Information & Ethics Committee on Dec. 13th, 2011

[Karen Shepherd]

If there is a breach of the act, I am required to suspend or refer it to the RCMP. What I've said is that in some cases lesser transgressions, such as late filings or where they forgot to list a beneficiary, are breaches of the act, but they do not warrant going to the RCMP, which is why I've been educating and monitoring them. And we have been monitoring, following up.

[Brad Butt, Conservative, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Right now, are you and your staff already making a predetermined judgment on what you believe is a significant criminal offence under the act, versus something that would be more administrative, i.e. a late filing of this monthly report?

I'm trying to come to terms with criminal versus administrative and whether the act currently defines those, or whether everything is lumped into being a criminal offence, even if it is extremely minor.

[Karen Shepherd]

Right now all breaches of the act would be referrals to the RCMP. What I am looking at are some of these late filings or lesser transgressions. Anything where they have not registered, those are filed, for whatever reason, because they were for a consultant organizing a meeting, communicating, arranging activities. It's the same thing where I found with the in-house...they were clearly lobbying to get a financial benefit. And that took place yesterday.

Those are examples of where I am referring those to the RCMP. There's a range of transgressions, which is why the administrative monitoring penalty would help bridge the gap and have different penalties for different options along the continuum.

[Brad Butt, Conservative, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

If the act was amended and it provided for these levels of violations or charges under the act for non-compliance or for doing something inappropriate, do you really think that your department internally is the right place to be the judge, jury, and executioner, for lack of a better way of putting it? I know that sounds a little harsh, but rather than you making a recommendation, perhaps having an independent third party, a tribunal or some other monitor that could look at all of the evidence that's being presented...?

One would assume the accused would want their day in court, so to speak, to say this is exactly what happened, this is the situation, rather than you—and I'm not questioning your judgment, or your staff, as I think you're all very professional people. But I am concerned about due process to some degree and people being falsely accused or falsely charged, or information not being fully accurate.

Would an independent body to which, other than the RCMP, you may refer a significant criminal charge to...? Would it not be helpful to have some independent tribunal that you could refer cases to, that they could properly adjudicate in a neutral, unbiased kind of way?

[Karen Shepherd]

Right now, when I'm looking at the act, and due process is part of my concern as well in terms of putting a mechanism in place, I do feel that, as you said, the expertise or the professional...the best one to understand what's going on in terms of the act and whether a breach has occurred. I would not see anything changing from what happens in my office now, where a thorough process would be fulfilled. There would be sufficient information to look at, to see whether all of the facts are there in order to determine whether there was a breach of the act or perhaps the code, depending on whether the penalties were given.

So that concern for me would be taken care of in that way. As with the reports to Parliament, the act requires that I give them reasonable opportunity to present their views. What I have done in that process, which I think is the best method, is to actually give them the investigation directorate's report that I received. So they have full information and they have 30 days to respond. Those who have asked for it have been granted exceptions. So they would see where I'm going and have the ability to comment on...maybe it's a first-time offence and the fine should be lower. I could see that working that way.

All of my decisions are judicially reviewable. So there is a body, without creating more bureaucracy, in terms of where this would go.

[Brad Butt, Conservative, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

There's an appeal mechanism, in essence.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Mr. Butt, you're well out of time.

[Brad Butt, Conservative, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Thank you.

Just on that note, it would be an interesting question to pose to some of the other jurisdictions that are coming before us. In places like Alberta, where the commissioner does have an administrative remedy, there is a judicial process that can be invoked.

I want to thank all of the committee members and especially the commissioner and her staff. I think this was a very useful discussion and I want to thank everybody for their participation today.

This is our last meeting until we come back at the end of January. The clerk is well on the way to scheduling the witnesses the committee had approved, so I think we'll continue this very interesting discussion.

I just want to wish everybody the best of the season and safe travels to your respective homes.

Thank you very much. The meeting is adjourned.