Speech (committee meeting)

{
    "time": "2014-05-15 11:00:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Mr. Charlie Angus (Timmins\u2014James Bay, NDP)",
        "fr": "M. Charlie Angus (Timmins\u2014Baie James, NPD)"
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"3733497\" data-originallang=\"en\">I'm just interested in clause 9, and it will be in clause 10 as well. This is one of the key issues that was raised by many people. I'm looking at an article in the March 21 edition of <em>The Lawyer's Weekly</em>, where lawyers for the federal commissioners are raising alarm bells, particularly about this clause of Mr. Adler's bill. It says that crown counsel Lisa Blais said that Bill <a data-HoCid=\"6251908\" href=\"/bills/41-2/C-520/\" title=\"An Act supporting non-partisan agents of Parliament\">C-520</a> \u201cwould give politicians a weapon to attack independent and impartial Parliamentary officers\u201d, and \u201cIt politicizes the public service\u201d. She particularly drills down on clause 9 and in the ability to demand investigations by members of Parliament or the Senate.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"3733498\" data-originallang=\"en\">The article says, \u201cif passed it could jeopardize the ability of the 40 lawyers who work for agents of Parliament to do their jobs, Blais warned.\u201d She also said:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"3733499\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Their professionalism [and] impartiality is questioned and suspect. If they make a very tough call in the context of their position, will this be used as a sword because some politician doesn't like an opinion that one of our members provides? So there will be a chilling effect potentially when it comes to our members discharging their duties. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"3733500\" data-originallang=\"en\">My understanding is that Mr. Adler's no longer supporting clause 9. I'd like to ask him, does he agree with this assessment by federal crown lawyers that this would impede the independence of the parliamentary officers of Parliament, and is his decision not to support clause 9 an indication that he's recognized that mistake?</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"3733497\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je m'int\u00e9resse \u00e0 l'article 9, et aussi \u00e0 l'article 10. Il s'agit de l'une des grandes questions que de nombreuses personnes ont soulev\u00e9e. J'ai devant moi un article du num\u00e9ro du 21 mars du <em>The Lawyer's Weekly</em> selon lequel les avocats qui travaillent pour les commissaires f\u00e9d\u00e9raux tirent la sonnette d'alarme, tout particuli\u00e8rement au sujet de cet article du projet de loi de M. Adler. On peut y lire que la procureure de la Couronne Lisa Blais a dit que le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"6251908\" href=\"/bills/41-2/C-520/\" title=\"An Act supporting non-partisan agents of Parliament\">C-520</a> \u00ab donnerait aux politiciens une arme pour s'en prendre aux agents du Parlement ind\u00e9pendants et impartiaux \u00bb, en plus de \u00ab politiser la fonction publique \u00bb. Elle analyse plus en profondeur l'article 9 et la capacit\u00e9 des d\u00e9put\u00e9s ou des s\u00e9nateurs d'exiger des enqu\u00eates.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"3733498\" data-originallang=\"en\">Toujours selon l'article, \u00ab s'il est adopt\u00e9, il pourrait menacer la capacit\u00e9 des 40 avocats qui travaillent pour des agents du Parlement de faire leur travail, pr\u00e9vient Mme Blais. \u00bb Elle a aussi ajout\u00e9:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"3733499\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Leur professionnalisme [et leur] impartialit\u00e9 sont remis en question et soul\u00e8vent des doutes. S'ils prennent une d\u00e9cision tr\u00e8s difficile dans l'exercice de leurs fonctions, est-ce qu'un politicien s'en servira parce qu'il n'aime pas une opinion de l'un de nos coll\u00e8gues? Il pourrait donc y avoir un effet d'intimidation lorsqu'un procureur de la Couronne s'acquitte de ses fonctions. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"3733500\" data-originallang=\"en\">D'apr\u00e8s ce que je comprends, M. Adler n'appuie plus l'article 9. J'aimerais lui demander s'il est d'accord avec l'\u00e9valuation faite par les procureurs de la Couronne f\u00e9d\u00e9raux selon laquelle cela nuirait \u00e0 l'ind\u00e9pendance des agents du Parlement, et si par sa d\u00e9cision de ne plus appuyer l'article 9 il reconna\u00eet cette erreur.</p>"
    },
    "url": "/committees/ethics/41-2/23/charlie-angus-1/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/charlie-angus/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/1434/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "8365663",
    "document_url": "/committees/ethics/41-2/23/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fcommittees%2Fethics%2F41-2%2F23%2F"
    }
}