Evidence of meeting #63 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was whistle-blowers.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
I'm afraid that is our time. I'm sorry. Maybe we can get back to you in the next round.
Mr. Johns, you have two and a half minutes, please.
5:20 p.m.
NDP
5:20 p.m.
Retired Lawyer, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, As an Individual
The answer to that is correct. It was very clear that there was the threat of libel. It's a very convenient device to be used, but ultimately, as hard as it is, I believe that nothing is more powerful than truth.
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Can you talk a bit about due process for whistle-blowers, about what they are getting under the current act and what they would get under Bill C-290, and maybe about, again, more improvements that still need to be made to ensure there's fair process?
5:20 p.m.
Retired Lawyer, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, As an Individual
That's an excellent question because, in order to have a chance to prevail, you have to be able to avail yourself of due process rights. Otherwise, you're into—what's the expression—tin pan.... The rights that are accorded under the current law are embarrassing. It is an assault on what Canada has historically stood for. They are weak, insipid non-rights, basically.
This act is addressing that. It's strengthening it. It's taking out the good faith. Mr. Bains—or was it Mr. Fergus—raised the issue of good faith. This is an argument that collapsed a long time ago. We don't go into the minds of people to determine whether the facts or the evidence that they are bringing forward are true or not. This act deals with that head-on. It also gives an appeal for somebody directly to the tribunal.
I have very strong views about the tribunal. I do not think the tribunal.... It has demonstrated by its track record that it has not been effective, and Canada is having a declining effect with tribunals.
I am an absolute, strong proponent, as is Tom Devine, that you have to have access to our courts of justice.
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
I just have a quick question.
I asked Ms. Dion what it would mean for Canada if we passed Bill C-290. Can you speak about what it would be like if we failed to pass it?
5:20 p.m.
Retired Lawyer, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, As an Individual
If we fail to pass it, it will be a dark day. It will be a national embarrassment. It will be an international embarrassment. It will be, frankly, a failure on the parliamentarians who failed to support it.
How do you not support the issue of occupational free speech? It's not credible in a functioning and free democracy.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
Thank you very much.
Mr. Barrett, you have five minutes, please.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to the witnesses for being here today and sharing their expertise and experiences with us.
Could you provide me with some international examples of best practices for whistle-blower protections? I will give each of the witnesses an opportunity to respond.
5:25 p.m.
Retired Lawyer, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, As an Individual
I think the best way to answer that—again, because time is sacred here—is that we can provide that to you in writing. I have been providing it to committees since 2004.
Tom is really the master of these best practices. Many countries around the world have implemented them. We have, currently, one. This bill introduces many more, so it is progress, but as I say, you have to have a fundamental structure. You can have a car that you can put excellent gas in, excellent oil, excellent seats, etc., but if the foundation of the car, the chassis, is rusted, then you're going to have problems. We have some real structural problems in terms of where you are going to go for your remedy.
We will provide you with those best practices. I think it will give you a lot of thought about what the next step is in introducing a bill.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Before I turn my questions to Ms. Dion.... What is the best thing we could do right now? What is the most important thing that you would say needs to happen next?
5:25 p.m.
Retired Lawyer, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, As an Individual
You have to endorse this bill. We can assist you with amendments. Again, it's limited. Spending cannot be in a private member's bill, and much of this relates to spending, remedies.
A whistle-blower who sacrifices everything needs to be able to get a remedy. That is a spending issue. Legal fees are a spending issue. The bill has to be supported. It is an excellent signal that this is important. There are remedies that we will assist you with, and we will provide you with best practices and try to introduce as many as we can that don't infringe what a private member's bill can do.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Thank you very much.
Ms. Dion, do you have any best practices that you would like to share—
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
—with respect to the best step that we could take next?
5:25 p.m.
Border Service Officer and Trainer, As an Individual
It's so vague and so large.
I'm going to come back to the credibility of the complaints that are made. I think the first thing to do would be to ensure that complaints are acted upon and that people who report these situations are listened to. I believe that Bill C‑290 will provide the protection needed for anonymity and to allow things to go smoothly for both parties.
I think that complaints should be acted upon and that every complaint must be listened to and investigated.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Okay.
Ms. Gualtieri.
5:25 p.m.
Retired Lawyer, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, As an Individual
Do you have any time left?
If you do—
5:25 p.m.
Retired Lawyer, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, As an Individual
The burden of proof is a big one. Gag orders.... I apologize. I should have raised this.
I was put under what my lawyer, a very senior lawyer who litigated my case, said was the most draconian gag order he had ever seen. You cannot give rights under this act, and then, at the same time, gag people—which is done both at the front end in the employment context and then at the other end when they come out after disclosure.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Non-disclosure agreements...?
5:30 p.m.
Retired Lawyer, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, As an Individual
It's not only non-disclosure agreements, Mr. Barrett. It's also.... The departments have, basically, gag orders for what you can say or do, or how you can communicate in the workplace. Those cannot cancel out your whistle-blowing rights.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
That's very helpful.
Thanks very much, Ms. Gualtieri and Ms. Dion.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
5:30 p.m.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to both witnesses for coming here. Indeed, when you shared your experiences, it was a difficult time. Thank you for the strength you've shown. Thank you for the service you've provided to the country.
I'm going to start with Madam Gualtieri.
You talked about how there's an urgency to pass this private member's bill. We are all committed to making sure that the appropriate amendment is put in. I'm confident that, collectively, we will work together to put in the appropriate amendment to manage the scope and to manage some of the unintended consequences of some of the recommendations in there. Hopefully, we will send it back to the House, and it will pass.
One thing that you mentioned was that you know there will come a point when this bill will pass. Fundamentally, what needs to happen is that there needs to be a cultural and socio-political change. My colleague, Madam Block started on that. This is where I want to do a little bit more of a deep dive because I believe the cultural and socio-political change could be something that.... My colleague, MP Barrett, asked what we could do immediately. Probably it's an area that we could explore, starting very soon.
Can you help us to, kind of, demystify it or break it down and say what specifically needs to change?
I know you talked about the public side and how the public got mobilized in the U.S. How about within the structure, within the government structure? What could be done?