44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 30, 2023 10:00AM
- May/30/23 11:16:05 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we hear the Liberals talk a lot about Mr. Johnston's respectability. Canadians respect him. I was one of those people until he accepted the appointment to be a special rapporteur when he was a member of the Trudeau Foundation, which had clearly become part of the foreign interference scandal. He was clearly in a conflict of interest.
Would the member agree that there are probably hundreds, maybe thousands, of other Canadians who are respected who could have accepted that appointment and are not in a conflict of interest?
91 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 11:18:58 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, how did we get to this point? How is it that we are here in the House of Commons to debate a motion to hold a public inquiry on foreign interference?
It started a long time ago. About 10 years, or a decade, ago, the Prime Minister expressed his admiration for the dictatorship of China. He said that the power concentrated in Beijing allowed that dictatorship to impose its will on the people of China and that he wanted to re-create that same power here in Canada. It therefore comes as no surprise that the Chinese government wanted an ideological ally in power.
Thanks to information given to the media, we know that Beijing interfered in two elections to help get the Prime Minister elected. We know that Beijing donated $140,000 to the Trudeau Foundation. A telephone call from a Chinese diplomat shows that the purpose of that donation was to buy the Prime Minister's love and loyalty.
We know that, since that time, Beijing has been interfering by threatening the family of at least one MP and targeting other MPs who criticized the policies of the dictatorship in Beijing.
We also know that foreign police stations are operating here in Canada, even after the Minister of Public Safety promised to close them. Not only are those police stations open but, worse still, the Liberal government has subsidized them with taxpayer money.
We know that there are business ties between well-placed Liberals in the business world and the Liberal Party that influence this Prime Minister. All this is known, but there is a lot we do not know. People working for the intelligence service have said that Canadians need to know the truth about the relationships with the Beijing regime and its influence here in Canada. That is why there are unprecedented leaks from the intelligence service in the media. What could have compelled people to take that kind of risk? Since Canadians have learned of these risks, what has the Prime Minister done?
First, he asked Mr. Rosenberg to conduct an investigation. Mr. Rosenberg, a member of the Trudeau Foundation, said there was no problem, and that there was nothing to worry about.
There were still scandals, so the Prime Minister appointed Mr. Johnston as a special rapporteur, a fake position that does not even exist. Who is Mr. Johnston? He has been a friend of the Prime Minister’s family for 40 years, a ski buddy, a cottage neighbour and another member of the Trudeau Foundation, which received the infamous $140,000 donation.
However, the public was told not to worry because there was no conflict of interest. We know that because Mr. Johnston appointed a third person to give his opinion on the potential conflict of interest. It was another member of the Trudeau Foundation.
There are 40 million Canadians, but no one can be found outside the Trudeau Foundation to investigate this matter. That is why we need a public inquiry to make sure Canadians learn the truth.
The Prime Minister is trying to delay the launch of such an inquiry, which is inevitable. Indeed, if the Prime Minister does not launch that inquiry, I will do so when I win the next election. Today, we are studying a motion by the New Democrats, who helped the Prime Minister hide the truth and who are still in a coalition with this Prime Minister.
If the New Democrats are serious about forcing a public inquiry then they should tell the Prime Minister to launch a public inquiry or they will end the coalition with their Liberal bosses. That is the thing to do.
We need a foreign influence registry to ensure that anyone who is paid by a foreign government to influence and manipulate our policies will have their name published online for all the world to see.
We need stricter laws for those who facilitate setting up foreign police stations. We need to give more power to the RCMP and the police forces here in Canada to stop those who break the law by setting up police stations.
We need to wrest control of our democracy from foreign forces. We need to put Canadians back in charge of their lives. It is common sense. Let us bring common sense back by shedding light on the truth and allowing a public inquiry so that all Canadians can know the truth.
I will be splitting my time with the member for Brantford—Brant.
How did this all start? It started with the Prime Minister, who, before he even took office, expressed his admiration for the basic Chinese Communist dictatorship. Elsewhere, he expressed his admiration for Fidel Castro, whom he called a great revolutionary. Seeing this ideological bond, Beijing decided it had a friend and wanted to help the Prime Minister get elected. It interfered in two successive elections.
In the most recent election, intelligence confirms that Beijing wanted to see the Prime Minister win and defeat the Conservatives. It did this by intimidating people of the Chinese diaspora, who had otherwise been going out to vote patriotically. They were told they had to stay home and avoid voting. We saw that ridings with large Chinese populations had massive reductions in voter turnout.
We know that members of Parliament have been threatened by the regime in Beijing, with even the possibility of their families facing harm back home in China. We also know that the Prime Minister has been aware of many of these facts for a very long time and yet chose to do nothing. His defence is that he knew nothing. If he knew nothing and was not getting basic information from his intelligence forces, then he is incompetent and incapable of protecting our homeland.
Worst of all, the greatest victims of this are Canadians of Chinese origin, who came here to build this country, who came here to escape tyranny and embrace freedom, who follow the law and who contribute to our country every day and in every way. However, the government in this country has done nothing to protect them from the government in the country they left behind.
We have the stories, which were told to members of Parliament in our caucus. They were on doorsteps during campaigns meeting people who were in tears, people who told them that they had to leave the doorstep and go to a faraway field somewhere, leaving their phones behind because they were worried they were being tracked by a foreign government, worried that their families could be harmed, worried that acts of intimidation or even violence could happen to them here on Canadian soil. Still, the government has not set up a foreign influence registry that could help us identify the thugs who carry out this intimidation. Still, the government has refused to bring in tougher laws to shut down all foreign-controlled police stations. Still, the Prime Minister has failed to call the public inquiry that is required.
We call on the NDP to set a condition that if there is no public inquiry, the NDP will break the coalition and stand up for Canada and Canadians for once. These Canadians of Chinese origin attacked by this foreign government are patriotic Canadians. They deserve the protection of their government. These are our people. This is our land. This is our country. This is our home.
1238 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 11:41:16 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, after the release of the so-called special rapporteur report, the Conservatives were working to get Mr. Johnston to appear before committee to answer on his failure to recommend a public inquiry. Again, the NDP showed its true colours in siding with Liberals and voting together to try to silence the opposition and hide the truth from Canadians.
Now, 19 sitting days before the summer break, the New Democrats are trying to save what is left of their political legacy by presenting a motion that would once again recommend that the government do things differently. They will then vote blindly against their very own motion. It is hypocrisy at its finest.
Foreign operatives should never be permitted to intimidate and harass Canadian people on Canadian soil, as the government has allowed them to do for several years. Rather than following the response of our neighbours across the border, who promptly shut down these police stations and charged those responsible, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Public Safety instead chose to spend their energy on misleading Canadians.
First, the minister said that the stations were all shut down; we then found out that they were still in operation in Montreal. Now, most recently, the minister comes clean and admits that there may be more illegal police stations run by Beijing across this country. To make matters worse, we have now learned that the government has been providing taxpayer funding to these groups, which are designed to implode our democracy. As reported by the National Post, Centre Sino-Québec is “one of two Quebec organizations ... under RCMP investigation for allegedly hosting a secret Chinese police station”, and it was given nearly $160,000 worth of funds.
The solution is not difficult. It is very simple. It is to shut down all these police stations and create and implement a foreign influence registry to protect Canadians now. Canadians have no idea what to believe at this point. Who can blame them? Thus, it is imperative to have an open and honest public inquiry on foreign interference in this country to give citizens the answers they so need and deserve.
Unfortunately, we all know very well that the government's lack of action did not stop there. Rather, the Prime Minister showed his true colours when he chose to place his partisan interests above the safety of our institutions and of this country by selecting a family friend and member of the Beijing-funded Trudeau Foundation. He knowingly appointed a ski buddy, a cottage neighbour and a member of the Beijing-funded foundation to a fake job intended to legitimize the Liberal cover-up.
As well stated by Canada's next prime minister, in a country of 40 million people, the government could not find anyone who did not have connections to the Liberal Party or who had not been on the foundation. That is unbelievable. It is remarkable. We have so many distinguished prominent Canadians with the same credentials as former governor general David Johnston, and they ignored each and every one of those individuals and hand-picked Mr. Johnston for the job.
To make matters worse, while working on the report and during the investigation, Mr. Johnston sought advice from another trusted Liberal adviser, Sheila Block. This is a Liberal supporter who donated thousands of dollars exclusively to the Liberal Party of Canada.
If that were not enough, we have another layer of the cover-up cake. When David Johnston wanted to make sure that he was not in a conflict of interest in judging Beijing's interference in the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, we can guess whose opinion he sought. We have all kinds of retired Supreme Court justices in this country who are still alive, but he had to choose Mr. Frank Iacobucci of the Supreme Court of Canada, a member of the Trudeau Foundation. As a lawyer, I am absolutely gobsmacked and astounded that they cannot see this runaway freight train called “the conflict of interest” running smack dab into the middle of the heart of the current Liberal government.
It is not only a pure, active conflict of interest. It is the appearance of such an interest. Any lawyer who goes into court knows that many judges have completely recused themselves on the lower grounds of not doing anything that might compromise the integrity of the process. This process has been substantially compromised by the actions of David Johnston, the Prime Minister and his government.
In conclusion, sunshine is the best disinfectant, per CSIS. Let the public see. Let us let the public be the judge. Let us call a public inquiry. If NDP members really want to prove that they support a public inquiry, they must tell the Prime Minister that they will pull out of their coalition agreement if he does not call one. Stand up for Canadians, NDP.
822 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 1:44:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned putting politics aside, but he did not mention that the Liberal Party has benefited to a great extent from the Communist Chinese government's involvement in our democracy. It is a very serious situation. I hear Liberal members laughing, but this is no laughing matter whatsoever. We have Chinese Canadians who are being intimidated.
Will the member not admit that the special rapporteur should have pulled himself out in the first place and not accepted this job, considering his special connection with the Prime Minister and his involvement in the Trudeau Foundation? Would the member please respond?
102 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 2:16:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, over the last several months, Canadians have seen reports of foreign interference in our democracy by the Communist dictatorship in Beijing. What was the Prime Minister's response? He appointed a member of the Trudeau Foundation to investigate, the same Trudeau Foundation that has been the target of a foreign influence operation that saw it accept $140,000 from the Communist dictatorship in Beijing.
The House called on the government to hold a public inquiry, but instead, the Prime Minister's ski buddy and Trudeau Foundation board member covered up for him. When that came to light, people could count on the official opposition. Could they count on the New Democrats? When the chips were down at committee, they delayed this for the government's benefit and continued to cover up the Prime Minister's inaction, to the detriment of our democracy.
Canadians deserve a public inquiry now.
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 2:18:49 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, no one believes the Prime Minister's cottage neighbour and member of the Trudeau Foundation, David Johnston, when he tries to cover up the reality of Beijing's interference to support the Liberal Party and the Prime Minister for the past 10 years.
To enhance and restore Canadians' confidence in our democratic system, will the Prime Minister finally fire his friend from the Trudeau Foundation and launch a real public inquiry?
73 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 2:22:44 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, he wants facts? Well, here is a fact. He would have me commit to following section 12(1) of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act, which would not only strip away my ability to speak about this matter but would also ban me from doing it right here on the floor of the House of Commons. That is a fact.
The real question is, what is he so determined to hide?
We know Beijing helped him in two elections. We know Beijing gave donations to his Trudeau Foundation. Is that why he is so determined to silence his critics and keep these secrets?
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 2:24:04 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, what he is saying is that nothing is hidden. I invite my colleagues to look at everything that is hidden.
After that, they will go before the media and say that they can say nothing. That would not provide any further information to Canadians, who are worried about the loss of independence of our democratic system.
Ultimately, will he stop hiding behind his friend from the Trudeau Foundation and finally launch a public inquiry?
76 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 2:26:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the appointment of a former member of the Trudeau Foundation, a family friend and a friend to China was not legitimate. The findings and the report have no legitimacy. Mr. Johnston's obstinacy in designating himself to continue on with this matter is wrong.
If Mr. Johnston refuses to recuse himself, as Parliament may well ask him to do, will the Prime Minister have the dignity and statesmanship to remove him from his role and create an independent commission of public inquiry?
86 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 2:30:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal Prime Minister appointed a member of the Liberal Trudeau Foundation, advised by a Liberal donor, to decide whether to investigate Liberal cabinet ministers and Liberal staff about what they knew and when they knew it, but, do not worry, another Liberal Trudeau Foundation cleared the conflict. That is the story in Ottawa.
Canadians say it is not good enough and Conservatives say it is not good enough. Even the NDP is making a half-attempt at appearing to say that it is not good enough. It is not good enough. It is a cover-up.
How can the government not call a public inquiry?
108 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 2:32:35 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Beijing interfered in two federal elections and helped the Liberals win. It threatened members of Parliament of this House and their families. It donated $140,000 to the Trudeau Foundation to influence the Prime Minister's decisions. These are very serious matters of foreign interference that require a full public inquiry. Unfortunately, we all knew that the fix was in when the Prime Minister appointed a member of the Trudeau Foundation, who also happens to be his neighbour and a long-time family friend, and then gave him a fake fancy title.
Why the cover-up?
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 2:35:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this farce has gone on long enough. With the special rapporteur's report, the Prime Minister's shenanigans to avoid launching a public inquiry have been exposed for all to see.
What is really so special about this rapporteur are his ties to the Trudeau Foundation, his reliance on Liberal donors, his status as an old friend of China and, most of all, his close friendship with the Prime Minister's family.
When will the Prime Minister end this charade, fire Mr. Johnston and launch an independent public inquiry?
91 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 4:39:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the only party that has been trampling on the reputation of the former governor general is the Liberal Party. Its members knew that there was a perceived conflict of interest with the links to the Trudeau Foundation and with the close family ties going all the way back to Pierre Elliott Trudeau. It was very clear that there was an obvious conflict of interest. That right there was enough for them to realize that they should look beyond Mr. Johnston. In a country of close to 40 million people, surely to goodness they could have found one person who did not have ties to the Trudeau Foundation and who did not have ties to the Prime Minister's family.
How is it that the Liberal government, every single time it decides to do something, is found to have a conflict of interest? Let us just look at the infrastructure minister's sister-in-law being appointed as the interim ethics commissioner. Again, that was a conflict of interest. Why is it that, every time this government does something, it becomes tied up in an ethics violation?
188 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:42:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I listened intently to my hon. colleague's speech, and I think there is a little bit of confusion about what a conflict of interest or a perception of a conflict of interest is and what it means when such a charge is made.
Nobody is questioning the eminence of David Johnston or his lifetime of service. Many eminent people can have impeccable integrity but can still be caught in a conflict of interest or a potential or perceived conflict of interest simply because of their relationships. Mr. Johnston obviously had a family relationship with the Trudeau family, including skiing with the children of the Trudeau family. He was on the board of directors of the Trudeau Foundation, the same Trudeau Foundation that is implicated in the interference file because of its reception of money from the Chinese government.
Does the member not agree that the optics are such, leaving aside Mr. Johnston's pristine reputation and record, which we do not doubt, that this places him in a perceived conflict of interest? Does he not agree that it would be better for everybody and for Canadians' confidence if we found another eminent Canadian, with the same impeccable credentials but who is not in a perceived conflict of interest, to look into this matter?
216 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:44:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague puts on a pretty lively show. To hear him talk, we should give Mr. Johnston the Nobel Peace Prize, the Oscar for best actor, and the Medal of Bravery, and name him patriot of the year. While we are at it, we should call the Pope and ask him to elevate Mr. Johnston to sainthood. This is so absurd.
Today, we know that Mr. Johnston is a friend of the Trudeau family. That is documented. He himself does not deny it. How can he be objective when it comes to the Prime Minister? It is inconceivable. He co-chaired the “no” committee in 1995. The woman he hired as his legal adviser, whose name escapes me, is a Liberal Party donor, a fact that is well known and documented.
How can my colleague defend such a preposterously biased report? The only way to get to the bottom of this affair is to launch a full, independent commission of public inquiry. That concludes my intervention.
173 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 4:49:16 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we listened to a 20-minute speech from the member for Kingston and the Islands, and unfortunately, it was more heat than light.
Now he is accusing us, all the opposition parties, of creating this conflict of interest that David Johnston finds himself in. We are not creating it. We just uncovered it, and it was a pretty easy job to do. The fact he is a member of the Trudeau Foundation, which has become part of the story, is clearly a conflict of interest. I have a lot of respect for David Johnston, as do all my colleagues. That is why we are so disappointed that he accepted the appointment when he knew that he was in a conflict of interest.
I am not surprised the Prime Minister made the appointment because we are used to bad judgments there. Did nobody on the government side of the House advise the Prime Minister that this might turn out badly?
161 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/30/23 5:35:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I can understand why the Liberals do not want to have an inquiry. For one thing, what benefits them politically is the status quo. Most of the ridings held by Chinese Canadians went Liberal in the last election, primarily because of threats and because all sorts of things were happening, such as money being funnelled.
I wonder if the member could comment on this. The special rapporteur, in spite of his credentials, is not acceptable to the opposition because of his connections to the Trudeau Foundation and because he is a personal friend of the family. Is it not self-evident that this is not appropriate?
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
