Thread by @amandacconn

Boissonault presenting a motion to committee members right now. NDP MP Nathan Cullen speaking while these are passed around, says concerns raised by Liberals about motion being raised without consultation applies to Liberals now trying to table their own motion

"The goal here was not to be in any way non-consensual," Housefather says.

Boissonault motion proposes that the committee hold meetings to examine remediation agreements, the Shawcross doctrine, call Privy Council Clerk Michael Wernick and Attorney General David Lametti ....

"Her omission in your list is more than interesting," Cullen says of Jody Wilson-Raybould not being included in the proposed Liberal motion, nor are any of the PMO officials in the original opposition motion.

Cullen says the allegations at the heart of this go to the heart of Canadian democracy and "how the halls of power work," and also raises the case of Vice Adm. Mark Norman and says the matters call into question the government's commitment to an independent judiciary.

Cullen: "I'm not satisfied with the motion as it's written. I think there might be a combination" of the two that could work.

Cullen: "I'm not interested ... in a seven-month wandering expedition into the deep bowels of Canadian laws."

"We need to get to the substance of the matter>"

Cullen says "The case we have before us is one of the most troubling I've seen in my career in politics."

Housefather says the individuals listed in the Liberal motion are those they have confirmed are willing to attend: clerk of Privy Council, deputy minister of Justice, and the current GA/Justice Minister

Lisa Raitt speaking now. Says she is "so disappointed" about comments being make about Jody Wilson-Raybould's work performance.

Raitt highlighting differing remarks given by PMJT over the past week, says matter raises "critical questions on ethics and conduct of senior staff in his office."

Raitt also raising the case of Mark Norman right now in remarks, saying allegations of political interference in that case too make it crucial this investigation goes ahead.

"I'm not satisfied with the motion either," Raitt says of Liberal motion

Liberal MP Colin Fraser says Liberal motion is "designed to reassure Canadians and show how Parliament can work" and that he will vote for it

"I do think it's important that the motion submitted by Mr. Boissonault mention that there is potentially an issue around the sub judicie rule," Fraser adds. Raises concerns also voiced by other Liberals about ongoing court proceedings and what parliamentarians can say

Conservative Michael Cooper speaking next. "For a prime minister who talks about sunshine being the best disinfectant ... I would have thought they'd be eager to get on with sunshine."

"It's rather interesting that so many of the key players are omitted from this motion," Cooper says of the Liberal motion

"I don't think it's a coincidence those individuals are omitted from this list," Cooper says. "The only conclusion I can draw is that there isn't an interest to get to the bottom of this matter."

Adds he is concerned why this motion also proposes in camera meetings to discuss further amendments to the witness list.

Iqra Khalid speaking now, says she has a "lot of issues with the speculation Mr. Cooper has put forward" in his remarks. "We are independent, have not been influenced in any way in what we are deliberating here today."

"The wording of the motion does not limit the witnesses," Khalid says, adding the motion includes further meetings on how to amend that witness list which she reiterates is just those who have agreed to appear

Remember: the original motion calls for nine officials to appear, including Jody Wilson-Raybould and top PMO advisers including Gerald Butts, Katie Telford and two others who are listed as having been lobbied on justice issues by SNC-Lavalin last year.

Housefather says agreeing on a witness list in camera is the normal course of this committee. Cullen says that may be the case but this isn't a normal meeting.

"The experience that Ms. Wilson-Raybould is not nothing," Cullen says of Khalid's remarks that the opposition is "making hay" out of nothing

"I thought that spectacle was unbecoming of a prime minister," Cullen says of PMJT referring to Wilson-Raybould by her first name in this matter while he has called male colleagues by their titles.

"The last less than a week has told us there is clearly something here," Cullen says, then raises the issue of Shawcross, a principle about the independence of the attorney general.

Cullen says he wants the Liberal motion limited on how deep into the weeds legalistic expeditions proposed in its wording can go

"The principal secretary to the prime minister seems to be an obvious witness," Cullen argues.

"It's not just the act itself; it's the attempts to cover up the act itself that Canadians so often find infuriating," Cullen says.

Cullen urging Liberal members to show they are serious about making decisions by consensus by agreeing to the amendments he is proposing

Cullen wants Butts, Bouchard and Wilson-Raybould invited to appear. Says Liberal members have an obligation to Canadians, not to PMO.

"We owe it to Canadians to do this," Cullen says

Pierre Poilievre speaking now and running through chronology of this matter

Boissonault notes the ethics commissioner is looking into this matter. "The role of the justice committee is not an investigative body."

"At best, committees of the House of Commons are political theatre that occasionally produce good reports," Boissonault says, adding they don't have the resources to conduct the "witch hunt" the Conservatives are asking for.

Boissonault: "The reason we had a change to the criminal code to include remediation agreements was to comply with our trading partners."

Boissonault accuses critics of "specious" attacks for suggesting the reason of the change to create remediation agreements was to help a company

Pierre Paul-Hus speaking now, says "truth rises above any partisanship and therefore there's no partisanship on our part."

"What we're getting is a law class here," Paul-Hus says. "We don't actually need a course in legal affairs...what we need to do is get to the heart of the issue."

Khalid speaking again. Says she wants to clarify when she said there was "nothing" to this matter, she meant "nothing substantiated."

Khalid accusing the Conservatives of trying to put out soundbites. Adds again that the list of proposed witnesses is not final and the wording of it reflects that.

Khalid: "The role of our committee is not investigative ... we study bills and the impact of those bills and legislation to Canadians but we are not here to look into what the ethics commissioner has undertaken to do."

Khalid says what Canadians really want here is clarification "on how the role of government functions."

Cooper now asking who called the witnesses in advance to ask who was willing to appear. Boissonault says "my colleagues in government reached out to these people...no it is not PMO."

"Did Mr. Butts refuse?" Cooper presses

Housefather says Liberals "deliberately have not contacted anybody in PMO. That's why you would not see Mr. Butts name there."

"My understanding is nobody else has yet been contacted," Housefather says when asked again whether Butts refused to appear.

"It's quite ironic because I wish our justice committee had the time to examine deferred prosecution agreements," Cooper says. "Guess what. That didn't happen. Why didn't it happen? Because the Finance Min through the omnibus bill decided to sneak it in."

"The fact that Mr. Boissonault wants to go on at length studying these remediation agreements speaks to the fact the Liberal members don't want to get to the bottom of this:" Cooper

Cooper adds what remediation agreements are have nothing to do with the matter. The issue, he stresses, is whether PMO officials pressured Wilson-Raybould to intervene to help SNC-Lavalin get one of them.

Fraser speaking again now. Notes that witness lists and timetables are usually done in camera and that the ongoing issue of matters before the courts means the committee will likely have to obtain legal opinion on, which he says would have to be done in camera

"If we're going to be encroaching on a matter that is currently before the court ... we have to be really sure that we're not doing something improper as a committee," Fraser says. "That's perfectly normal."

"We are trying to find a way as committee members to finding an avenue forward:" Fraser says, noting Liberal motion would deal with these issues on Feb. 19.

"The purpose of this motion is that future meetings would be public," Fraser says, with the exception of the witness list, timeline and consideration of the sub judicie rule regarding ongoing court cases

Fraser adds that lobbying of politicians is also normal.

"There're a number of issues at play that we need to take seriously," Fraser says. "If there's truly an interest to determine these items, then we need to do so in a way that'll have the confidence of Canadians. What I have seen here today I'm not sure will carry the confidence."

So far the Liberals seem to be indicating they will not support amendments to the motion they have presented.

"The power of this committee to actually find out what happened here is substantive," Cullen said. "The witnesses you have offered are suspect in that they have already made their opinions known about this."

"The fact that Liberal committee members don't even want to hear from her is telling," Cullen says of Wilson-Raybould not being on the list. If there are things she thinks she can't talk about, he says she can decide that for herself.

Cullen presenting his amendments asking the motion to invite: PM's principal secretary Gerald Butts, Wilson-Raybould and Matthew Bouchard, senior adviser in PMO

"This is as obvious as the nose on my face -- and my nose is pretty obvious," Cullen jokes.

"The light of day is our best ally in all of this," Cullen adds

Debate is now moving on to discussion about the proposed amendments. Cons say they will vote in favour of Cullen's proposed amendments. Adds they will reject any motion that this committee meet in camera (aka in secret)

"They have indicated that Canadians want clarification on the relationship between the AG and the cabinet," Raitt says. "Our point of view and the point of view of editorials is we want to get to the bottom of political interference."

Boissonault when pressed on who exactly asked the proposed witnesses if they were willing to appear: "Colleagues working in the House Leader's office have been able to work with these three witnesses proposed."

"I think it's perfectly appropriate for the House Leader's office to reach out on the committee's behalf," Housefather says.

"I really do want to assert the independence of this committee:" Housefather

Ali Ehsassi, Liberal MP, speaking now adding that Liberal members do not want to limit the witness list and that "we want to work with you."

Ehsassi says they are not trying to drag this out and that's why the proposed date for the witness/timeline/sub judicie meeting is next week

Boissonault getting into some political jabs now as to who the Cons have chosen to have speak at the committee. Asks if the opp want to get into specifics of what SNC-Lavalin talked about with Scheer and Singh, and opposition members yell yes.

"If SNC-Lavalin had ended up in a remediation, you'd have something. But guess what, they're going to trial:" Boissonault asserts.

If I recall, SNC has appealed decision not to offer them this agreement and federal prosecutors have asked for that appeal to be dismissed.

As well, Attorney General David Lametti said an agreement "remains a possibility" in an interview with CTV over the weekend. theglobeandmail.com/politics/artic…

Liberal Ron McKinnon speaking now, picking at the original Globe story that sparked this whole affair. "They left the impression that any interaction between cabinet and PMO and the attorney general was illegitimate."

"How can we deal with random people?" McKinnon says, pointing to the fact we don't know who the Globe's sources were.

For the record, this is the *second* time a Liberal has gone after the anonymous sources used by the Globe in their reporting.

Paul-Hus asks if McKinnon is suggesting the Globe would have published "fake news."

"They want us to fall into comas - deep, irreversible comas -- as they drone on about legal theories rather than talk about the facts before us," Poilievre says about the Liberal motion

"They will be voting for a cover up," Poilievre says of any who support the Liberal motion as it stands.

Oh hey look at that, Rheal Fortin is here too.

Says he wants to talk about the impact on the families employed by SNC-Lavalin that will come from all this. Adds he doesn't see any other way for this to proceed without Wilson-Rayboud being invited.

"The Liberal motion is just a red herring," Fortin says. "My concern is what we're doing here is putting SNC-Lavalin on trial."

"It's very important for Quebec and it's a very important business," Housefather says of SNC-Lavalin, thanking Fortin for his remarks and moving the discussion to Khalid.

Khalid accuses members of being at committee "looking for soundbites" again and says partisan issues need to be put aside so they can meet in camera to discuss how to proceed and which witnesses to call.

"My fear is if the cameras are on, my colleagues across the way will not be able to turn off their partisanship," Khalid says, adding she will not support Cullen's amendment for open meetings.

"It is not our mandate and we do not have the means to put SNC-Lavalin on trial," Boissonault says.

Boissonault now says he misspoke and no one from the House Leader's office called the witnesses proposed in the Liberal motion to ask if they were willing to appear.

"With people watching and the cameras on, you won't commit," Cullen says when asking why Liberals won't commit to calling Wilson-Raybould. "Just trust me won't cut it."

Cullen says Trudeau "literally stood in front of buses" when he talked about how disappointed he was in @Puglaas, adds that PM doesn't need to opposition to try and embarrass him and is doing that well enough on his own.

"The prime minister's arguments have not worked out well," Cullen says

"Liberals seem to have dug in," Cullen says. "You're about to vote against the witnesses I proposed."

"I'd be happy to show you ours if you show us yours," Cullen says of details of meetings with SNC-Lavalin.

Vote on Cullen's amendment to call additional witnesses and hold the meeting on further witnesses/timeline in public is defeated.

We're basically waiting for the final votes now with members from all sides hitting each other a few more times before this wraps up.

Cooper attempts to move an amendment to the motion to ask Trudeau to waive solicitor-client privilege

Boissonault now giving quite strongly worded attack on how if the Liberals wanted to cover things up, they would have shut the meeting down at 3:10.

Vote now on the Liberal motion to call three witnesses, hold legal advice sessions, and debate timelines and further witnesses on Feb. 19 in camera.

Carried 5-4.

Liberals vote for it, Cons and NDP vote against.

Liberals also defeat a motion from Cooper to call on Trudeau to waive solicitor-client privilege and let Wilson-Raybould speak about the allegations

And that is wrapped up.