Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2010

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

I think the conversation we had last week led to an overall concern that officers of Parliament report to Parliament, but there seems to be a problem with understanding what parliamentary privilege means in terms of how we can do our job in having them report to us when they come before us and can't tell us the whole story. I think that is for all of the commissioners. And I do believe that the legal counsel to the House of Commons....

I believe this committee needs to look at the framework across government institutions for the fact that officers of Parliament have to report to Parliament but then get to decide which bits of information they give parliamentarians, and how we can do our job if when they come they apologize and say they can't tell.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Ms. Bennett, you're correct. I'm not totally clear that it relates to the schedule there, but you're right.

Just to keep you up to date, based upon our difficulty with the lobbying commissioner, I did give you what my interpretation of the law of Parliament was at the hearing. I did subsequently write the parliamentary counsel, Mr. Rob Walsh. I got his letter earlier today. It wasn't in both official languages; he expects the French translation to come tomorrow. It will be circulated to the committee members tomorrow. It basically confirms that Parliament has the right--and we've been over this before--to ask these questions and get answers, and the commissioners cannot come to the committee saying their act says this so they can't say anything. That's not the law at all. But that has to be balanced with what's in the public interest and that has to be dealt with by this committee. I don't know if it really behoves us to get into the whole thing right now.

Mr. Albrecht.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Chair, I disagree. They did not say they wouldn't be able to divulge. They couldn't divulge during the time the investigation was going on, and the problem this committee is getting into over and over again is that we want to do the investigations instead of letting the lobbying commissioner, the ethics commissioner, the information commissioner do their job. That's their job, and if we're going to do all of their jobs, then we might as well sit for 24 hours a day and let them go.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

I don't disagree with you. It's not our job to investigate any--

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

But that's what Ms. Bennett was asking for in the last meeting.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Chair, in the College of Physicians and Surgeons, the college has to divulge the investigations that are ongoing, anonymized. If it is found to be of no merit, it stays undisclosed. If there's bound to be a problem, then you disclose the name.

I guess I would wonder whether Mr. Walsh would come and give us a bit of a tutorial on this in terms of his interpretation so we aren't spinning around trying to do an investigation. I don't think that's our intent, but I think it would be clearer if there were guidelines for all officers of Parliament as to what they can and cannot tell parliamentary committees.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

I think we're actually getting ahead of ourselves here. I have the opinion. I will circulate that tomorrow and we can have this discussion later on.

I don't think there's any disagreement. It's not our job to investigate the matter. We have to be very careful. There are innocent reputations. In fact, just because someone has complained about someone else, that doesn't give us the right as members of Parliament to broadcast it in the media or to go over it at a parliamentary committee.

On the other hand, we have a situation with the lobbying commissioner. She is coming to the committee and saying she's not going to reveal any investigations, she's not going to reveal anything about any investigations as she answered to Madame Freeman. And then she said if there are any violations, she reports them to the RCMP. To me, there is a bit of a problem there, but again, that's something for the committee to discuss at a future date.

So the chair would entertain a motion to approve the minutes as circulated.

A question, Ms. Davidson?

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Yes. Did you say that on Thursday we were only having Google for one hour?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

One hour, yes, and that's a change from this morning, yes.

[Patricia Davidson, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Okay.

I'll move that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Approval of the minutes has been moved.

(Motion agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

There is no further business.

The meeting is adjourned.