44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 30, 2023 10:00AM
- May/30/23 10:37:16 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this is not the first time that the NDP has disagreed with the process that David Johnston has been in, but it certainly is the first time that it has participated in the Conservatives' conspiracy theories and antics to malign his character.
In 2018, we were studying the debates commission, and David Johnston, who was leading that process, appeared before committee. I would like to read a quote of what was said about David Johnston:
You are the gold standard of public service and I can't imagine any position for which you wouldn't be eminently qualified to represent Canadians and bring that fairness and values, and your integrity and your intelligence, your experience, to bear....
I have the highest regard for you, as does my caucus, and if at the end of the day, you end up being the debates commissioner, we as a country would be well served.
That was said by David Christopherson, a former NDP MP from Hamilton Centre.
How is it that the NDP cannot set aside its partisan interests this time?
180 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 11:14:04 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I found it very interesting when the member told us that she was on NSICOP, she had national security clearance, yet she is still able to participate in this debate despite the fact that the Leader of the Opposition suggests that he cannot.
I did a little research. It turns out the member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound is also on NSICOP, which means that he would have the security clearance, yet he participated in the motion of privilege regarding the member for Milton and he also participated in a Conservative opposition motion on March 20 about foreign interference.
How is it that the member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, who has the national security clearance, is not silenced, but somehow the Leader of the Opposition would be silenced if he had the exact same clearance?
142 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 11:17:42 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, toward the end of that answer, there was so much heckling. I know Conservatives are trying to impress their leader as he walked into the room, but we could not quite hear the full answer because of all the heckling coming from across the way.
47 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 11:28:45 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has said on a number of occasions that he does not want to receive and learn about classified information because he does not want to be silenced, yet there are members of his caucus, like the member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, for example, who have the security clearances, have received briefings through NSICOP and have participated in multiple debates in this House on foreign interference.
Is it true that the Leader of the Opposition is concerned about being silenced, or is it more that he would rather be wilfully ignorant?
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 1:13:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the NDP members want to have it both ways. On the one hand, they want to say how incredible a Canadian David Johnston is. On the other, they have no problem saying he needs to step aside and get out of the way, because he is not producing the results they want.
I found it very interesting that the House leader of the NDP went to great lengths to specifically talk about how much respect he has for David Johnston. He even went on to say that he knew, as a matter of fact, that if David Johnston were asked by this House to step down through this vote, he would comply with that.
What if he did not comply with it? Would that mean the NDP would lose faith in and respect for David Johnston? Is that the case? Would the NDP members say they still respect this individual and the contributions he makes? I would like to hear this from my NDP colleague: What would his position be with respect to his feelings about the great integrity of David Johnston if he did not heed the ask of this Parliament?
194 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 1:23:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I just cannot believe that the member does not know the rules of the House. Perhaps he would like to rephrase the last name that he used.
29 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 1:41:41 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, I cannot believe that my NDP colleague is trying to silence the member when he is representing his constituents and properly debating in this House.
32 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:19:49 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to this opposition day motion introduced by the NDP. I believe that the manner in which the New Democrats have brought this forward is very unfortunate.
I am becoming more and more concerned with the willingness of this House to arbitrarily attempt to ruin reputations and smear great Canadians, people who put service above self and people who come and offer themselves to make our country better. I am quickly reminded of the time when, in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, the NDP helped the Bloc and the Conservatives drag the president of the Public Health Agency of Canada before this House, before the bar. It is an archaic tradition in the Westminster parliamentary system that had happened only twice in the history of this Parliament.
For nothing more than cheap political points, the NDP helped the Conservatives and the Bloc drag an individual before the bar, so that they could scold the individual publicly. I see this happening more and more, especially from the Conservatives. I find it alarming when I see our friends from the NDP doing it.
I would like to start by reading some stuff that has been said about Mr. Johnston. Stephen Harper said, “Mr. Johnston has a strong record of public service, a broad base of support and an impressive list of achievements.... He has extensive legal expertise, a comprehensive understanding of government and a deep appreciation of the duties and tasks now before him.” We can also listen to what the member for Calgary Midnapore said at a PROC meeting in March 2019. She said, “There's no doubt as to the integrity and the experience and the resumé of Mr. Johnston.”
At a PROC meeting in November 2018, the member for Perth—Wellington said, “It always begs the question, ‘What about the next appointment?’ I don't think anyone has any qualms about David Johnston—he's an exceptional human being and an exceptional Canadian—but what about next time?” They were anxiously waiting for Mr. Johnston's next appearance on the Canadian stage. That was the member for Perth—Wellington.
I have another comment from the member for Calgary Midnapore from November 6, 2018, at a PROC meeting. She said, “Thank you for being here today. Of course, as a woman, I have tremendous respect for you since you raised four amazing women. Congratulations. I think that's a wonderful accomplishment.” In a November 2020 PROC meeting, the member for Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan said, “I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment that Mr. Johnston is an eminent Canadian.”
The member for Sarnia—Lambton recently said, “I am very happy to have been able to speak today about the value of the role of Governor General and to give honour to the many who have served well in that role, such as the Right Hon. David Johnston.” The member for Thornhill, who is the deputy leader of the Conservative Party, simply put out a seven-word tweet on April 17, 2021. She said, “Who misses the Rt. Hon David Johnston?”
Those are words from Conservatives. Conservatives had great things to say about David Johnston. By all their accounts, he was indeed an exceptional Canadian who did exceptional things, until he was suddenly asked to look into something and perhaps form an opinion that did not quite jive with the Conservative way of approaching things and the Conservative narrative.
If we flash forward to today, this is what Conservatives are now suddenly saying about David Johnston: The member for Calgary Forest Lawn said, “Another random Liberal tasked by the Prime Minister to support his corruption and scandals. Nothing to see here folks”.
An hon. member: Good reading.
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: Thank you, I will continue to read what the Conservatives have been saying.
Madam Speaker, the member for Thornhill, who had that seven-word tweet praising and pining for the days of David Johnston to return, said, “The Prime Minister appoints Trudeau Foundation insider to tell us that we don't need a public inquiry into Beijing's donations to the Trudeau Foundation & their election interference.” Wow, what a change of heart this is from the member for Thornhill.
The member for Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, my neighbouring riding, said, “Trudeau Foundation board member appointed by [the Prime Minister] to report to [the Prime Minister] on if there should be a public inquiry that could be damaging to [the Prime Minister]. This seems fine.” Of course, it was in his sarcastic tone that we are all so used to hearing in this House.
The member for Regina—Qu'Appelle said, “[The Prime Minister] names another Trudeau Foundation insider to tell us we don’t need an inquiry into Beijing’s interference.”
The Leader of the Opposition, himself, said in a tweet just days ago, “We see today that his ski buddy, cottage neighbour, family friend and member of the Beijing-financed Trudeau Foundation came out and did exactly what I predicted”.
What a bunch of hypocrites they are: the gall, the audacity. I guess I might be able to wrap my head around it if it were different Conservatives who were saying one thing a couple of years ago and now others suddenly taking a new approach, but it is the exact same people. The member for Thornhill, who longed for the days of David Johnston, is now suddenly accusing him of being an insider. I just cannot wrap my head around it.
Well, I can when we look at the way that Conservatives routinely will trample on anybody's reputation and will trample on anything that they absolutely see as being an opportunity to squeeze out a tiny bit of political gain. Of course, the gravy would be the fundraising that they do off that because we know that they use all this for their fundraising purposes, one can only imagine how many times. I would love to have the analytics on how many times David Johnston has been used in fundraising email blasts that come from the Conservatives. I am sure it is way up there.
It looks like the member for Abbotsford is agreeing with me, so I guess they do use him in fundraising.
See, that is what we are talking about here. The Leader of the Opposition has a job to do as His Majesty's Loyal Opposition. He is supposed to hold the government to account and that is completely understandable, completely acceptable and absolutely within the realm of what he is supposed to do. The problem is that he is not interested in that. He is interested only in trying to spread misinformation, and create and exaggerate conspiracies where they do not exist.
What I find to be the most troubling is that he will do this completely at the expense of eminent Canadians who have served our country, such as an individual like David Johnston who was appointed as governor general by Stephen Harper when the member for Carleton, the Leader of the Opposition, sat in that government. The Conservatives do not seem to have any regard at all. They have no shame at all in just trampling over top of people if they think they can just get an ounce of political gain out of it.
I am glad that the member for Burnaby South got—
1276 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:28:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to pause and reflect on what I was going to say.
The Leader of the Opposition recently said that he does not want to be silenced. He does not want to take a briefing. The Prime Minister said that the government realizes there is a lot going on with national security and wants to make sure all parties are informed. The special rapporteur, David Johnston, recommended that party leaders receive a briefing so they can understand what is going on. At the heart of this, hopefully at the heart of what we are all doing here, is to serve Canadians in the best interest of Canadians. At the heart of this is allowing those who are in these positions of power, whether that is government or opposition, to have the ability to understand the facts, to get that proper security classification and to receive the briefings.
I applaud the member for Burnaby South, the leader of the NDP, for actually agreeing to do that. I disagree with the motion the NDP brought forward, but what I find remarkable is how the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the Bloc just brush it off. They say that they do not want to be silenced. That is such a ludicrous statement.
My colleague, the member for Pickering—Uxbridge, stood in this House, gave a 20-minute speech earlier, replied to questions for 10 minutes and she full-on told us during her intervention today that she was a member of NSICOP, she has the security clearances and she receives briefings, but she is capable of deciphering between what is classified and what is not. It has in no way limited her ability to represent her constituents. It has not limited her ability to participate in debate. Other members from the Conservative Party are in the same position as her, and indeed it has not silenced her.
When I asked the Leader of the Opposition that question earlier today after he spoke, he gave the most ridiculous answer. I asked him why he would not take the briefing and if it was really about being silenced. Nobody else who has that classification and who has seen those documents is silenced, but he seems to be the only one who would end up being silenced. I asked him if it was just that he wanted to be willfully ignorant so he does not have to be responsible. His response to me was that he knew the way this would work, and he would go into the Prime Minister's Office, who would throw a bunch of papers on the desk and then put a big stamp on them and say that he could not say a word when he left.
This is an individual who wants to be the leader of the country, and this is the manner in which he thinks security and intelligence is shared in a G7 country, a Five Eyes alliance partner. This is the way he thinks confidential information is shared. He would just go on up to the Prime Minister's Office in West Block, who would throw down some papers on the table and tell him to read them and to not say anything when he leaves. I cannot wrap my head around how somebody can actually think that is how it happens.
Of course he knows better than that and he knows that is not the way it is, but he is playing that game, and I cannot understand why he thinks playing that game and acting that way is something that will resonate with Canadians. I do not understand how he thinks Canadians will take assurances in somebody who acts that way as being responsible enough to be the prime minister of this country, which is ultimately what he seeks to do. I find it very perplexing.
The Leader of the Opposition is trying to hide behind a veil of ignorance. He is trying to not participate. He is trying to not have any information because he just wants to continue doing what he is doing, which is ranting on, pointing fingers at the Prime Minister, talking about the Trudeau Foundation and clipping that.
The leader of this opposition participates in this House of Commons, and to his credit he enjoys being in here, more than I have seen any other leader from that side of the House in the time I have been here. What he does with it is he comes in here, gives this speech and could probably care less who is talking to. He then takes the clip, blasts it out in an email and tells people to look at how he is standing up for them. He then tells them to send money and click “donate now” and to give them more of their money so they can use it to beat the Liberals.
I will shift gears for a second.
Now I want to address the fact that the NDP is bringing forward this motion. The NDP is taking a really interesting stance on this. New Democrats are basically saying that they really respect David Johnston, he is an eminent Canadian, he has done all these great things and they respect him. They respect him to be able to do this work, but they just do not respect the fact that he has come to an outcome that they disagree with. That is the only way I can read this.
Here is what David Christopherson had to say, the former NDP member. He was a member of this House for a very long time, had a lot of character when he was in here, he represented—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
964 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:34:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, David Christopherson sat on the procedure and House affairs committee. He was in this chamber for a very long time. He was well regarded among my NDP colleagues and indeed probably by everybody in this House. Here is what he had to say when he was before David Johnston at a PROC committee just a couple of years ago: “You are the gold standard of public service and I can't imagine any position for which you wouldn't be eminently qualified to represent Canadians and bring that fairness and values, and your integrity and your intelligence, your experience, to bear.” He went on to say, “I have the highest regard for you, as does my caucus, and if at the end of the day, you end up being the debates commissioner, we as a country would be well served.”
That is David Christopherson, the former NDP member from Hamilton, who made those comments. If he is correct and the NDP feels the way Mr. Christopherson does about David Johnston, they cannot have it both ways. They cannot say someone is an eminent Canadian who is overly qualified to do this and whose integrity and intelligence are above everybody else's, and then all of a sudden, when they get a report from him, say they do not like what he said, so it is best that he step aside and we do it a different way. I am very perplexed by it. I cannot understand why the NDP is skating this line, trying to position themselves somewhere between thinking David Johnston is amazing and saying he has to go because they do not like the report he produced.
Members will note that NDP members were not calling for David Johnston to leave a week ago. They only started doing that when he brought out this report. In their eyes, the only difference they could have possibly had between then and now is the fact that this report came out. They do not like what he said in the report, but I will tell my NDP colleagues, as can anybody who sits on the PROC committee and heard the witnesses who came forward, that Mr. Johnston's reasoning for not having a public inquiry jibes exactly with what the head of the RCMP, the head of CSIS and the national security intelligence people said. All of these individuals, who came before committee, told us the exact same thing. He came to the exact same conclusion the experts were telling us in committee.
I am glad to see the member for Burnaby South is willing to accept and receive classified information in order to understand how Mr. Johnston came to these conclusion, but two other parties in this House, which are supposed to be here for the purpose of holding the government accountable, are not even interested in the information that would give them the ability to hold the government accountable.
It should not come as a surprise that I will vote against the opposition day motion. There has been a lot of talk, and I find it very unfortunate that we seem to be on this crusade of trampling over the reputations of Canadians, with a willingness to do whatever is possible for a bit of political gain. Again I am reminded, and I have thought about it several times today, that I was one of the only Liberals sitting in the House of Commons during the pandemic, in this exact same seat, when the Conservatives, the NDP and the Bloc dragged the president of the Public Health Agency of Canada before the bar just for political gain.
I understand where the NDP is on this. If we want to assess the politics of it, the NDP is just trying to find a difference between themselves and the Liberals. The only way they can really do it is by trying to shift things a bit to say they will call out David Johnston and call for the firing of David Johnston. They dragged the president of PHAC to the bar of the House of Commons, which had only happened prior to that twice in the history of this country. They had no problem doing that.
This is for political gain. It is for no reason other than that, and I find it shameful. It is one thing to have a debate and an open discussion about the best way forward for this country in light of foreign interference. It is a whole other thing when we start trampling over people's reputations, in particular people who cannot defend themselves in here and people who have served this country with incredible distinction over the years.
790 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:41:02 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, when the member for Perth—Wellington said, “It always begs the question, What about the next appointment? I don't think anyone has any qualms about David Johnston—”
Mr. Jeremy Patzer: Five years ago.
40 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:41:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member's colleague, a sitting Conservative MP, said, “I don't think anyone has any qualms about David Johnston—he's an exceptional human being and an exceptional Canadian”.
Mr. Jeremy Patzer: In 2018.
Mr. Mark Gerretsen: How could that possibly lead anybody to believe that Conservatives would have a problem with David Johnston, when the member for Perth—Wellington is saying that in committee?
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:43:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, for starters, the member said that nobody is calling into question Mr. Johnston's reputation. Well, members of the NDP may be saying that they are not, but let us not forget that the Conservatives are doing that in full force. They will not miss an opportunity to challenge and to call out his reputation.
The member's question of perception is an excellent point. There is a difference between a conflict of interest and a perception of a conflict of interest, but let us not forget who has created that perception of a conflict of interest. The Conservatives have been doing that, the Bloc Québécois has been doing it, and now, for some reason, we see the NDP joining in on this too. However, nobody has purported and built upon that perception of a conflict of interest, which, in my opinion, does not exist, more than the Conservative Party of Canada has.
159 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:46:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is incredibly flattering to have a former entertainer and actor himself refer to me as a very dramatic person. I take that as a compliment, and I appreciate it.
I do not think that former governor general David Johnston has a conflict of interest due to the fact he happened to live on the same street, was a neighbour, or one thing or another. I cannot understand how that would impact how he does his work. It certainly did not impact it in any way that prevented Stephen Harper from appointing him as a governor general. It certainly did not impact it in the manner in which so many Conservatives referred to him as a eminent Conservative, which I read about in my speech.
Getting back to the NDP's previous question, this is what I was talking about, what we are seeing right here, this display. This is where the perception of conflict of interest comes from. It comes from Conservatives and the Bloc getting up and repeatedly saying there is a conflict of interest. Just because they say it does not mean it is true.
190 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:47:59 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the individual who the Conservatives and Bloc members want to jump all over and be so incredibly critical of delivered a report, stating what can be made public and that there is an annex to it. I really encourage them to get their security clearances so they can see the rest of it.
Now the leaders of the Bloc and the Conservative Party will be saying they have seen enough and know what they want to say, then jump up and start fundraising, and accusing the government and a character assassination of a former governor general, who Stephen Harper appointed. This is the reality of the situation. If nothing else it says to Canadians that this is it, they are not even interested.
The member for Carleton, the Leader of the Opposition, is not even interested in looking at the classified information. It would not prevent him from talking about the rest of the public report. He could go on, just as he is right now, but also having that knowledge. Why would he want to have that knowledge? To properly inform himself to represent Canadians.
188 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:50:17 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, when Conservatives say things like, “I do not think anyone has any qualms about David Johnston as he is an exceptional human being and an exceptional Canadian”, or when Conservatives say stuff like, “I agree wholeheartedly with the assessment that Mr. Johnston is an eminent Canadian”, or when Conservatives say things like, “There is no doubt as to the integrity, experience and résumé of Mr. Johnston”, how is anybody supposed to believe, based on those comments, that the Conservatives would have a problem with David Johnston? They do not, and do members know why? It is because their own former prime minister, Stephen Harper, appointed him Governor General.
What the Conservatives do want is to score cheap political points for political gain and fundraising opportunities. That is all they are doing with this. That is what this entire exercise is about. They are smearing an individual's reputation, an individual who has served this country extremely well, and I find it absolutely disgraceful.
174 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
