4th-36th Vol. 47-Oral Questions

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, it is indicated today that the Minister of Justice has been made aware of recollections of the Chief Judge. I would like to ask the Minister of Justice: has a report been completed about the allegations of political interference made by the Bar Association and the Law Society to the minister? Has a report been completed by Judge Webster, the chair of the nominating committee, and why will he not make that report public?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, that statement, in fact, reflects an agreement between the Chief Judge and myself in which she clearly indicates that she shares my recollections of the events of May 4.

Mr. Doer: The minister did not answer the question. Has a report been completed by the Chief Judge?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I have tabled the statement in the House and that is the report.

Mr. Doer: Then I am to assume a report has been completed, and the Minister of Justice is unwilling to make it public.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I have in fact just tabled my statement.

Mr. Doer: With a new question. The former Justice minister tabled the letter from Justice Oliphant in this House which stated, and I quote in the letter: it is not unusual for a judge, a judge particularly with responsibilities for administrative duties in the court, to speak out on issues that affect the courts.

That letter was tabled in this Legislature. Why will the Minister of Justice not table the report from Judge Webster, the chair of the nominating committee?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I have made it very clear, and perhaps the member has misunderstood me in some way. The statement that was made reflects the consensus of the Chief Judge and I in respect of her recollections of the conversation on May 4.

* (1350)

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, is the minister saying there is no report that has been completed by the Chief Judge based on the false statements we believe that he has made in this House on May 11, May 12, May 7, statements he has made to the public? Can the minister advise us whether there is a report conducted by the Chief Judge, chair of the nominating committee, and why will the minister not release this so that the public will have more to go with than the minister's statement on the basis of consensus rather than the full report prepared by the Chief Judge?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, the member is misleading this House. There is no report, as far as I am aware.

Mr. Doer: It is kind of unusual that somebody would accuse one of misleading the House, but he is not aware of whether a report does or does not exist.

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Justice: does he feel, given the reputation of Colleen Suche has been disagreed with in terms of the statements she made by the Minister of Justice two days ago when he said her facts were not correct, the reputation of Mr. Joubert, who has accused the minister of political interference, does he not feel, in terms of integrity and honesty and in terms of the public view of the justice system and the Minister of Justice himself, that the public should get a full report from the Chief Judge made public to this Legislature and to the people of Manitoba, rather than the statement that allegedly is a statement based on a so-called consensus with the Chief Judge? Should the Chief Judge not speak directly to the people of Manitoba so we will know whether Mr. Joubert is correct and Ms. Suche is correct in terms of the political interference of this minister in the selection of judges here in Manitoba?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, on May 4, there were two people who had a conversation. One of them was me, and the other person in that conversation was the Chief Judge. Mr. Joubert and Ms. Suche did not take any part of that conversation, nor did they or have they ever come to me to ask me about that particular conversation.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): To the Minister of Justice. If there was any perception of rigging by the minister in the system before, it is proven today to an extent never envisioned. I ask this minister how he thinks he can speak for the Chief Judge of Manitoba and why Manitobans should trust the word of this minister, the three-story minister. How can they trust him when he says what the Chief Judge says? Does the minister not understand how serious it is that he has had negotiations with the Chief Judge since this matter arose?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I want to very clearly indicate that I have had no direct communications with the Chief Judge, but this is in fact authorized by the Chief Judge.

* (1355)

Mr. Mackintosh: Madam Speaker, what kind of old-boys thing is this when he says that he has been made aware of the recollections of the Chief Judge and he has shared with her his comments set out today? What kind of manipulation, what kind of conspiracy is this minister trying to pull off?

Hon. James McCrae (Government House Leader): Again, Madam Speaker, on a point of order. The words of the honourable member for St. Johns are extremely intemperate and probably very unparliamentary.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, on the same point of order.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Opposition House Leader): A point of order, Madam Speaker. I just respond to that point of order: which words? I checked Beauchesne, and I do not see any words in Beauchesne that the member has used. I think they are directly appropriate to finding what really is going on with this statement. I suggest not only we find this point of order not to be in order, but that we ask the Minister of Justice to start answering directly these kinds of questions.

Madam Speaker: On the point of order raised by the honourable government House leader, in doing some very quick research, I cannot find the word "conspiracy" on any of the lists, nor has it in the last few years been a subject of contravention. Therefore, the honourable House leader does not have a point of order.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I reject the accusations of the member for St. Johns and certainly the derogatory comment about an old-boys' club. The Chief Judge is female; she is a woman.

Mr. Mackintosh: Does the minister not understand how wrong it is in the midst of these serious, serious allegations affecting the highest offices in the justice system for him or his office or his operatives, his agents to in any way make contact with the Chief Judge's office or the Chief Judge and then come in here and purport to speak for her? Does he not understand how that will affect the confidence of Manitobans in the justice system?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, an intermediary on my behalf did not contact the Chief Judge directly. The intermediary on my behalf contacted another individual.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, I am looking at a statement. There is some fluff in here. There are statements in here that do nothing to exonerate this minister. Someone is not telling the truth. It is either the Chief Judge or it is the minister. This is absolutely untenable and amounts to a crisis of confidence affecting the highest offices in the system. I have no choice but to ask the minister to tell us: what has he done to muzzle the Chief Judge?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I have done nothing to muzzle the Chief Judge.

Mr. Mackintosh: Will the minister not admit that at the time that he was negotiating the list brought to him by the Chief Judge from the nominating committee, he was holding over her a threat to take her and judge representation off the nominating committees?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, the Chief Judge and I had a conversation over a number of issues; one of those involved legislation.

* (1400)

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Well, then, would the minister confirm allegations that have been made that the Chief Judge was prepared to issue a statement which she had put together to be issued to the general public, not to the minister, and I want the minister to tell the House what he did to stop the issuing of that statement from the Chief Judge.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Well, Madam Speaker, I have done nothing to stop the Chief Judge from issuing any statement. This is the statement that I have read in the House. The Chief Judge has indicated her concurrence with the substance of the recollections as indicated on May 11, and that is the extent of the matter.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Madam Speaker, in going over the ministerial statement I think what is critical here is he quotes, saying, and I quote from the ministerial statement: "I am advised my comments left her uncertain, upon leaving our meeting, as to my intention to proceed with the process of appointing 2 provincial court judges from the list of seven."

I think the real question here that needs to be answered is that you have a minister who is saying one thing, and you have some other distinguished individuals saying another thing. What is missing is what the Chief Justice is actually saying. What the minister is making reference to the Chief Justice is saying does alleviate a lot of the problems that the minister would be having.

My question specific to the Minister of Justice is: would he recognize that there is some value to the Chief Justice, as I would recognize, for the Chief Justice to make some sort of a statement, and I trust that the New Democrats would acknowledge that, so that there would be all-party support to see the Chief Justice in fact say--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The question has been put.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I think the statement is clear in respect of her understanding of the meeting, and any further matters are for her to determine and not for me.

Mr. Lamoureux: Would it then be appropriate if in fact there was, because we want to recognize the importance of an independent judiciary--that the Chief Justice acknowledge or at least be made aware that there is all-party support to see a statement coming from the Chief Justice?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I will not be a part to ordering her to do anything.

Mr. Lamoureux: Madam Speaker, I would ask the minister not to order the Chief Justice to do something of that nature. What I am suggesting is that if the Minister of Justice, as he can I am sure acknowledge--that he will not feel insulted if she comes out with a statement. The New Democrats will not feel insulted if she comes out with a statement. I do not think there would be any Manitobans feeling insulted, so it is just a suggestion that in fact it would be appropriate to see some sort of a statement, given the seriousness of the issue that is before us today.

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I think my position has been clear on the record. I have made the statement here in the House, and I stand with that statement.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, the minister has presented the statement to the House, purporting to speak on behalf of the Chief Judge, which really amounts to an absolute affront and undermining of the independence of her recollection and her value to clearing the air.

I ask the minister: since the statement says that the minister has been made aware of recollections of the Chief Judge and he has shared with her comments set out in this release, who was the intermediary between the minister and the Chief Judge?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, there were two intermediaries, one representing myself and one representing the Chief Judge. I did not think it was appropriate to approach the Chief Judge, either through an intermediary without the Chief Judge having an intermediary.

Mr. Mackintosh: The minister did not answer my question, I thought an important question. I do not think the minister gets the significance of this. Who was the intermediary between him and the Chief Judge?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, at no time have I had any conversations relative to this issue directly with the Chief Judge. We proceeded through intermediaries with respect to her position to ensure that her independence and her position in this matter was not in any way compromised.

Mr. Mackintosh: Since the minister will not answer that question, I ask him this: how long did it take to negotiate with the Chief Judge this mush in this statement today?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, this occurred between May 11 and today's date.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, the disagreement between the Minister of Justice, the members of the committee and the Chief Judge arise around the nominating committee's perception, based on Judge Webster's comments, that the minister told them that they would not proceed with the list prepared by the nominating committee to cabinet unless the nominating committee went back and considered additional names to be added to an additional list.

Madam Speaker, is it the specific view that Judge Webster believed that the minister stated that he would not proceed with the list prepared by the nominating committee unless they went back to prepare other names?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I never stated that.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the minister says in his statements that there is a "misunderstanding," is his word, that he takes responsibility for. The committee was told--and therefore accused the minister of political interference--that if they did not consider more names, if they did not expand the process, the existing list of nominees that they had prepared would not be considered by the minister.

Madam Speaker, I would like to know from the Minister of Justice: was it the understanding of the conversations with the Justice minister and the Chief Judge that in fact those were the statements made by the Justice minister to the Chief Judge which were relayed to the nominating committee?

Mr. Toews: On the first matter, again the member has misquoted my statement. What my statement says, and I want to quote that carefully here: "I regret any misunderstanding that might have been generated by my lack of clarity and take responsibility for any misunderstanding that I may have caused."

So, Madam Speaker, I am not aware of the conversation that the Chief Judge had with the committee members, because I never spoke to them about that conversation.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, obviously the minister has come forward with a statement today based on a different set of assumptions that the Chief Judge had about their meeting.

I would like to ask the minister if the crux of the issue is: was it the recollection of the Chief Judge, the chair of the nominating committee, that the Minister of Justice stated to her, through to the nominating committee, that he would not proceed to cabinet with the list of seven unless this nominating committee went back and expanded the list? Was that her understanding of the facts versus what the Minister of Justice has maintained in this House previously?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I have made clear what my position was. I understand, for her part, that my comments left her uncertain upon leaving our meeting as to my intention with proceeding.

* (1410)

Mr. Doer: The nominating committee was told by Judge Webster that the Minister of Justice would not appoint any member from the list unless they went back and expanded the list.

Madam Speaker, I would like to know: was it the Chief Judge's recollection--

An Honourable Member: Were you at the nominating committee?

Mr. Doer: Well, if the Premier (Mr. Filmon) would like to table the statements made by the Chief Judge, if the Premier would like to have a retired judge investigate this independently, we challenge him to do so, Madam Speaker. We are not afraid of an independent review.

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable Leader of the official opposition, to pose his question.

Mr. Doer: Madam Speaker, the issue here is: did the Chief Judge believe that the Minister of Justice had stated that he would not appoint anybody from the list prepared by the nominating committee unless they went back to expand the list versus the Minister of Justice's changing statements all last week that in fact he had never made that demand, the fact that he had repeated repeatedly in Hansard?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, that is not my understanding.

Mr. Gary Doer (Leader of the Opposition): Madam Speaker, how are this Assembly and the people of Manitoba going to obtain the beliefs and statement of facts from the Chief Judge of this committee when that is the issue in dispute, whether the Chief Judge had reported to the committee that the Justice minister had refused to proceed with the names prepared by the nominating committee versus his instructions, and unless other names were prepared and given to him, he would not appoint anybody from the list?

How are we going to know, and I would ask the Premier: will he now have an independent investigation, somebody like a retired judge or somebody else, that can obtain the truth from the Chief Judge, the chair of the nominating committee, so that the names of the members of the Bar Association and the Law Society can be cleared, as opposed to just damage control for a Minister of Justice that has changed the truth three times in this Legislature over the last seven days?

Hon. Gary Filmon (Premier): Madam Speaker, it seems very clear that there is a statement that has been provided to the House that is agreed to by both the Chief Judge and the Minister of Justice. It seems very clear that there is a consensus, a view of what has been said and what has been agreed to that has been said. On the one hand, the Minister of Justice has indicated his position on the issue; on the other hand, the Chief Judge has indicated that she was unclear on a particular point, and that, I think, is exactly where it ought to be.

That certainly is not a matter for us to have some sort of grand jury inquiry. That is an acknowledgment that there was a lack of clarity on one particular point, and that certainly is not an issue that should result in some grand jury investigation.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Madam Speaker, the minister has made a terrible error, far worse than what was originally done by him when he negotiated and rigged the nominating committee's selection for appointment. What is happening today is the Minister of Justice is trying to speak for someone else, someone else whose recollection is critical to the clearing of the air of the highest judicial offices and offices in the justice system in Manitoba. Will the minister resign?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): In response, I can indicate from the statement--which the Chief Judge is aware of every word of this--indicating that she shares my recollection of the substance of the matters discussed between us on May 4.

Mr. Gord Mackintosh (St. Johns): Would the minister, who does not understand that what he is doing here in the world that he came from is like the lawyer speaking for the key witness--I ask the minister: how many meetings did it take to negotiate with the Chief Judge her so-called recollection set out in his document?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, I do not question the good faith or the integrity of the Chief Judge, and I rely on the statements that she has agreed with that I have read today in this House.

Mr. Mackintosh: How do we know she agreed with it?

My question to the minister is this--

Madam Speaker: Order, please. I would remind the honourable member for St. Johns that on supplementary questions, the question is to be a specific question. I believe I heard the honourable member for St. Johns ask a very short but specific question.

Mr. Mackintosh: I ask the minister: who initiated the negotiations, and who did the negotiations for this political statement?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I again repeat that I have complete faith and trust in the integrity of the Chief Judge. I am standing up in this House making these public statements. These public statements are written down by Hansard.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, the foundation of a modern democracy is that we have a judicial system that is beyond reproach. Recent allegations of political interference in the selection of judges from the Law Society of Manitoba and from the Bar Association have raised those fundamental questions of honesty and of respect for the rule of law. I want to ask the minister again, as my colleagues have done many times: will he do what is right for Manitoba, what I believe is right for the office he holds, what is right for the reputations of Ms. Suche and Mr. Joubert? Will he step down? Will he welcome the independent review that will clarify this for all Manitobans?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, the real issue here is that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) has been embarrassed by relying on hearsay and innuendo. The person who shared that conversation with me on May 4 has made her position clear in the statement that I read in the House. Now, if the member has any other information relating to the direct conversation that I had with the Chief Judge, I would invite him to do that rather than to slander peoples' reputations.

* (1420)

Ms. Friesen: I would like to ask the minister to recognize that this sorry parade of allegation, counter allegation and now a private clarification by third and fourth parties anonymous have left Manitoba with a justice system which appears in the eyes of the public to be tainted. Will he step aside, accept the independent review from which he apparently believes he has nothing to fear?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, members of the opposition rely on statements made by people who were not a party to a conversation that I had with the Chief Judge. They are relying on those allegations to mount a campaign. One of the things that I know is that I did not breach the law, unlike the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Doer) who released names publicly in this House by subverting The Provincial Court Act. He specifically subverted the act.

Ms. Jean Friesen (Wolseley): Madam Speaker, will the Minister of Justice tell the House which day he was made aware of the recollections of the Chief Justice, and will he tell us whether that view, conveyed to him by anonymous parties, was conveyed in writing?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, the process that occurred, occurred between the two intermediaries. They came and both of them discussed this issue with me last night.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, the web of inconsistencies that this minister has spun continues, and people wonder why we have this problem. It is the same minister who on Thursday said that he did not raise the issue of bilingual candidates, who earlier this week said that he did raise the issue, now puts out a statement that says he has been made aware of the recollections of the Chief Judge and apologizes for some potential misunderstanding that might have taken place.

Why does the minister not admit right now on the public record that the reason there is a misunderstanding here is because right from day one he attempted to rig the selection process? That misunderstanding, most definitely, was not any question. He should resign based on his own statements today.

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): No, Madam Speaker. In fact, as I understand it, is that my comments left her uncertain.

Mr. Steve Ashton (Thompson): Madam Speaker, this minister, who admits his own difficulty in communicating directly, now expects us to believe this brokered statement.

I want to ask the minister, because he never answered this question: who was the person that he appointed to negotiate this statement that is an attempt to control the severe political damage that this minister's credibility has taken these last several days? Who negotiated it?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): Madam Speaker, if it is relevant, it is not a member out of my office or a government employee. The person who I had acting as an intermediary on my behalf was Mr. Bill Olson of Thompson Dorfman, and the intermediary acting on behalf of the Chief Judge was Eleanor Dawson of Aikins MacAulay.

Mr. Ashton: Madam Speaker--

Some Honourable Members: Oh, oh.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. The honourable member for Thompson, with a supplementary question.

Mr. Ashton: As a further supplementary, now that after close to 40 minutes of questioning we have the names, I want to ask the Minister of Justice if he can indicate what role he had in setting up this brokerage process. Did he contact the lawyer involved? Did he set this process in place, and does he in fact consider it appropriate, given the sensitivity of this issue, to even start a process which I think on the surface looks very clearly to be inappropriate, having a brokered statement for this minister to come into the House and try and attempt to control the damage done to his political reputation?

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I cannot remember the question. Maybe he will repeat the question again.

Madam Speaker: The honourable member for Thompson, to repeat the question.

Mr. Ashton: Yes, Madam Speaker. After 40 minutes I had indicated that the minister finally indicated the names of these people that in his statement were responsible--or him being made aware. I want to ask whether the minister initiated this contact, whether the minister spoke to either one of those lawyers involved, and also what direction the minister gave to these individuals, certainly his representative in this attempt to broker some sort of attempt to save this minister's political skin. What direction and contact did he have?

* (1430)

Mr. Toews: Madam Speaker, I have ongoing obligations to ensure that the administration of justice is carried out in this province. That requires contact with the Chief Judge of the province, who is the administrator of that court. In the context of her acting as the chair, it was necessary for me to proceed to ensure that that communication continues between us.

You know, had I contacted the Chief Judge directly, there would have been, clearly, cries of interference. Yet, on the other hand, when I prudently cancelled a meeting that I had with her last Thursday morning, I am accused of doing that for political purposes. So when I cancel a meeting, it is for political purposes; when I proceed with a meeting, it is for political purposes. They do not even know what position they are taking.

Madam Speaker: Order, please. Time for Oral Questions has expired.