SCHEER Fergus acting like biased hockey referee
Episode Stats
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.