Government Operations Committee on March 13th, 2008

[John H. Gomery]

Thank you, sir.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Do you agree with the thrust of the Federal Accountability Act, for example, increasing the number of government bodies covered under access to information by 20 new organizations?

[John H. Gomery]

I think that was an excellent initiative, and I think I indicated it is a fine piece of legislation, as far as it goes.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Right.

[John H. Gomery]

I just think that there were a number of issues that have not really been addressed.

If the government considers these issues and comes to the conclusion that these would not be its policy, for whatever reasons, I would be satisfied with that. I don't pretend to dictate to the government what its policy should be. But when a recommendation is made, it seems to me that it at least deserves to be considered.

I have no indication that many of my recommendations have been given serious consideration, or that they have been considered at all. I don't know to what extent my report has even been read.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I can assure you that it has been widely read, and we thank you for having written it.

[John H. Gomery]

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Poilievre, before we continue, I would like to set something straight.

It can be extremely difficult to amend a piece of legislation once it has passed second reading in areas where there is no mention of--

[John H. Gomery]

I think it contains 160 provisions, as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Yes.

If my memory serves me right, the Information Commissioner came with a number of recommendations. They were put forward as amendments, but they were rejected because they were not within the context of the bill.

I think it's important to remember that when a piece of legislation is drafted, it may not be as easy to amend at that point. That's all I want to say.

I just want to be fair.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Point of order, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Yes, sir.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

There were dozens of amendments to the bill that were accepted and that found their way into the Federal Accountability Act.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

That is not a point of order, Mr. Poilievre.

We will go to Mr. Silva.

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair and Mr. Gomery.

It's important to note that it was the Liberals who set up the Gomery commission, and we very much support you being here today. It's also important to note that the Conservatives refused any types of amendments to the accountability legislation.

I can tell from your remarks today that--

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Point of order, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Is it a point of order--

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

It is.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

--or is just to disrupt the proceedings?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

It is a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Well, make your point.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Yes. The records of legislative proceedings cannot be tampered with retroactively. The reality is that the Federal Accountability Act was amended numerous times, and that record needs to be accurately accounted for.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

That is not a point of order, Mr. Poilievre.

We will go back to Mr. Silva.

[Mario Silva, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Mr. Gomery, you have been totally ignored by the Prime Minister, whom you call a “one-man government”. Your report has been tossed aside by a prime minister who is more interested in the perception of doing something than in actually doing something.

When you speak about your priorities, whether it is the whistle-blowing legislation, access to information, or adequacy of accountability, they have all been ignored. Do you not feel you have been used by the Conservative government, and the Conservative Party, who said they supported your report, but once they got into power they totally ignored it?

[John H. Gomery]

Well, I don't think I'll answer that question directly, because I've tried to remain non-political, and it is not my intention to attack any particular political party or to endorse the program of any particular Liberal Party. I prefer to think of the Government of Canada as representing the public interest and to direct my comments to that.

But let me say that it was the Government of Canada; it wasn't one person. It was the Government of Canada. There was an order in council that came, essentially, from the Privy Council, which is basically the Governor General, that named me. The Government of Canada asked me to make recommendations, and I made recommendations to the Government of Canada--not to the Conservative Party, not to the Liberal Party, but to the Government of Canada.

I thought it was appropriate, after the amount of time and a very considerable amount of money had been devoted to studying these questions, that they would be brought before the attention of the Government of Canada and that there would be discussions.

I just have to judge on the evidence that there hasn't been any discussion that I can see. Maybe there has been, but if there has been, it was done in secret. It certainly was not done publicly, and nobody spoke to me and told me, yes, we're studying this. I had the one conversation with Mr. Baird, who I don't think had read my report at that time, but he was very preoccupied with other matters. He had just been named President of the Treasury Board. I'm sure he had a ton of things to read.