Evidence of meeting #9 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was code.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
There's no formal thing called a referral.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Either way.... But if information of any kind comes to your office that gives you reasonable grounds, you are automatically in a state of examination.
12:10 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
No, only if there's been a request.
Okay, if a member formally submits a request and there are reasonable grounds underpinning that request, examination is automatic. If I notice something in the newspaper, or if somebody sends me a letter and it's not a request, I'll look at it and think about it.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
12:10 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
If in the final analysis I'm satisfied there are reasonable grounds, I would proceed to a self-initiated examination if nobody has sent in a request.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Okay. We're travelling a long distance to get to the same place. The point is that regardless of how you get the information, if you believe that it gives you reasonable grounds, an investigation automatically follows. That's what I'm hearing from you.
12:10 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
No, it's not quite that way.
In one case, it happens like a flick of a switch because it's coming from a member. But if it hasn't come in from a member, it's up to me to decide whether.... It boils down to something very similar, but the thing is that I might want to take a week to think about whether the grounds are really reasonable. I guess it's the same in the case of a member, because I have to think about whether they're really reasonable. But the only thing that on the face of the act looks to be automatic occurs when a member brings it in.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
So the major distinction between the process resulting from a referral and from a request is that with a referral of information or some other transmission of information that is not in form of a formal request, the only difference is that you might take a little bit of extra time to think about it. But ultimately, if there are reasonable grounds, you then proceed with an examination. Is that the case?
12:15 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
It's a little bit more complicated in one way. It's the member.... The way this thing is drafted, it says “a member who has reasonable grounds to believe”. So it's the member's reasonable grounds, but—
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
That's under the request. I'm talking about referrals, though.
12:15 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
A referral is not an official thing of any kind; it's just some information I've received.
12:15 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
There's no reference to “referral” in this act.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
And I was going to raise that with you. I think all of the members have raised the same issue. “Referral” just happens to be—
12:15 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
It's a word.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
—a word. It's not mentioned in the act. A request is, and it has a special form. A referral could be any information that someone gives to you, and you may or may not do anything with it.
12:15 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's right.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
12:15 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Is there a difference—and please give me a little latitude, colleagues—in the activities that you would undertake in an inquiry versus an examination?
12:15 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
There is, just in the start-up. An inquiry doesn't start until I've gone through the 30-day period and the 15-day period. Under the act, there's no allowance—
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Okay, that's the “pre” thing. But in terms of the latitude and the scope of what you would do, it would be the same under both?
12:15 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
It's exactly the same.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Paul Szabo
Thank you.
Now, here is one last question, just for clarification: what did the Prime Minister send to you?
12:15 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
He sent me a letter.