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.
Noon
Bloc
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC
You say that there must be sufficient grounds in order to launch an investigation. All of these allegations we are hearing, do they not in themselves constitute sufficient grounds to investigate?
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I have the power to self-initiate. When and if I feel that I have reasonable grounds and that it's an appropriate time to proceed with something, I will do so. If I do it under the code, I still have to comply with the 30 days--the 15 days isn't relevant if I self-initiate. Under the act, I just have to be satisfied myself that I have reasonable grounds. But sometimes it takes more than overnight to decide that I have reasonable grounds.
April 22nd, 2010 / noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you for coming, Ms. Dawson, and for bringing your colleagues with you.
I appreciate that this is a difficult time for all of us, sorting through all these issues.
I know that in the past you told us that there is some confusion about your role and some misinformation in these kinds of situations, partly because of the title you have, which includes the word “ethics”. None of the backup to that includes that language. So I appreciate that it's sometimes confusing for all of us.
My questions, at least at the beginning, are related to the situation concerning Ms. Guergis. I just want to make clear that the Prime Minister didn't make an official complaint or request an investigation or an inquiry or an examination, either under the code or under the Conflict of Interest Act, to your office.
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's correct.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Your office posts on its website a form that helps people meet the requirements for making those kinds of complaints to your office.
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Yes, that's something we instituted quite recently, because we saw that they were coming in a form we couldn't accept.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
You make it easy, if somebody has a concern, to know what the requirements for making that kind of formal request are.
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's right.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
The Prime Minister never followed that or made a formal request.
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
No.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
That information, I believe, became public around April 15. A lot of us had felt that we'd been led to believe that some kind of official complaint had been made to your office. You pointed out that you received a complaint from Libby Davies, NDP House leader. I believe that went in on April 16. That was our response to the fact that we understood that there was no official complaint lodged with your office. Ms. Davies did write to you making an official complaint, specifically with regard to the letter Ms. Guergis wrote in support of Wright Tech, a company with which, it is alleged, her husband has had a business relationship.
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That was a new matter. That was not the same question.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Right. I understand. But you did get that letter, and you responded, saying that you were going to start the investigation. Let me get the language right here. It was the investigation process under the code. And that investigation is indeed under way. Is that right?
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Yes.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
You have an investigation under way under the code, and you have asked Ms. Guergis to respond to the allegation.
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
An investigation is always a difficult word, because people misunderstand when people say that I've started an investigation. It just means that internally, I am looking at it, but it's not an official inquiry under the code—it's always hard to remember which is which—until the proper procedures have been gone through.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
You have initiated the first procedure, which is asking Ms. Guergis to respond.
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's correct.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Okay, and she has 30 days to do that, starting on April 16 or thereabouts.
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's right. It is somewhere in there.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
At the same time you responded to Ms. Davies about her request, you said that you weren't able to conduct an examination under the Conflict of Interest Act, because you hadn't been “provided with any information indicating”--I'm quoting--“that Ms. Guergis was acting in her capacity as a Minister of State”. I gather that this is because the act deals with public office holders and their roles as ministers, ministers of state, parliamentary secretaries, and so on, but not specifically as MPs. Is that correct?
Noon
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's more or less correct, yes.
Noon
NDP
Bill Siksay NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Now, this is where I get a little confused. It strikes me that it must be difficult to sometimes recognize when a minister or minister of state is acting in his or her capacity as a minister, and in his or her capacity as a member of Parliament. I was wondering what guidelines you use to draw that distinction. I think it must be hard. Ministers don't necessarily go around and physically change hats, or change their business cards, I would suspect, or those kinds of things. So how do you draw that distinction between whether they're acting in their capacity as a member of Parliament or as a minister?
12:05 p.m.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
You're correct, it's not an easy decision. You'd have to look at all the surrounding circumstances.
Obviously, right off the top, if it's under ministerial letterhead, then you conclude she must be acting as a minister. In this case, it was on MP letterhead. Then you ask, did it have something to do with her portfolio? You look at the portfolio of the minister, and if it was energy, mines and resources or something, you'd question, “Does that matter have something to do with EM&R?” There are probably four or five other questions you'd ask. You wouldn't need to ask questions sometimes because you would look at the circumstances and figure it out.
Look at the converse. Imagine if every time a member who was a minister did something as a member, and members are allowed under the.... It's expressly written out that a minister can act and do things that a member would normally do for their constituents. There's a whole plethora of activities that MPs do all the time for their constituents. I would have to ask myself, is there something being done over and above what is the normal course of an MP's job that suggests that their role as a minister has been implicated? I look at that, and, again, you can't decide that overnight. You have to ask around, ask the person involved, think about it, and understand the circumstances.
