Sudbury advocates disappointed after Ottawa committee meeting turns into ‘political circus’

Filibustering cuts witnesses' testimony short, delaying Sudbury MP Vivian Lapointe's private members' bill to force criminals to pay victim-serving groups.

There is disappointment amongst several front-line organizations in Greater Sudbury, as well as a local Member of Parliament, after time in front of a parliamentary committee turning into what the one Liberal caucus member is calling ‘filibustering.’

Evie Ali, the executive director of the Go-Give Project, and Cristina Scarpellini, the executive director of Angels of Hope against Human Trafficking, both from Sudbury, were asked to appear before the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights in Ottawa. The group is made up of MPs from various political parties.

The invitation came from Sudbury MP Viviane Lapointe. Last fall, she proposed Bill C-238, a Private Members’ Bill that, if passed, would amend the criminal code, forcing criminals to pay restitution to organizations that support victims of drugs or human trafficking.

The meeting on June 15 was to hear from Ali and Scarpellini as witnesses testifying about their experiences with their respective agencies and answer questions from the committee.

Both had the opportunity to provide opening statements and answers during the first round of questioning.

But halfway through the meeting, one MP used the opportunity to turn attention away from Lapointe’s private members’ bill and the witnesses who were in front of them.

“We as parliamentarians, we can walk and chew gum at the same time and we often do that very well as we navigate a myriad of policies and government bills, but most importantly, private member bills. This, in fact, being a private members’ bill. So, at this time, Madam chair, I’d like to move my motion that I presented and filed on Thursday, June 4th…” Conservative MP Larry Brock told the committee.

“As somebody that’s not super entrenched in politics or you know very familiar with the policies and procedures that would normally take place, there were a few moments where I was kind of like ‘what is happening?’ Ali told CTV News a few days later.

“I was very confused as he began to speak.”

Once the delay was underway, one committee member asked for the witnesses to be released.

“Perhaps we should release the witnesses because clearly we’re not going to hear anything anymore from them and it’s a bit unfortunate to just leave Ms. Ali sitting here,” Rheal Eloi Fortin can be heard asking the chair.

Brock went on for 47 minutes – half the meeting.

“(Brock) chose not to discuss the merits of the bill or hear from witnesses and instead used the time to filibuster,” Lapointe told CTV News on June 18.

“He talked about and read text message exchanges.”

Filibustering is a political delay tactic that is more frequently used as the parliamentary session nears its end.

“For me, that’s a really disappointing example of political tactics that get in the way of meaningful work that committees do,” Lapointe said.

“A lot of mixed emotions, especially getting to witness firsthand how these decisions are made and by whom these decisions are made,” Ali said.

Ali said she travelled six hours with her three children to participate in the committee meeting, while Scarpellini attended via Zoom.

“My experience on Monday, I feel, I was very disappointed. You know we didn’t get a chance to finish Bill C-238; instead, it turned into a political circus,” Scarpellini said.

Because of the ‘filibuster,’ Lapointe said the bill’s review is delayed.

“So, now it will remain, there’ll be competing priorities on when we can get back on to the agenda of the justice committee. So, it does mean that the bill, unfortunately, is delayed,” she said.

The House of Commons rose for the summer recess on June 18. That means anything still at the committee level won’t be looked at until the fall. The committee must complete its review before the bill can move on to the Senate.

Both Ali and Scarpellini told CTV News that they will think twice about testifying again, given their recent experience.

“I know how much time it took for them to prepare for appearing before the Justice Committee. They did their research on the bill, they also prepared opening statements and prepped themselves for that appearance,” Lapointe said.

“I would have emphasized the fact that not only is this restitution to organizations like ours, but it’s justice for survivors as well. They’ll feel that sense of justice that their traffickers are held accountable,” Scarpellini said.