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it was okay for the Prime Minister's chief of staff to testify in the WE scandal at committee and to appear during the scandal of sexual assault in the military. It was okay on those two occasions. I think the better question is why it is not okay today. If she does not want to appear as the Prime Minister's chief of staff, perhaps she can appear as the campaign director of the Liberal Party campaign and the member's own leadership, who oversees nominations in his party. Why does she not appear under that title?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 5:34:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, often Liberal members get criticized for not answering questions. I am going to ask the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader the simple question for a third time.
NDP members last week supported the idea of having the Prime Minister's chief of staff and key witnesses testify in committee on what they knew and how they knew it when it came to Beijing's election interference. Suddenly, they are wavering. Can the member answer the question with a yes or a no? Have they made the vote tomorrow a confidence matter? For the third time, is it yes or no?
104 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/20/23 6:04:40 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, acting with a sense of urgency is very important. I agree wholeheartedly.
That is why the call for an immediate, transparent public inquiry was made. That is also why the issue was to have already had Ms. Telford testify a week ago, not to continue a filibuster over the course of four weeks and not to then have this supply day used to address this issue as well. It already could have occurred, but the government is intent on covering up what it believes is too damning for Canadians to hear.
We should move quickly with it, and all parties in the House, including backbenchers on the government side, should support having the Prime Minister's chief of staff testify at committee.
124 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
