No clear end in sight as House of Commons gridlock approaches 2-month mark

A debate that has jammed up the House of Commons for nearly two months now doesn't appear likely to end any time soon, as neither the Liberals or Conservatives are showing signs of backing down.

The parties blame each other for tying Parliament up in a privilege debate that began in late September. That debate stems from a House order that directedthe government to hand over unredacted documents related to a now-defunct foundation responsible for doling out hundreds of millions of federal dollars for green technology projects.

On Monday, government House leader Karina Gould accused the Conservatives of "holding Parliament hostage."

"Time is up for Conservatives to stop playing their silly, partisan, procedural games and let us all get back to the work of this place," she said.

But Conservative House leader Andrew Scheer said Tuesday the Liberals are the ones holding things up by refusing to hand over all the relevant documents.

Scheer pointed to a letter from the House law clerk tabled in Parliament on Monday that indicated some of the documents have been redacted or withheld.

"This is clearly a decision that the Liberals have made to continue to keep Parliament paralyzed rather than hand over documents," Scheer told reporters on Tuesday. Conservatives have vowed to keep the debate going until the remaining documents are produced.

On Monday, Gould said the government has handed over almost 29,000 pages to the law clerk "in a way that complies with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms." The law clerk's letter indicates that the redactions purportedly were made to comply with access to information laws.

WATCH | Gould says Liberals have released documents related to green technology fund:

Gould says Liberals have released documents related to green technology fund

1 day ago

Duration 1:22

Government House leader Karina Gould says the government has provided nearly 29,000 pages of documents related to the Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) matter.

Because the matter is considered a question of privilege, it takes precedence over all other House business. As a result, the government has been unable to move any legislation forwardfor weeks.

The debate also has prevented the Conservatives from moving motions on designated opposition days motions the party has used recentlyto triggernon-confidence votes in an ongoing attemptto bring down the governmentand force an election.

The Liberals tabled the supplementary estimates an update on the government's planned expenditures for the remainder of the fiscal year on Monday. According to House rules, those estimates need to bevoted on by Dec. 10.

Treasury Board President Anita Anand said Tuesday that if the privilege debate gets in the way of a vote on the estimates, some departments might lack funding.

"There is no way for the government to simply pull the rug out from under the House of Commons required voting process and say that [those expenditures] are in place," Anand told reporters on Parliament Hill.

'So it's extremely important for the House to function so that those voting expenditures can be put into place."

In June, the auditor general released a report that found Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) violated its conflict of interest policies 90 times, awarded $59 million to 10 projects that were not eligible and frequently overstated the environmental benefits of its projects.

In the wake of that report, opposition MPs voted to have the government provide all documents related to SDTC to the House law clerk for deliveryto the RCMP, whichwould investigate.

Some documents have been given to the RCMP. But the government redacted information from those documents and withheld other documents entirely, citing privacy laws, solicitor-client privilege and cabinet confidence to explain the exclusions.

Speaker Greg Fergus ruled in September that the government "clearly did not fully comply" with the House order. But he also said it was "unprecedented" for the House to require the government to produce documents for the purpose of providing them to a third party the RCMP, in this case.

At the time, Fergus suggested that the matter be further studied by the House procedures committee. But because the debate has continued for weeks, a vote to send the matter to committee hasn't been held.

RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme has cautioned thatpolice might not be able to use documents received through a House orderin a criminal investigation.

"Before taking any investigative steps to access documents that may give rise to a reasonable expectation of privacy, the RCMP must comply with applicable legal standards to preserve the validity of any potential criminal investigation or prosecution," Duheme wrote to the law clerk in July.

"There is significant risk that the [House order] could be interpreted as a circumvention of normal investigative processes and Charter protections."

Separate privilege motion waiting in the wings

Even if the debate over the documents ends soon, the House won't be returning to business as usual right away.

MPs still have to debate and settle a separate privilege motion related to Employment Minister Randy Boissonault's former business partner, Stephen Anderson.

Anderson is at the centre of an House ethics committee probe that was launched after several texts were released as part of legal proceedings. Those texts show Anderson referring to a person named "Randy" in business conversations with associates, prompting questions about whether Anderson was still consulting Boissonnault on business matters while the latter was in cabinet.

In his own testimony at committee, Boissonnault has denied having any involvement in the business since he was re-elected in 2021.

The Conservatives have accused Anderson of failing to answer questions when he appeared before the ethics committee and of not providing documents related to the matter.

Conservative MP Michael Barrett moved a motion in October calling on the House to find Anderson in contempt of Parliament. Because it is also a privilege motion, the government won't be able to move forward with any legislation until that debate isconcluded.