Government Operations Committee on April 28th, 2015

[Tarik Brahmi, NDP, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you.

Are those tools or computer services external or internal? I am looking at your 2015-2016 expenditures. If we use the 2014 public accounts as a reference point, informatics services are the second item in the professional and special services section, right after business services. Is that an evolution? Are you planning to keep the expenditures for that need internal or to use external services?

[Joe Friday]

We are currently exploring the possibility of using a cross-government case management system. It's a shared system. For the time being, we have an internal electronic case management system. Considering the financial resources, I hope that the shared system will be more affordable and effective.

[Tarik Brahmi, NDP, Saint-Jean, QC]

You talked about that cross-government case management system in your presentation.

Are only the computer platforms shared, or can other government organizations have access to the information?

[Joe Friday]

That's a very important issue for us because confidentiality of information is a pillar of our regime. With Ms. Fraser's help, we are making sure that all the necessary protections are in place to avoid problems such as privacy breaches.

[Tarik Brahmi, NDP, Saint-Jean, QC]

However, I imagine this means that, at a certain clearance level, the infrastructure will be accessible from other government organizations, as will the information. Is that what you are telling me?

[Joe Friday]

Perhaps Patricia could answer your question.

[Patricia Fraser, Manager, Financial services, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada]

There's a lot of security being put in place by Shared Services Canada, working with PWGSC, for this project. It's not ready yet from Shared Services Canada but it will be Microsoft Dynamics that will be used and there's a lot of interest. There are approximately 35 departments using it. If we decide that security isn't sufficient to meet our needs, we would still go ahead and use the same software product to be consistent.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Thank you very much, Ms. Fraser.

Thank you, Mr. Brahmi.

We'll go next to the Conservatives with Mr. Greg Kerr.

You have five minutes, please, Greg.

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's very interesting.

I'm going to back up a little bit because we were talking about “internal” and “external” several times.

Is it possible for you to give a clear explanation of the responsibilities under “internal”? I see 30 resources are dedicated there as compared to what is “external”. I know it's very simplistic but I think it would help if we could help separate the two.

[Joe Friday]

I'll turn it over to Ms. Fraser to walk us through that, if I may.

[Patricia Fraser]

Definitely.

We follow Treasury Board Secretariat's guidance on the classification of our costs and what's internal and what's external. Internal costs include finance, human resources, IT, information management. As for our legal costs, when they relate to litigation, we consider those internal costs. Those are probably the largest ones. The program costs are the investigators, the case analysis, and the management of that. The majority of our legal costs are considered part of the program because they are reviewing the cases and getting opinions on those.

[Joe Friday]

Could I also clarify that as a micro-organization, which I think is our official designation—we're smaller than small—we don't have internal information management, information technology services, or internal human resources services. We buy those services from PWGSC and the Canadian Human Rights Commission, and that represents a large portion of what we classify as our external costs.

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

That gets into the whole security question, which I know keeps coming up.

What is the basic training that a person needs to be an employee in your services? What are the main requirements?

[Joe Friday]

We do provide our own training and orientation to new employees.

From an operational perspective, for our investigators we have developed a statement of qualifications that emphasizes the need to have direct investigative experience and direct administrative investigation experience as well.

Going back to Mr. Warkentin's question, the distinction between a criminal investigation and an administrative one is one that we think is worthwhile focusing on. We occupy a particular position within the range of investigative models and approaches, and it's of utmost importance for us to ensure that the people who work for us understand what our powers and authorities are, what they aren't, what the burden of proof is, what the standards are.

At this point we are developing, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, a pool of pre-qualified investigators so that we can dip into that pool when necessary. Also, the standing offer that I mentioned provides us with the ability to hire on a contractual basis specialized services or those with specialized knowledge, for example, if we're working on a complex financial investigation, where we would need some expert advice, with all the appropriate security requirements in place. We have security requirements for both internal, obviously, and external service providers.

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

Do I have a bit of time left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

You still have about one and a half minutes, Greg.

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

Given the delicacy of what you do, the investigators obviously all have to walk on eggshells, otherwise you'd be worried about legal ramifications, I'm sure. Do the investigators have to be bonded or certified? How is that controlled so that it protects the integrity of both what you do, and the potential on the other side, those being investigated?

[Joe Friday]

We have the security classifications for each of those, and they must have and maintain those security requirements. Expressly under the law, if we are working on.... It's possible that we could be working on an investigation that includes top secret information, and we ensure that we have at least two members of our staff who have current top secret clearance at all times.

It's not the norm, but it is certainly a possibility.

[Greg Kerr, Conservative, West Nova, NS]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Thank you, Mr. Kerr.

Next, for the Liberal Party, the vice-chair of the committee, Mr. Gerry Byrne.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thank you to our witnesses.

We're talking about the main estimates and spending appropriation by the government.

Mr. Friday, back in 2011 agents of Parliament wrote to the Speakers of the Senate and the House as well as the chairs of the government oversight committees requesting an opportunity to appear about the independence of agents of Parliament. That letter was issued in 2011. Subsequently there was the May election in 2011, and then following the configuration of the new Parliament the letter was retransmitted. It's never been replied to by Parliament, by any standing committee.

What are your views about the independence of Parliament and whether your going before Parliament looking for the appropriation of funds impacts your independence?

[Joe Friday]

Mr. Chair, I have not had the requirement or the opportunity to seek extra funds, because we've been able, quite thankfully, to manage within our budgets. I know there have been structural changes. There used to be something called the parliamentary panel that was responsible for dealing with matters of financial administration of agents of Parliament.

With respect to independence, it is essential to what we do in our office. I won't speak on behalf of other agents of Parliament, but I am very confident in being able to presume their unquestioning agreement with me with respect to the overriding importance of our independence.

As I said, as commissioner for the last month I haven't had the opportunity yet to explore the challenges that may or may not be posed by existing structures, but it is something that I am extremely finely attuned to. One of my core responsibilities, of course, is protecting the independence of the functioning of our office, which to date has been, in my view, unqualified.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

It would appear that the league of agents of Parliament—the group—would also share your concerns, or at least they did share your concerns back in the spring and fall of 2011. The letter has never been replied to. There has been no communication or discussion amongst parliamentary oversight committees with agents of Parliament, either with the Auditor General or with the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner, about strengthening that independence and that function.

Would you see it as pertinent and valuable, or would you request that the letter—the spirit of that letter, the contents of that letter—be revisited, and that such a discussion with parliamentary committees occur?

[Joe Friday]

I don't have the letter in front of me, and I wasn't a signatory to the letter, but generally speaking, any efforts that can be taken to underscore the essential importance of the independence of agents of Parliament is something that I would be supportive of.

It's also essential to achieve certain of the priorities I mentioned—for example, increased awareness of and confidence among public servants to come forward. That is one of the core reasons we were created in 2007, to be independent. So yes, independence is of utmost importance to me.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

When you assumed this particular office some short while ago, you received no information, in terms of your briefing, that this was still an ongoing request or still a topic of discussion amongst agents of Parliament?