The federal Conservatives are pushing back on the government’s proposal for how membership and chair positions on the coming Parliamentary Review Committee are being allotted, saying the Liberals are trying to “weaken” the study into the federal government’s use of the Emergencies Act by not giving their party more of a leading role.
In a statement, Conservative House Leader John Brassard and Deputy Leader Luc Berthold said Thursday that they’ve rejected the proposal as it stands, accusing the Liberals, with the backing of the NDP of “trying to weaken” the accountability and oversight mechanisms required under the Act.
Responding to this critique, Government House Leader Mark Holland said the Conservatives’ role is “balanced” and reflective of their “bias in cheering on the illegal occupation.”
Over the course of the “Freedom Convoy” protests and blockades, some Conservative MPs backed the truckers, and suggested that blame for the extended crisis situation prompted by anti-vaccine mandate and anti-government demonstrations laid squarely on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s shoulders. Weeks into the standoff, Trudeau made history in invoking the Emergencies Act to bring and end to the occupation of downtown Ottawa and the flow of funding enabling it.
REVIEW BY 11 MEMBERS
According to a copy of a draft motion being considered by the parties that was obtained by CTV News, the government proposal with which the Conservatives take issue suggests there would be seven MPs on the committee: Three Liberals, two Conservatives, one Bloc Quebecois MP, and one NDP MP. As well, there would be four senators, with their affiliation not specified.
The Liberals have indicated there would be one senator from the Independent Senators Group, one senator from the Conservative Party caucus, one senator from the Progressive Senate Group, and one senator from the Canadian Senators group.
How the law is worded, the never-before-created-committee must include “at least one member of the House of Commons from each party that has a recognized membership of twelve or more persons,” which in this Parliament means at least one Liberal, Conservative, Bloc, and NDP MP.
And, the Act says there must be at least one senator from each party that also has representation in the House, which is complicated now given the Conservatives are the only party with a Senate caucus, and there are a handful of other non-affiliated and independent senate groups.
The aforementioned construction does satisfy these requirements, but the Conservatives say the Act “envisions a lean, opposition-heavy committee that will review the use of the extraordinary powers employed by the prime minister under his emergency declaration,” and in their view, given the NDP’s support for enacting the Act, the two parties working together would “give the Liberals a working majority.”
CO-CHAIR CONCERNS
The Official Opposition is also taking issue with the proposed allocation of a number of co-chair positions and what they call the “disproportionate” role of the Senate, which ultimately did not end up voting to confirm the powers given the timing of Wednesday’s revocation.
“Traditionally, oversight committees are chaired by the Official Opposition, not a member of the fourth party that sees itself as an extension of the government,” reads Brassard and Berthold’s statement. “Conservatives have rejected this proposal and provided a viable alternative that better reflects the requirements under the law.”
According to the motion, the government is proposing the committee would have three co-chairs: The Bloc and NDP MPs, plus one senator. The Bloc voted with the Conservatives against invoking the Emergencies Act, while the NDP supported the move.
Holland said the Conservatives' alternative proposal would see party members hold two chair slots, whereas under the proposed model they are rejecting, the chair would be neither a Liberal, whose party enacted the historic powers, or a Conservative, whose party supported the protest.
The proposal does include two vice-chair roles, one to be held by a Liberal MP and the other by a Conservative MP.
Asked to comment on the ongoing negotiations towards striking this committee, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said Thursday that the committee needs to be able to engage in “full scrutiny and full transparency.”
“The committee should be led by opposition, and the majority of seats should be opposition, the way our Parliament right now is comprised. That way there can be true accountability,” Singh said.
UP AND RUNNING NEXT WEEK?
Under the Act, a joint House and Senate Parliamentary Review Committee has to be established once a declaration of emergency is made. While the emergency orders have been rescinded, this committee still needs to be created.
On Wednesday in announcing the revocation of the extraordinary powers under the Act, Trudeau said the government was hoping to have the committee up and running next week, when MPs return from their constituency break. A motion to create the committee will have to be passed.
It’ll be the committee’s responsibility to review the government’s actions under the Act starting on the day it was invoked, and ensure the government used its powers responsibly through the 10 days it remained in effect.
Every member of the committee and all staff tasked to work with it will have to take an oath of secrecy, and now that the orders have been revoked, will likely have to issue its first report back to both the House and Senate within days of beginning their work.
The motion to create the committee also notes the requirement under law for much of the committee’s work to be done behind closed doors, though it does carve out that should the content of the meeting be able to be aired publicly, that audio or video broadcasting be allowed.
In his statement to CTVNews.ca, Holland said that it’s essential that the committee be formed immediately, and the government intends to press on with its “reasonable,” proposal as drafted.
“We must move without delay to establish the committee. We intend to give notice of a proposal for the House to debate and vote on early next week. We remain hopeful that we can reach consensus before then to move forward,” Holland said.
