Democratic Institutions Minister Dominic LeBlanc said the government is open to not including a provision in a bill amending the Elections Act, following Conservative criticism that it would secure pensions for 80 MPs.
However, opposition MPs have raised concerns that the move would ensure parliamentary pensions for dozens of MPs who were first elected in 2019, many of whom are not forecast to be re-elected. The Members of Parliament pension plan states that MPs 55 years of age and older qualify after six years of service, but the original election date would mean MPs elected on Oct. 21, 2019, would fail to qualify.
In his opening statement before the House Affairs Committee, Leblanc, who is the minister of public safety, democratic institutions, and intergovernmental affairs, said he had “certainly taken note of comments from colleagues” and that the government would “happily respect the will of this committee should there be a desire to amend the legislation and move the date forward even further, or move it back to the October 20 date.”
MPs Questions
Conservative MP Eric Duncan asked Leblanc about a “secret meeting” on Jan. 25, where representatives from the NDP, the Prime Minister’s Office, Elections Canada, and Leblanc’s office met to discuss the tabling of the legislation. “Do you think it’s appropriate that the NDP—not just MPs on two different occasions—NDP party headquarters staff got access to the Prime Minister’s Office and to Elections Canada to get briefings that were not offered to any other party?” he asked.Leblanc responded that the meetings were “routine” and “normal” given that the Liberals and NDP were in a supply and confidence agreement at the time. “You find it shocking that parliamentarians work together in a collaborative way. We think it’s something that Canadians would find very positive,” he said.
Duncan said it was “completely inappropriate” given that one party was given “access to information and documents and crafted a bill.” He questioned whether it was a Liberal or an NDP idea to “move back the election by a week, so it guarantees any defeated Liberal and NDP MPs their pension.”
Leblanc said pension entitlement had “nothing to do with that decision to move the date,” and said he would “welcome this committee’s judgment” in moving the date. “When you get to the clause by clause, feel free to work with colleagues if you’re so outraged ... But anytime you move the date, you’re going to bump into a problem somewhere,” he said.
Conservative MP Michael Cooper said that moving the election date back to Oct. 27 would interfere with the territorial election in Nunavut. He suggested this was evidence that the Liberals and NDP were not concerned about interfering with special dates, but were trying to secure pensions.
“The fact that you profess ignorance of that fact is only because you’ve been caught, and the fact that you’re willing to back down is, again, because you’ve been caught,” he said. “I’m going to put the question to you once again, the question you refused to answer ... whose idea was it to pad your pockets?”
LeBlanc replied that Cooper was attempting to generate a video clip to use on social media, and said the Conservatives were showing “supreme arrogance” by suggesting that none of their MPs were at risk of being defeated in the next election.
NDP MP Lisa Marie Barron said while her colleague had previously put forth an amendment to the bill in Parliament to strike out the clause moving back the election date, the Conservatives had tried to “have the entire bill completely delayed, not put into place, because they don’t want to see improvements to our elections process.” She asked if Leblanc would support such an amendment.
“If the committee decides to change that date, return the date seven days earlier, that’s entirely up to the committee,” Leblanc said, adding that he would not personally be voting on the bill at committee. “The controversy is such that if people want to change the date, that’s fine.”
