Tag: proc committee

Liberal MP Ruby Sahota complains about costs of a public inquiry

Today at the PROC committee, Liberal MP Ruby Sahota (Brampton North) complained about the hypothetical costs of a full public inquiry into the allegations of Chinese state interference in Canadian elections. It is alleged that Beijing wanted to see the re-election of Justin Trudeau in 2021 to a minority government. It is alleged the CCP facilitated funding for up to 11 candidates.

Watch Ruby Sahota here:

Of course, this intervention by Sahota was part of a concerted effort to filibuster the committee to prevent Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Chief of Staff Katie Telford from testifying at the committee, but it got me curious about the history of public inquiries in Canada. Here are a few recent examples that looked into allegations political malfeasance and controversial political decisions:

  1. Rouleau inquiry (Public Order Emergencies Commission) was put in place as required by the Emergencies Act when the Act is invoked during a public emergency. The debate concerned whether Justin Trudeau was justified in treating the 2022 Trucker protest as an emergency. The process found the order to be justified and the commission was estimated to have cost the taxpayer $19 million.
  2. Gomery Inquiry (Commission of Inquiry into the Sponsorship Program and Advertising Activities) – launched in 2004 to investigate political corruption related to the distribution of advertising contracts to Liberal friendly firms. The inquiry heard from over 150 witnesses and released its findings in two reports. The report found that senior Liberal government officials knew of the wrongdoing but failed to act. The scandal and inquiry cast a harsh light on the Liberal government ending 13 years of governance. The cost of the inquiry initially was estimated to cost $14 million but expanded to over $80 million.
  3. Charbonneau Commission (Commission of Inquiry on the Awarding and Management of Public Contracts in the Construction Industry) – launched in 2011 to investigate corruption in the Quebec construction industry and links to Quebec political parties and politicians. The commission investigated bid-rigging, illegal political financing, and money laundering and their relation to the awarding of public contracts. The commission lasted 4 years through 2015 and cost $45 million.
  4. Cullen commission (Commission of Inquiry into Money Laundering in British Columbia) – an investigation into the links between political parties and money laundering in the province heard from over 220 witnesses cost $15 million (according to its budget)

Regarding an investigation into the corruption of our political system by a hostile foreign power, this indeed would be costly but few would argue it wouldn’t be worthwhile. Federal elections in Canada cost on the order of $500 million to elect a government that manages an annual budget of over $300 billion.

Liberal MPs look to protect Katie Telford

The slow grind of the story of alleged interference by Beijing’s communist government in Canadian elections continued this week.

The Prime Minister announced that he will appoint a special rapporteur to investigate these claims. This has placated few outside of Liberal partisans and a small group within the national media. Most everyone else is calling for a public inquiry or a judicial review.

Conservatives have been trying to get PROC – the Parlimentary committee for Procedure and House Affairs – to compel Trudeau’s Chief of Staff to testify. Katie Telford, according to some knowledgeable observers, would have been briefed by CSIS had Canada’s intelligence agency sought to inform the government about domestic electoral interference by a hostile foreign power. It is reported that CSIS briefed the government on China’s actions on two previous occasions.

The Liberals on the committee are employing stalling tactics, such as filibustering and even not showing up to meetings, to prevent the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff and longest running senior advisor from testifying before the committee.

For their part, Liberals seem to complain that it is unusual for staff to testify before Parliamentary committees. This is true and usually held as a courtesy by all parties. Indeed, as they argue, it is the politicians who accountable for the actions of their staff that act on their behalf. However, Telford has testified before committee during two previous occasions. Further, if she was briefed on foreign interference, she is a key witness that can provide insight on the government’s response.

She also wouldn’t be the first PMO Chief of Staff to testify before committee. All three Prime Ministerial Chiefs of Staff in the Harper government (Ian Brodie, Guy Giorno, and Nigel Wright) testified before various Parliamentary committees as I noted in 2019.

Telford could be of service to her government by testifying about whether she was briefed by CSIS. The Prime Minister maintains that he was not briefed on Liberal election candidates receiving funds from China. If so, this is concerning as this is what the supposed CSIS leaks allege. The Prime Minister is either wilfully ignorant about this affair, dangerously incompetent, or the allegations themselves are entirely work of fiction.

It would serve Canadians to find out one way or the other.