Information & Ethics Committee on June 17th, 2010

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

The time commitment that we asked of him...?

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

The time commitment that he offered.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

The committee passed a motion: one hour on access, one hour on privacy. He accepted the date of the seventeenth and I have received no further communication in writing from the minister--

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

I think he indicated he was available for one hour.

[A voice]

One hour.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Not to me.

In any event--

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I think we're just about there, aren't we, Mr. Chair, because...?

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

We are.

You're familiar with the drill at committees. We're just into the second round, and I think there are three more people. I think we could probably get through it.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Yes, fair enough.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

We have other work to do as well.

Is that okay with you, Minister?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Mr. Rickford, please.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

I appreciate you coming here today and making some comments about the rich British traditions. The Liberals actually do have one. It's called the House of Lancaster; it's not really the House of Commons. That's I guess where they carry out a lot of their ministerial level affairs--

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

It is funny.

In any event, Minister, I think our work so far on access to information and on the act is solid. I know that the Federal Accountability Act sought to make further improvements to access to information. It seems to me that there are some residual issues with respect to access to information that are not included substantively by the FAA, I'll call it.

If I understand it correctly, it's because these issues have some degree of complexity. They require further analysis. You mentioned earlier the importance of discussion and consultation with stakeholders before anything is really implemented. I believe these issues were laid out in the discussion paper by your predecessor, in April 2006. We've heard some reference to that today.

Since then, you've asked this committee to delve into these issues and present their findings to the government. I wonder if you'd take a few minutes to tell us why you think it would be valuable for the committee to study the issues raised in that paper.

Thank you, Minister.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

I'm a big fan of parliamentary committees and I'm a big fan of the work they do. I've been a member of 35 legislative committees and five national investigations and reports with respect to various topics. Again, I find this very useful.

I've made the point that I was a big supporter of the Federal Accountability Act. It was a tremendous improvement on the whole question of access to information. Again, to move forward, I think it would be very helpful and very instructive for this committee to bring stakeholders forward.

In answer to Ms. Block, I'd be pleased to forward the names of a number of organizations to make those available to you, if that's of interest.

Thank you very much.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Okay.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Paul Szabo]

Madame Freeman, s'il vous plaît.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Here is my first question for the Minister of Justice: Do you consider yourself above the law?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Well, I do my best, Madame Freeman. I can tell you that I have several thousand lawyers who assist me on a regular basis, so I get quite a bit of good advice.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

Thank you.

I have a second question for you.

Many lawyers are helping you. Could you provide us with a legal opinion contradicting that of the Law Clerk, Mr. Walsh, who contends that staffers must present themselves when subpoenaed to appear? Can you provide us with a document or a legal opinion issued by your thousands and thousands of lawyers that could prove to us otherwise?

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Madame Freeman, I'm quite familiar with the concept of ministerial responsibility, as per my answer to my question from Mr. Easter.

With respect to political accountability, I believe that rests with the ministers of the crown.

With respect to any technical questions, as you probably are aware from when I have appeared before this committee and, for the most part, before the justice committee, I do have lawyers who advise me with respect to the technical aspects.

So I think on both counts, if there's something, I think we're covered.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

I simply wanted to know if you can provide us with a legal opinion contradicting the opinion Mr. Walsh issued at Tuesday's committee meeting.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

You had the statement by Mr. Hill, who, as the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, I think was very clear, very comprehensive. As the chief legal officer of the Government of Canada, I can tell you that I think he clearly set out the doctrine of cabinet responsibility.

[Carole Freeman, Bloc, Châteauguay—Saint-Constant, QC]

The issue here is not ministerial power; we are talking about the constitutional power committees have to subpoena witnesses to appear. Have you received a legal opinion that is contrary to the one we received about constitutional and not ministerial power? Would you be able to issue a contrary legal opinion, Mr. Minister?