MPs will not hold a priority debate on how to release the names of politicians implicated in a foreign interference report released earlier this year.
House Speaker Greg Fergus ruled Monday that the question of privilege raised by NDP MP Jenny Kwan in June didn’t rise to the level of a “prima facie” violation of MPs’ privilege, which would have given it priority over all other House business.
In June, Kwan suggested that the report from the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) had damaged the reputation of all sitting members of Parliament.
That report alleged, based on intelligence reports, that some parliamentarians had been “semi-witting or witting” participants in efforts by foreign states to interfere in Canadian politics. The unredacted version of the report did not name any of those MPs.
Kwan argued that as long as the names of those politicians remain secret, Canadians will lose trust in their elected officials, undermining MPs’ ability to do their jobs.
“The report did not provide any names and as such all 338 members of this House, including those who have since left this chamber, are under a cloud of suspicion,” Kwan said in June.
But Fergus ruled Monday that Kwan had failed to demonstrate “concretely” that keeping the names secret has impeded MPs’ ability to carry out their duties.
“While I understand that findings presented in the NSICOP report are serious and appear to create suspicions about certain members, that in itself is not a basis to establish this question of privilege merits priority of consideration over all other House business,” he said.
In order to be considered a “prima facie” violation of privilege, an issue must also be raised in a timely manner. In his ruling, Fergus pointed out that Kwan raised the issue two weeks after the NSICOP report was released.
“The facts raised by the member in her arguments had become apparent well before her intervention. The chair is of the view that the member for Vancouver-East had prior opportunities to raise her concerns,” he said.
Fergus’ ruling doesn’t mean the debate over releasing the names from the NSICOP report can’t continue. It just won’t take priority over other House business.
Conservatives had been pressuring the government to release the names of the MPs in the report by having a government member reveal them on the floor of the House of Commons, where MPs enjoy certain legal protections.
When asked about the possibility that the names could be released in the House of Commons, RCMP Deputy Commissioner Mark Flynn indicated that it was a grey area.
“That’s a question that should be asked, due to the complexities of parliamentary privilege, of a legal expert,” Flynn told CBC News in June.
Kwan had been calling for the matter to be referred to the House procedures committee to explore ways of releasing the names from the report without compromising national security.
The issue could still be looked at by a committee. MPs on the committee would have to agree to a study.
Inquiry won’t release names
Fergus’ ruling came as the second week of the second phase of the public inquiry into foreign interference began.
Justice Marie-Josée Hogue, who is heading the inquiry, has said she has reviewed the intelligence that formed the basis of the NSICOP report. She has said she is not in a position to release the names.
“Because the allegations contained in the NSICOP report are based on classified information that cannot be disclosed to the individuals in question, those individuals would not be in a position to be heard in respect of any potential findings that the Commission might consider making against them,” said in a written statement earlier this month.
“As a result of its dual obligations to respect national security confidentiality and the rules of procedural fairness, the commission cannot make any findings that might identify the individuals involved in the allegations.”
 "Why is it so difficult to lose weight? ‘Fat cells’ may be the reason – Firstpost")
