Environment Committee on Jan. 30th, 2007

[Luc Harvey, Conservative, Louis-Hébert, QC]

Ms. Fraser, you should come more often, because a consensus is easily... No really, what you have said is perfectly understandable. We really appreciate your being here today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I take it, Mr. Chair, that the part of the meeting that would be in camera would be very short?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

That will be totally up to Ms. Fraser.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

And then we'd open the doors, and anybody who wanted to join us could join us?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

I'm sure that Ms. Fraser would be happy to accept any questions, but once that's done, then they will carry on.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

So anybody who wants to come and join us afterwards is welcome to come and join us to deal with the committee business today on the reporting system?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Well, again, having just briefly talked to Ms. Fraser about that.... She may want to come at another date for that. Let's let her make her statement. If we have any questions about that statement, then let's move on from there, and we'll make that decision at that point, Mr. McGuinty.

Ms. Fraser.

[Sheila Fraser]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

As I mentioned, I wish to inform you, as a matter of courtesy, of an announcement that we will be making later today.

First of all, I wish to advise you that the current Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, Johanne Gélinas, will be leaving the position to pursue other opportunities. She will be announcing her specific plans once they are finalized.

I have decided to appoint Ron Thompson, who is with me today, as interim commissioner, effective today, until we can select Johanne's replacement. Ron is an assistant Auditor General with the office, and he has kindly agreed to defer his retirement in order to assist in this transition. Ron has worked closely with the commissioner's group over the past year, and in his thirty years with the office he has been responsible for financial and performance audits, including several with environmental and sustainable development components. He has led audits in the three territories, in Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, and in Fisheries and Oceans Canada.

Moreover, we are announcing today that we will be initiating a review of our environmental and sustainable development audit practice, to determine whether it can be strengthened to serve Parliament better in the years that lie ahead. This is something we have done in our financial and performance audit practices to good effect. This review will obviously be performed in the context of our current mandate, which leads me to an issue I would like to raise with the committee.

One of the messages we have already heard from some of our advisors is that there is a gap between the expectations of some about the role of the Commissioner and the actual mandate as outlined in the Auditor General Act—for example, the extent to which the Commissioner can or should be involved in an advocacy role where government policy is concerned. This is an issue this committee may want to consider.

In the course of our review, I would obviously like to hear from parliamentarians and other stakeholders about what works well and what could be improved. In particular, the views of this committee are very important, and we will be contacting you to conduct interviews in the next few months. I would expect that our review will take several months and that the results, which we hope will be known next autumn, will assist us in developing a profile of the ideal candidate as our next Commissioner. This will allow us to move forward with confidence to select a new Commissioner, whom I would expect to be in place in about a year's time.

That concludes my remarks, Mr. Chairman.

I would be very pleased to discuss with members of the committee how we might move forward together to ensure that the audit work my office does on environmental and sustainable development issues best serves you.

If we are to discuss reporting strategies in the review, I would appreciate that we do it after the public announcement has been made.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Thank you, Ms. Fraser.

We're still in camera, of course.

If there are questions that need to be asked, basically you are suggesting that we discuss the original request about the reporting mechanism and so on and that this could be done, not in camera but in public, at a future date.

[Sheila Fraser]

Yes, that would be the case.

In the course of this review, we are going to look at how best to report the environmental and sustainable development issues. We have not come to a firm decision going forward on that, and we would certainly welcome any views of the committee.

We would welcome coming to discuss the planned review, how we plan to take this forward, and any suggestions you might have about the profile of the next commissioner. We would be glad to do that in a public hearing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

So there are two issues, basically. The reporting process and the profile of the new environment commissioner would be what the committee would be charged with and what we would be able to discuss publicly.

[Sheila Fraser]

I would also, if I may, very much like to discuss with you the gap that some people have indicated seems to exist between the expectations of the commissioner's role and the current mandate in the Auditor General Act, to understand whether that gap exists for parliamentarians as well, and whether parliamentarians want to address that question.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Bigras.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you very much, Ms. Fraser, for having been thoughtful enough to inform us about changes to your organization rather than having us wait and find out from the media. It is very much to your credit. At the same time, I cannot but draw the attention of committee members to point 13 of your presentation. And I quote:One of the messages we have already heard from some of our advisors is that there is a gap between the expectations of some about the role of the Commissioner and the actual mandate as outlined in the Auditor General Act.

To begin with, I'd like to know the nature of this gap and the names of these advisors. Second, I feel I must ask you to what extent the Commissioner can or should be involved in an advocacy role where government policy is concerned.

I'm wondering if, as it turns out, point 13 isn't what actually prompted you to appear before the committee today and make this announcement. To my mind, and this will always be the case, the Environment and Sustainable Development Commissioner is the environmental watchdog. I understand that you may or may not wish the committee to address this issue, however the Environment and Sustainable Development Commissioner is duty bound to be vigilant and act as watchdog in relation to key causes or matters. You probably prefer the word “matters” to the word “causes”, as the latter implies some form of militancy. Are you in the process of telling us today that you consider the Environment and Sustainable Development Commissioner to be overly militant on environmental issues, and you may prefer a future commissioner to take a bit of a step back in this regard? I'd be interested to hear what you have to say to that. I didn't read your text, but I listened to you. I'm not saying that point 13 annoys me, because I myself am militant, but I just want to understand this better.

[Sheila Fraser]

Let me go back in time a little. Following a study in 1994-1995 to establish the position of Commissioner, a report from the then environment committee recommended there be an independent Commissioner mandated to carry out assessments, and make comments on government policies and so forth. The government decided not to adopt all the committee's recommendations and amended the Auditor General Act so that the Commissioner was part of the Auditor General's Office. The Commissioner had two obligations under the act: the first, to be petitioned, and the other, to audit sustainable development strategies. These are the only obligations of the Commissioner under the act.

Over time, we broadened the Commissioner's role to include reporting on all performance audits within the office. The Office of the Auditor General cannot, and must not, comment on policies. The Commissioner is not independent of the Office of the Auditor General. He or she is appointed by the Auditor General and is part of the Auditor General's staff and team. Under the current act, the Commissioner must comply with the constraints—that is, what some people perceive to be constraints— from the Office of the Auditor General. Some people would like the Commissioner to be far more proactive and comment on and assess the government's environmental performance. They would like the Commissioner to make comments on policy, which is something the Commissioner cannot do. These observations have been made to us in no uncertain terms during consultations we have had.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Give me some examples. Are there any examples?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Bigras, Mr. McGuinty wants to interject here.

The order was incorrect. I basically should have started with the Liberals, the Bloc, the NDP, and then the government with our witness. But I believe Mr. McGuinty wants a point of order.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

It's a point of order, Mr. Chair.

I'm sorry, and I don't want to cause any grief for any of us, including the Auditor General, but I'm very uncomfortable now. We've gone into a substantive discussion of the structure of the Auditor General's office. We've gone into a discussion immediately of the structure and the role of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. We're looking at some of the challenges. I don't see anything in this discussion that shouldn't be public.

There are four journalists outside this room who want to cover this discussion, who I think ought to cover this discussion. These are important discussions for Canadians. They want to know how we are doing this reporting. I'll pick up any newspaper today and it is the headline across the country. Environment is in. It's a concern to everyone. I understand the délicatesse--using the word of my colleague from the Bloc--about advising us in advance, and I thank you for that, because Madame Gélinas is departing, and that will be announced this afternoon. But everything I have read here other than that, and everything that has happened in the earlier discourse between my colleague, Monsieur Bigras, and the Auditor General ought to be a matter of open public discussion.

In good faith, I cannot continue participating in a discussion.... I don't think we should go any further in this discussion until we open the doors and say it's an open meeting. Let's have it out. I think Canadians want to know. If there are concerns about how the office is structured, Canadians should know.

Personally, I'm pleased to see this discussion. It was the national round table that called for the creation of the commissioner's office; it was the red book of 1993 that called for the creation of the office. And there's a great history and we all want to see it improve.

So I would respectfully submit, Mr. Chair, that before going one second further we move this meeting into a public meeting and open it up. I think the délicatesse around Madame Gélinas is fine; we can deal with that. But I think we should now not circumscribe the debate and open it up to the public.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. McGuinty, I tend to agree with you. I think Mr. Bigras was in fact trying to broaden that debate that we're going to have, and that the Auditor General has asked us to have, about the position, about the reporting, and so on.

I would just hear Ms. Fraser first.

[Sheila Fraser]

Mr. Chair, I would just like to say that I would very much like to come back and discuss this with the committee. We would like to get a sense of whether this is an issue for the committee or not. But if I could just ask that we do this after the announcement comes out about the review, because the departure of Johanne is in fact giving us.... We're sort of saying that this is an opportunity for us to look at all of this. I would be a little uncomfortable talking about the review that hasn't been announced right at this moment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Yes, Mr. Regan.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Forgive me for my lack of clarity on this, but perhaps you could, if you don't mind, tell us why you made the decision to have the announcement after this meeting rather than before. We started at 11. Maybe there are good reasons for it, but I don't see why the announcement couldn't have been at 10, and then you could have come here and talked about the issue.

You're willing to come back, and I hear that, so that's critical, obviously. It's just that it seems a strange process, and we'll have the media asking questions about what the heck this is about.

[Sheila Fraser]

If members would rather.... We have always gone on the principle that we should always inform parliamentarians before we inform the general public and the media. We would never send out something to the media if we haven't informed parliamentarians first.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Yes. I suppose one alternative would have been to announce it here. It happens sometimes. Ministers do that. Other people do that sometimes. That would have been an alternative, and that would then allow us to immediately proceed to a discussion. What Mr. Godfrey asked for was a discussion about the structure, not the individuals. But since there is an announcement, I do appreciate being advised in advance of the announcement. That, I understand. However, the desire was to get to a discussion in public about the reporting structure.