SCHEER Fergus acting like biased hockey referee
Episode Stats
Words per minute
155.1585
Summary
In this episode, the Speaker of the Ontario House of Commons, Kathleen Spivens, faces questions about her appointment of a chief of staff with a close relationship to the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, as her Chief of Staff.
Transcript
00:00:02.440
I think it's really important for Canadians to understand why this is such a big deal.
00:00:08.000
You have come from a very, very partisan past, what some might describe as a hyper-partisan role,
00:00:14.180
given the fact that you have served in executive-level positions.
00:00:18.180
I think you said national, was it director of the Liberal Party, president of the Youth Wing.
00:00:22.760
You were parliamentary secretary to the prime minister right up until the beginning of this fall session.
00:00:31.440
Those are roles in which you are very close with the government, very close with the prime minister himself.
00:00:38.520
And then to transition into becoming speaker, to running for speaker,
00:00:42.220
members of parliament have to kind of, once you've won, we have to park that history of yours
00:00:47.540
and trust that you're going to be non-partisan and objective.
00:00:51.160
The fundamental rule of being speaker is also one of the easier rules to follow,
00:01:03.940
You don't say things publicly or certainly not in a capacity wearing speaker's robes
00:01:11.240
or in his office that would have any connection to partisan activities or partisanship
00:01:18.700
You did the interview with the Globe and Mail where you praised a sitting Liberal politician
00:01:29.400
He's given every indication he's going to run again as a Liberal in Ontario.
00:01:34.080
So it's not like it was a retirement party or he's going off to do something else.
00:01:38.920
He's going to continue being an active partisan player in Ontario politics.
00:01:43.380
You referred to the Ontario party as our party.
00:01:48.580
In addition to this, we understand that your Chief of Staff,
00:01:53.500
which I understand your hesitance to name certain people at committee,
00:01:57.920
but he is listed on a public website, the Government Employee Directive Service,
00:02:05.040
I understand that he was very close with the current Prime Minister, Prime Minister Trudeau.
00:02:09.960
He was his executive assistant at one point, and now he's your Chief of Staff.
00:02:14.320
So having that hyper-partisan role in your very recent past,
00:02:19.380
hiring someone very quickly out of the PMO with a very close relationship,
00:02:23.960
personal relationship with the Prime Minister, and now this comes to light.
00:02:27.740
So again, I ask you, you talked about the arbitrator,
00:02:30.360
and you didn't quite address the nature of my question.
00:02:32.240
If you're a hockey player and you're about to play a game
00:02:35.580
and you just saw the referee in his uniform giving a pep talk
00:02:44.620
it wouldn't matter what the context was, would it?
00:02:46.860
You wouldn't want that official referee in your game.
00:02:50.320
If you were involved in some kind of dispute that needed an arbitrator
00:02:53.400
and you saw that judge in his robes at an event with opposing counsel,
00:03:03.360
You've now acknowledged there was a grave error of judgment.
00:03:12.040
without time to run things through filters or decision-making treaties,
00:03:16.160
and we have to trust that that's coming from a non-partisan and objective place.
00:03:20.120
And I would suggest the fact that you didn't see that
00:03:22.080
shows that you're still too close to the partnership of it.
00:03:25.380
You're too close with these partisan players that you don't see
00:03:28.000
that for members of other parties, it would be a problem.
00:03:31.960
So again, we'll just ask you, would you want to hear your case adjudicated?
00:03:40.060
having seen the referee or having seen the judge or arbitrator,
00:03:43.140
involved in that type of display with an adversary or with an opponent?
00:03:48.900
Would you trust that process, having seen that?
00:03:52.980
Madam Chair, through you, I think it's really important,
00:03:55.840
and I thank the Honourable Member for his intervention,
00:04:10.340
it was a different league in which we were involved,
00:04:14.260
A, but B, I also recognize that the member is right,
00:04:18.980
that talking about my past, although in that reference to the notion of our party,
00:04:25.300
that was when I was actually a resident of Ontario back in the late 1980s, early 1990s, up until 1994.
00:04:35.660
That was at that time that it was referred to that.
00:04:39.180
Now, I do not like talking, I don't want to talk about my past here,
00:04:44.060
because every time I do, I know that it sounds like I'm being partisan.
00:04:48.020
That is, it was a matter of record that, at that time, we were both members of the same party.
00:04:56.200
It's just, it is a fact that I don't want to, I'm not validating that today.
00:05:05.840
Second thing, you'd raise the issue of my Chief of Staff.
00:05:10.920
When I, as you know, being Speaker, that you are administrating a large organization here,
00:05:17.200
my Chief of Staff left Parliament Hill in 2008, early 2018,
00:05:23.140
almost six years that he's been occupying a senior management role in the private sector.
00:05:33.980
He's someone who can help manage this, but more importantly,
00:05:40.300
who understands what it is to be a third political party,
00:05:43.000
to be in official opposition and in government.
00:05:47.200
So someone who has an ability to really hear and respond to the needs,
00:05:57.040
So that's the reason why this person was hired.
00:06:00.140
He's calm, he's collected, and has a great reputation on the Hill.