SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 211 - Jun/12/23

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, Lib.)

Jun/12/23 2:27:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as I said at the start of question period, that has always been an option. I know that the Bloc Québécois will never form the government, but the Conservative Party is well aware that a public inquiry involving the most heavily protected national security information cannot proceed irresponsibly. I think that everyone would benefit from a substantive discussion on how to approach the next steps in the public process and, if a public inquiry is the option chosen, how it will proceed, what its terms of reference will be and what the timeline will look like.

102 words

Context: House Hansard - 211 - Jun/12/23

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, Lib.)

Jun/12/23 2:31:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we think that a discussion about issues as important as protecting Canadian democratic institutions from unacceptable foreign interference would benefit from all of us lowering the partisan temperature. That is why we believe the decision of Mr. Johnston to leave the special rapporteur role gives all of us an opportunity to discuss what the next steps are in a public process. The opposition says it wants a public inquiry. What would be the terms of reference of that inquiry? How would they protect necessary national security information in the interests of Canada? What would be the timeline? Those are the conversations we are anxious to have.

108 words

Context: House Hansard - 211 - Jun/12/23

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, Lib.)

Jun/12/23 2:32:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it will not surprise members that I do not share some of the exaggerated premises of our hon. colleague's questions. What we have said, and members of the Conservative Party know this well, including the leader of the Conservative Party, who sat in government, is that this was designed and decided to protect national security information from public release. The Conservatives know that. Saying they want a public inquiry right now is not, in fact, a responsible suggestion. They should tell us what the terms of reference would be, how they would protect the national security interests of Canada and who might lead this process—

109 words

Context: House Hansard - 211 - Jun/12/23

Hon. Marco Mendicino (Minister of Public Safety, Lib.)

Jun/12/23 2:33:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the colleague across the way highlights the mechanisms that shine a light on how we are protecting our democratic institutions from foreign interference, including through the creation of NSICOP, a multipartisan endeavour; through the creation of NSIRA; and yes, through Mr. Johnston, who has now determined that he will not be carrying on and has charted out a course. What is important is that we work together to address the concerns that have been raised with regard to foreign interference, but doing so in a way that is responsible to protect our national security. That remains the commitment of this government, and we look forward to taking the next concrete steps with all members in this chamber.

119 words

Context: House Hansard - 211 - Jun/12/23

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Infrastructure and Communities, Lib.)

Jun/12/23 2:41:34 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am encouraged by our colleague's comments about the kind of public inquiry that will have to be considered by the government and by the House of Commons. She specifically identified one of the challenges when it comes to top secret information, which is so classified in order to protect the safety of Canadians and those who work for our security agencies. Rather than simply repeating the call for an independent public inquiry, it would be helpful to hear exact terms and conditions, specific suggestions on how to protect top secret information, the ideal person to conduct that kind of discussion or public inquiry, and the timelines.

111 words