PHAC president rebuked, still doesn't produce documents on fired scientists
OTTAWA — The Conservatives are asking that the Public Health Agency of Canada's offices be searched after a public shaming of the agency's president failed to persuade him to turn over unredacted documents related to the firing of two scientists at the country's highest-security laboratory.
OTTAWA — The Conservatives are asking that the Public Health Agency of Canada's offices be searched after a public shaming of the agency's president failed to persuade him to turn over unredacted documents related to the firing of two scientists at the country's highest-security laboratory.
© Provided by The Canadian Press
PHAC head Iain Stewart was hauled Monday before the bar of the House of Commons to receive a reprimand from Speaker Anthony Rota for his repeated refusal to provide the documents.
Stewart duly showed up — the first non-MP to be subjected to such a procedure in more than a century — and stood impassively at the brass rail at the entrance to the Commons, as ordered by a motion passed by the combined opposition parties last week.
Rota informed Stewart that the Commons possesses constitutional powers to order the production of any documents it sees fit. Those powers, he said, "are essential to the performance" of MPs' duties.
"The House has the power and indeed the duty to reaffirm them when obstruction or interference impedes with its deliberations," Rota said.
"As guardian of these rights and privileges, that is precisely what the House has asked me to do today, by ordering the Speaker to reprimand you for the Public Health Agency of Canada's contempt, refusing to submit the required documents."
Rota told the Commons that Stewart's lawyer had informed him earlier in the day that the PHAC head was still not able to release the unredacted documents, as twice ordered by the Canada-China relations committee and twice by the House itself.
Stewart was not given a chance to say anything Monday. But he told the health committee last week that he is bound by law to protect national security and privacy rights and nothing in the House order relieves him of that obligation.
In a sign of support from the minority Liberal government, the 27-year veteran public servant was accompanied to the chamber Monday by acting Privy Council clerk Janice Charette, who could be seen giving him an elbow bump before he walked in.
Opposition parties have joined forces to demand the documents in hopes that they'll shed light on why scientists Xiangguo Qiu and her husband, Keding Cheng, were escorted out of Winnipeg’s National Microbiology Laboratory in July 2019 and subsequently fired last January.
They are also seeking documents related to the transfer, overseen by Qiu, of deadly Ebola and Henipah viruses to China's Wuhan Institute of Virology in March 2019.
Stewart has said the virus transfer had nothing to do with the subsequent firings. He's also said there is no connection to COVID-19, a coronavirus that first appeared in China's Wuhan province and which some believe may have been released accidentally by the virology institute.
Nevertheless, opposition parties continue to suspect a link and are, hence, determined to see the unredacted documents.
Video: Senior public servant receives first formal House of Commons reprimand for non-MP since 1913 (Global News)
Stewart was forced to stand at the bar for some 40 minutes while MPs debated what should happen next. Opposition MPs initially refused unanimous consent to let him depart but eventually relented.
"Having Mr. Stewart at the bar was very difficult for many of us to witness," Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux told the Commons later, questioning why "an outstanding" public servant who has done "such a wonderful job" during the COVID-19 pandemic was treated so badly.
"The amount of time he stayed at the bar was deeply offensive to many members."
But opposition MPs argued that the issue goes to the heart of Canada's democracy and the government's continuing refusal to comply with the will of the elected members cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged.
"This government is rolling back 18 decades of parliamentary evolution with its defiance of now four orders of this House and its committee," said Conservative MP Michael Chong.
"Why do Canadians send 338 of their fellow citizens to this chamber if their decisions are going to be ignored? Why do we spend $400 million a year on this chamber and the other one (the Senate), if our votes don't mean anything? Why do we vote to adopt orders if they don't have effect?"
Conservative House leader Gerard Deltell served notice that he will propose a motion calling on Rota to instruct the Commons sergeant-at-arms to search PHAC offices and seize the documents.
If Rota doesn't agree with that, Deltell said he'll move that the issue be referred to the procedure and House affairs committee to consider an enforcement mechanism. If the committee fails to issue a report within four weeks, then the sergeant-at-arms would be directed to search PHAC offices and seize the documents.
"Let me be clear," Deltell said. "This House has a job to do and this House shall be respected and, especially, shall be respected by its own members."
New Democrat MP Jack Harris signalled that his party supports the Conservatives' proposal. The Bloc Québécois reserved its opinion, as did Rota, who at several junctures noted that he was dealing with "a very touchy" and "unique" and "unprecedented" situation.
Liberal House leader Pablo Rodriguez proposed an alternative to the original House order, which ordered PHAC to turn over the documents to the parliamentary law clerk, who would redact them as needed, with members of the Canada-China relations committee retaining the right to publicly release redacted material.
Rodriguez said the government is prepared to go along with the law clerk vetting, provided that he is assisted by national security specialists.
He argued that the law clerk does not have "the necessary training or expertise" to determine what sensitive information could negatively impact intelligence agencies. Disclosing sensitive information, Rodriguez said, could inadvertently reveal "covert methods of operations," imperil human sources, identify employees and have "a severe impact on Canada's reputation as a responsible security partner."
Rodriguez also challenged the opposition's position that parliamentary privilege supersedes all other laws, pointing to a 2005 Supreme Court ruling that found legislatures "do not constitute enclaves shielded from the ordinary law of the land."
However, opposition parties countered that he should have made that argument before Rota ruled last week that the Commons and its committees have unfettered power to demand the production of documents, no matter how sensitive.
They similarly dismissed Rodriguez's proposal to let the law clerk vet the documents, with advice from security experts, as too little, too late.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 21, 2021.
The Canadian Press
PHAC head Iain Stewart was hauled Monday before the bar of the House of Commons to receive a reprimand from Speaker Anthony Rota for his repeated refusal to provide the documents.
Stewart duly showed up — the first non-MP to be subjected to such a procedure in more than a century — and stood impassively at the brass rail at the entrance to the Commons, as ordered by a motion passed by the combined opposition parties last week.
Rota informed Stewart that the Commons possesses constitutional powers to order the production of any documents it sees fit. Those powers, he said, "are essential to the performance" of MPs' duties.
"The House has the power and indeed the duty to reaffirm them when obstruction or interference impedes with its deliberations," Rota said.
"As guardian of these rights and privileges, that is precisely what the House has asked me to do today, by ordering the Speaker to reprimand you for the Public Health Agency of Canada's contempt, refusing to submit the required documents."
Rota told the Commons that Stewart's lawyer had informed him earlier in the day that the PHAC head was still not able to release the unredacted documents, as twice ordered by the Canada-China relations committee and twice by the House itself.
Stewart was not given a chance to say anything Monday. But he told the health committee last week that he is bound by law to protect national security and privacy rights and nothing in the House order relieves him of that obligation.
In a sign of support from the minority Liberal government, the 27-year veteran public servant was accompanied to the chamber Monday by acting Privy Council clerk Janice Charette, who could be seen giving him an elbow bump before he walked in.
Opposition parties have joined forces to demand the documents in hopes that they'll shed light on why scientists Xiangguo Qiu and her husband, Keding Cheng, were escorted out of Winnipeg’s National Microbiology Laboratory in July 2019 and subsequently fired last January.
They are also seeking documents related to the transfer, overseen by Qiu, of deadly Ebola and Henipah viruses to China's Wuhan Institute of Virology in March 2019.
Stewart has said the virus transfer had nothing to do with the subsequent firings. He's also said there is no connection to COVID-19, a coronavirus that first appeared in China's Wuhan province and which some believe may have been released accidentally by the virology institute.
Nevertheless, opposition parties continue to suspect a link and are, hence, determined to see the unredacted documents.
Video: Senior public servant receives first formal House of Commons reprimand for non-MP since 1913 (Global News)
Stewart was forced to stand at the bar for some 40 minutes while MPs debated what should happen next. Opposition MPs initially refused unanimous consent to let him depart but eventually relented.
"Having Mr. Stewart at the bar was very difficult for many of us to witness," Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux told the Commons later, questioning why "an outstanding" public servant who has done "such a wonderful job" during the COVID-19 pandemic was treated so badly.
"The amount of time he stayed at the bar was deeply offensive to many members."
But opposition MPs argued that the issue goes to the heart of Canada's democracy and the government's continuing refusal to comply with the will of the elected members cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged.
"This government is rolling back 18 decades of parliamentary evolution with its defiance of now four orders of this House and its committee," said Conservative MP Michael Chong.
"Why do Canadians send 338 of their fellow citizens to this chamber if their decisions are going to be ignored? Why do we spend $400 million a year on this chamber and the other one (the Senate), if our votes don't mean anything? Why do we vote to adopt orders if they don't have effect?"
Conservative House leader Gerard Deltell served notice that he will propose a motion calling on Rota to instruct the Commons sergeant-at-arms to search PHAC offices and seize the documents.
If Rota doesn't agree with that, Deltell said he'll move that the issue be referred to the procedure and House affairs committee to consider an enforcement mechanism. If the committee fails to issue a report within four weeks, then the sergeant-at-arms would be directed to search PHAC offices and seize the documents.
"Let me be clear," Deltell said. "This House has a job to do and this House shall be respected and, especially, shall be respected by its own members."
New Democrat MP Jack Harris signalled that his party supports the Conservatives' proposal. The Bloc Québécois reserved its opinion, as did Rota, who at several junctures noted that he was dealing with "a very touchy" and "unique" and "unprecedented" situation.
Liberal House leader Pablo Rodriguez proposed an alternative to the original House order, which ordered PHAC to turn over the documents to the parliamentary law clerk, who would redact them as needed, with members of the Canada-China relations committee retaining the right to publicly release redacted material.
Rodriguez said the government is prepared to go along with the law clerk vetting, provided that he is assisted by national security specialists.
He argued that the law clerk does not have "the necessary training or expertise" to determine what sensitive information could negatively impact intelligence agencies. Disclosing sensitive information, Rodriguez said, could inadvertently reveal "covert methods of operations," imperil human sources, identify employees and have "a severe impact on Canada's reputation as a responsible security partner."
Rodriguez also challenged the opposition's position that parliamentary privilege supersedes all other laws, pointing to a 2005 Supreme Court ruling that found legislatures "do not constitute enclaves shielded from the ordinary law of the land."
However, opposition parties countered that he should have made that argument before Rota ruled last week that the Commons and its committees have unfettered power to demand the production of documents, no matter how sensitive.
They similarly dismissed Rodriguez's proposal to let the law clerk vet the documents, with advice from security experts, as too little, too late.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 21, 2021.
The Canadian Press
PHAC president Iain Stewart reprimanded in House by Speaker for failing to produce documents
The president of the Public Health Agency of Canada appeared before the bar at the House of Commons today, where he was publicly admonished by Speaker Anthony Rota for failing to turn over to a Commons committee documents related to the the firing of two scientists from the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg.
Rota called Iain Stewart into the House and began his reprimand by telling Stewart that the House of Commons and its parliamentary committees have defined powers outlined in law that must be followed.
"The powers in question, like all those enjoyed by the House collectively and by members individually, are essential to the performance of their duties," Rota said. "The House has the power, and indeed the duty to reaffirm them when obstruction or interference impedes with its deliberations.
"As guardian of these rights and privileges, that is precisely what the House has asked me to do today, by ordering the Speaker to reprimand you for the Public Health Agency of Canada's contempt, refusing to submit the required documents."
Stewart also was ordered to bring with him the unredacted documents demanded by opposition MPs. The Speaker said Stewart's lawyer had reached out to Rota's office earlier in the day saying he would be unable to produce the documents.
Calling someone to the bar of the House is a rarely used procedure meant to publicly shame a person who has committed "an offence against the dignity or authority of Parliament," according to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition.
Since 1913, it has not been used against a private citizen. It has been used twice, in 1991 and 2002, to discipline MPs who had grabbed the ceremonial mace during heated Commons proceedings.
Opposition parties joined forces earlier this month to pass a motion in the Commons ordering PHAC to turn over all unredacted documents related to the firing of scientists Xiangguo Qiu and her biologist husband, Kending Cheng, who were escorted off the premises in 2019 and were officially fired in January of this year.
The motion called for the documents to be handed to the parliamentary law clerk, who would confidentially review them and redact anything he felt would compromise national security or the ongoing police investigation.
The motion specified that the Canada-China relations committee, after consulting with the law clerk, could choose to make public any redacted material.
In defiance of the House order, the minority Liberal government instead provided the unredacted documents to the all-party National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, NSICOP, whose members have top security clearance and are bound to secrecy.
NSICOP was established by the Liberal government in 2018 to review Canada's national security and intelligence activities.
The Liberal government argued that NSICOP was the appropriate body to examine the documents without putting at risk national security or compromising any ongoing investigations.
Last week, Rota ruled that sending the documents to NSICOP is not an acceptable alternative since it's a relatively new body and not a standing committee of Parliament.
Liberal government must obey House order: Chong
Today, Liberal House Leader Pablo Rodríguez said the government remains concerned about the possible impacts of releasing sensitive intelligence.
"While the government accepts that the Parliament and parliamentary counsel have the appropriate security clearance to review the information, we do not believe he has the necessary training or expertise in national security related information to make the necessary assessment" of what can be released, Rodríguez said.
Rodríguez said disclosing sensitive information could compromise covert investigative methods used in intelligence gathering or put at risk human sources of information and their families. "It can have a severe impact on Canada's reputation as a responsible security partner," he said.
Rodríguez proposed two possible methods that would allow MPs to review the documents.
The first involves striking an ad-hoc committee of MPs, as was done during the Afghan detainee debate under former prime minister Stephen Harper. MPs who took part in that committee were sworn to an oath of confidence in return for access to documents.
The second proposal was to have the law clerk and parliamentary counsel, assisted by national security experts, look at the documents together to decide what can be released.
Conservative MP Michael Chong argued that the House could not stand by and let a government refuse to deliver documents lawfully ordered by the House of Commons.
Rota said he would take the arguments into consideration and come back to the House with a ruling on what to do next.
The president of the Public Health Agency of Canada appeared before the bar at the House of Commons today, where he was publicly admonished by Speaker Anthony Rota for failing to turn over to a Commons committee documents related to the the firing of two scientists from the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg.
Rota called Iain Stewart into the House and began his reprimand by telling Stewart that the House of Commons and its parliamentary committees have defined powers outlined in law that must be followed.
"The powers in question, like all those enjoyed by the House collectively and by members individually, are essential to the performance of their duties," Rota said. "The House has the power, and indeed the duty to reaffirm them when obstruction or interference impedes with its deliberations.
"As guardian of these rights and privileges, that is precisely what the House has asked me to do today, by ordering the Speaker to reprimand you for the Public Health Agency of Canada's contempt, refusing to submit the required documents."
Stewart also was ordered to bring with him the unredacted documents demanded by opposition MPs. The Speaker said Stewart's lawyer had reached out to Rota's office earlier in the day saying he would be unable to produce the documents.
Calling someone to the bar of the House is a rarely used procedure meant to publicly shame a person who has committed "an offence against the dignity or authority of Parliament," according to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition.
Since 1913, it has not been used against a private citizen. It has been used twice, in 1991 and 2002, to discipline MPs who had grabbed the ceremonial mace during heated Commons proceedings.
Opposition parties joined forces earlier this month to pass a motion in the Commons ordering PHAC to turn over all unredacted documents related to the firing of scientists Xiangguo Qiu and her biologist husband, Kending Cheng, who were escorted off the premises in 2019 and were officially fired in January of this year.
The motion called for the documents to be handed to the parliamentary law clerk, who would confidentially review them and redact anything he felt would compromise national security or the ongoing police investigation.
The motion specified that the Canada-China relations committee, after consulting with the law clerk, could choose to make public any redacted material.
In defiance of the House order, the minority Liberal government instead provided the unredacted documents to the all-party National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, NSICOP, whose members have top security clearance and are bound to secrecy.
NSICOP was established by the Liberal government in 2018 to review Canada's national security and intelligence activities.
The Liberal government argued that NSICOP was the appropriate body to examine the documents without putting at risk national security or compromising any ongoing investigations.
Last week, Rota ruled that sending the documents to NSICOP is not an acceptable alternative since it's a relatively new body and not a standing committee of Parliament.
Liberal government must obey House order: Chong
Today, Liberal House Leader Pablo Rodríguez said the government remains concerned about the possible impacts of releasing sensitive intelligence.
"While the government accepts that the Parliament and parliamentary counsel have the appropriate security clearance to review the information, we do not believe he has the necessary training or expertise in national security related information to make the necessary assessment" of what can be released, Rodríguez said.
Rodríguez said disclosing sensitive information could compromise covert investigative methods used in intelligence gathering or put at risk human sources of information and their families. "It can have a severe impact on Canada's reputation as a responsible security partner," he said.
Rodríguez proposed two possible methods that would allow MPs to review the documents.
The first involves striking an ad-hoc committee of MPs, as was done during the Afghan detainee debate under former prime minister Stephen Harper. MPs who took part in that committee were sworn to an oath of confidence in return for access to documents.
The second proposal was to have the law clerk and parliamentary counsel, assisted by national security experts, look at the documents together to decide what can be released.
Conservative MP Michael Chong argued that the House could not stand by and let a government refuse to deliver documents lawfully ordered by the House of Commons.
Rota said he would take the arguments into consideration and come back to the House with a ruling on what to do next.
No comments:
Post a Comment