Evidence of meeting #14 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was budget.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
You said you had to hire outside counsel for various opinions, one presumes, in the growing pains of the office to determine what the legalities were. Putting those aside, out of the seven cases, how many times did you retain outside counsel insofar as it pertained to the case, as opposed to general questions of authority?
3:45 p.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Ethics Commissioner
I don't have that answer. On our website we list the contracts we issued for each legal firm. I wasn't prepared for that question.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
You can't possibly anticipate what everybody is going to ask. I fully understand that. Just provide that information to us. Just tell us, out of the seven cases, you hired outside law firms on however many it was.
Madame Lavallée.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
I'm going to ask the first question.
Good afternoon, Mr. Shapiro. If I understand correctly, your 2005-2006 budget totalled $4.6 million, and you're now asking that it be increased to $5 million, which represents an increase of approximately 10%.
I've only been sitting on this committee for a short time; so I haven't had the opportunity to absorb all the necessary information. Correct me if I'm wrong, but, from what I understood, this committee prepared a report a year and a half ago on the new funding mechanism for officers of Parliament. I believe that mechanism was not yet really implemented. Is that correct?
3:45 p.m.
Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Ethics Commissioner
I think that's right in the sense that what is happening at the moment is a pilot project. It's a two-year pilot project, which has been launched as a result of this committee's report about how the budget should be handled. So it's not in full operation, but it is in operation. The pilot project is ongoing. My office has not participated in that project. As some people have suggested, I did not decline to participate. As I said in my opening remarks, if the panel wishes to review this, that's quite fine with me.
What I have to do, I think, is maintain the integrity of the legislation under which I operate, which does not provide for a role for Treasury Board, as it does for many other parts of the government, obviously. So I'm quite happy to appear in front of any panel that the Speaker decides is appropriate for me to go to, including the one we're talking about. They haven't asked, and I haven't declined.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
In short, the budget you're presenting hasn't been reviewed by anyone. Is that correct?
3:45 p.m.
Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Ethics Commissioner
That's right. The only person who has reviewed it that I would know of is the Speaker. It is our obligation, according to the legislation, to present this to the Speaker. He can seek advice from whomever he wishes, have it reviewed by whomever he wishes, and then forward his decision to Treasury Board.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
So you have an important responsibility, to request reasonable increases. In your office, you've no doubt implemented mechanisms permitting self-criticism in this regard, haven't you?
3:50 p.m.
Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Ethics Commissioner
That's correct. We try to proceed in two different ways. One, of course, is the standard way. Our financial statements are, of course, audited by an outside party every year. But more importantly, since we're not part of the Auditor General's responsibility, so to speak, we undertook to have an operational review of the entire office. This was at the suggestion of the Auditor General, whom I asked for some advice on the matter. We did contract with an outside group to review all the operational processes within the office to make sure we were operating on a relatively efficient basis and that we're not spending money inappropriately.
That operational review has been completed; it was completed some months ago. It was quite a positive review, but we're in the midst, at the moment, of implementing some of the recommendations that these people made so as to make the operation as efficient as possible.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Carole Lavallée Bloc Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC
You've obtained the Auditor General's opinion on the mechanisms you've implemented. What about your budgets?
I imagine, for example, that the first version of your budget must have totalled a little more than $5 million. What are you doing to discipline yourself, to criticize yourself? What helps you do that?
3:50 p.m.
Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Ethics Commissioner
We do that internally. We have all kinds of internal procedures for looking at what we think we need, and so on. I felt, quite frankly, that the funds that we had last year were fully adequate for our needs. They were exactly adequate, as far as I could tell, and so I began the budget preparation by assuming that there ought to be no increases. We've reached a stable amount, let's just stick with it, and let's not look for additional ways to spend money.
The only difference came in terms of our memoranda of understanding with the House of Commons and the Library of Parliament. We decided at the very beginning that we would not try to replicate all these special services inside our own office. We felt that it would be inefficient and inappropriate to do that, and so we contract with the House of Commons in one case and the Library of Parliament in the other to provide special services for us. There has been an increase in the cost of those services, and that is the only increase contained in the budget that we've brought forward. Those services, incidentally, have been excellent. We are very satisfied, and we feel we've made a very good choice in that regard.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Thank you.
Dr. Shapiro, the estimates that you provided to us basically consist of two lines: program expenditures and contributions to employment benefit plans.
3:50 p.m.
Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Ethics Commissioner
I'm not sure what you're referring to.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Well, I don't know, someone put a piece of paper in front of me some time ago that said those are your estimates: $4.486 million for program expenditures and $565,000 for contributions to employee benefit plans.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Tom Wappel
Mr. Tilson, there's also something that was included in the package today.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
I haven't even looked at that. I got it as the meeting was started. I haven't had a chance to look at it.
I am going somewhere on this, Mr. Chairman, if you'll just bear with me.
3:50 p.m.
Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Ethics Commissioner
We're trying to figure out which document you're referring to.
