Jagmeet Singh, the leader of the New Democrats (NDP), expressed his disappointment that former governor general David Johnston did not support the request for a public inquiry made on March 2, according to Blacklock’s Reporter. . David Johnston .However, Singh told reporters on Tuesday that there is no need to dissolve the forty-fourth Parliament and trigger an election over denying a public inquiry into Chinese election interference..“I disagree with the finding,” said Singh. .“I think Mr. Johnston was wrong here. I respect his work, but I think he’s wrong not to declare a public inquiry.”.“The prime minister can do that,” said Singh. .“I will also let the prime minister know we’ve got tools and we’re going to use all those tools at our disposal to continue to push for a public inquiry.”.“Is one of those tools triggering an election?” asked a reporter. .“That’s not a decision we’re making today,” replied Singh..“This is something that is so serious it requires a public inquiry,” said Singh. .“We are going to continue to push for one. We are going to use every tool at our disposal in the House of Commons to continue to advance a public inquiry.”.“Is triggering an election one of the tools you are willing to use in order to get a public inquiry?” asked a reporter. .“That’s not a decision we are making today,” replied Singh..“Why not trigger an election and have parties run on that mandate?” asked a reporter. .“We’re not making that decision today,” replied Singh..“We want a public inquiry to protect elections, not an election that is under the cloud of suspicion of foreign interference,” said Singh. .“That would undermine the work we are trying to do. Right now, we are not in a position.”.“When will you make that decision?” asked a reporter. .“It’s not a decision we’re making today,” replied Singh..In his First Report, Johnston stated that a public inquiry would be meaningless..“In my view, a person leading a public inquiry would be unlikely to learn more about who knew what,” wrote Johnston. .“An inquiry would not be the best way forward,” added Johnston, claiming it “would not be productive” and could be “expensive and lengthy.”.The House Affairs committee on March 2, by a 6-5 vote, endorsed a motion sponsored by NDP MP Peter Julian (New Westminster-Burnaby, BC) that Parliament “launch a national public inquiry into allegations of foreign interference in Canada’s democratic system including but not limited to allegations of interference in general elections by foreign governments.”.The motion asked that a judge be “selected by unanimous agreement of the House leaders of the officially recognized parties in the Commons” and have “all necessary powers” to subpoena secret documents and witnesses for cross-examination under oath..The NDP motion passed the House of Commons on March 23 with a vote of 172 to 149, opposed only by Liberal MPs..“We are going to continue to fight to make sure that people can have confidence entirely in our electoral system, that the questions people have are answered,” Singh said on Tuesday. .“We want to encourage people to participate in democracy, that voting is important, that you can trust that your vote will matter. We want to make sure people have that confidence.”.In 2022, the NDP made an agreement with the Trudeau government called the Supply and Confidence Agreement. .The agreement stated the NDP would support key bills from the Liberals with “no surprises” until 2025. In return, the NDP asked for legislation like pharmacare. .“I am not going into this hoping for it to fail,” Singh told reporters at the time. .“I want it to work.”
Jagmeet Singh, the leader of the New Democrats (NDP), expressed his disappointment that former governor general David Johnston did not support the request for a public inquiry made on March 2, according to Blacklock’s Reporter. . David Johnston .However, Singh told reporters on Tuesday that there is no need to dissolve the forty-fourth Parliament and trigger an election over denying a public inquiry into Chinese election interference..“I disagree with the finding,” said Singh. .“I think Mr. Johnston was wrong here. I respect his work, but I think he’s wrong not to declare a public inquiry.”.“The prime minister can do that,” said Singh. .“I will also let the prime minister know we’ve got tools and we’re going to use all those tools at our disposal to continue to push for a public inquiry.”.“Is one of those tools triggering an election?” asked a reporter. .“That’s not a decision we’re making today,” replied Singh..“This is something that is so serious it requires a public inquiry,” said Singh. .“We are going to continue to push for one. We are going to use every tool at our disposal in the House of Commons to continue to advance a public inquiry.”.“Is triggering an election one of the tools you are willing to use in order to get a public inquiry?” asked a reporter. .“That’s not a decision we are making today,” replied Singh..“Why not trigger an election and have parties run on that mandate?” asked a reporter. .“We’re not making that decision today,” replied Singh..“We want a public inquiry to protect elections, not an election that is under the cloud of suspicion of foreign interference,” said Singh. .“That would undermine the work we are trying to do. Right now, we are not in a position.”.“When will you make that decision?” asked a reporter. .“It’s not a decision we’re making today,” replied Singh..In his First Report, Johnston stated that a public inquiry would be meaningless..“In my view, a person leading a public inquiry would be unlikely to learn more about who knew what,” wrote Johnston. .“An inquiry would not be the best way forward,” added Johnston, claiming it “would not be productive” and could be “expensive and lengthy.”.The House Affairs committee on March 2, by a 6-5 vote, endorsed a motion sponsored by NDP MP Peter Julian (New Westminster-Burnaby, BC) that Parliament “launch a national public inquiry into allegations of foreign interference in Canada’s democratic system including but not limited to allegations of interference in general elections by foreign governments.”.The motion asked that a judge be “selected by unanimous agreement of the House leaders of the officially recognized parties in the Commons” and have “all necessary powers” to subpoena secret documents and witnesses for cross-examination under oath..The NDP motion passed the House of Commons on March 23 with a vote of 172 to 149, opposed only by Liberal MPs..“We are going to continue to fight to make sure that people can have confidence entirely in our electoral system, that the questions people have are answered,” Singh said on Tuesday. .“We want to encourage people to participate in democracy, that voting is important, that you can trust that your vote will matter. We want to make sure people have that confidence.”.In 2022, the NDP made an agreement with the Trudeau government called the Supply and Confidence Agreement. .The agreement stated the NDP would support key bills from the Liberals with “no surprises” until 2025. In return, the NDP asked for legislation like pharmacare. .“I am not going into this hoping for it to fail,” Singh told reporters at the time. .“I want it to work.”
