Information & Ethics Committee on Feb. 7th, 2012

[François Casgrain]

That’s right, if we want to respect the spirit of the provision. The provision refers to principles and it is important to see whether those principles are respected beyond the strict standards. It is often difficult to have standards, since we seem to tell ourselves that, if we comply with the standards, we are doing well. We are talking about making a distinction between ethics and conduct. When we talk about a code of ethics and a code of conduct, the code of conduct sets out standards, but beyond standards, there are values and principles that we need to uphold. It is important to be able to go beyond mere standards. Sometimes, they are also difficult to establish.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

If I am not mistaken...

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Mr. Dusseault, you only have 30 seconds.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

To conclude, Ms. Denham, if I am not mistaken, you said that every partisan activity must be reported. That is what I understood from your comment earlier. Is that correct?

[Elizabeth Denham]

No, I didn't say that. I was making a suggestion in terms of the federal issue around rule 8 of the code of conduct, suggesting that a modest transparency requirement may address some of that problem. But there is no code of conduct in the B.C. law. We don't regulate political activities.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Great. Thank you very much.

Mr. Butt, for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you all for being here. We appreciate your input today.

I think all of you have indicated that you think it would be beneficial for the federal lobbying commissioner to be able to have some sort of administrative penalty or fine. I guess my concern about that might be that unless it's done properly—maybe you can give me some advice on this—what would you see as an appeal process of that? What would you see as making sure that the individual who has now been fined by the commissioner has some fairness of an appeal mechanism? I don't know if any of your provinces have a system like that right now. Maybe you can share that if you do. If you don't, do you have any suggestions for us as to what we might do to ensure we have due process?

I don't know who wants to start.

[Bradley Odsen]

In Alberta, it's specified in the legislation that upon the issuance of a notice of administrative penalty, the party receiving the notice has 30 days within which to file an application in the Court of Queen's Bench. The court can review the amount or indeed whether it was even appropriate to have issued an administrative penalty. The appeal is directly into the courts.

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

Okay, very good.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Ms. Morrison.

[Lynn Morrison]

In Ontario we don't have the ability to issue those penalties. It is something we're looking at, and what the appeal mechanism would be is not determined yet.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Monsieur Casgrain.

[François Casgrain]

In Quebec, we don’t have administrative penalties, although the lobbyist commissioner has made a suggestion to have administrative penalties for very specific offences. Not all offences would necessarily be subject to administrative penalties with opportunity to appeal, since that is already the way it works with the commissioner’s power to impose disciplinary measures.

At the moment, disciplinary measures could be imposed on a lobbyist who has gravely or repeatedly breached the provisions under the act. We have used this power before. We first have to give the lobbyist a notice of intent, with an opportunity to make comments. It has been the case that the comments have made the commissioner back off. If there are no comments, the commissioner may decide to impose measures, which could be appealed before the Court of Quebec within 30 days.

In my opinion, we can have mechanisms in place to establish security indicators for those likely to be penalized.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Ms. Denham.

[Elizabeth Denham]

Madam Chair, in British Columbia, like Alberta, there is a requirement in our legislation that there be a reconsideration. Also, after the reconsideration the decisions are subject to judicial review.

I've also structured my office in such a way that I am the registrar, so I am the reconsiderer. I am the appeal body, and it's my deputy registrar who carries out the investigation and makes the findings and makes the recommendation for the administrative monetary penalty. So I've structured my office that way for a reason, and it also allows a fair process, appeal, and then decision subject to judicial review.

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

Here is my last question, just quickly, because I know we're running out of time.

We've had other witnesses come before the committee and indicate that they didn't even know they were under investigation, or their lobbying firm was under investigation, until they got a letter three or four years later saying the case had been closed. How do you notify, or do you notify, individuals or companies that are under investigation by your office? How would somebody know, in whatever province, that a complaint had been lodged against them, you are launching an investigation and conducting one, and you would obviously be back to them when some conclusions are reached or when you need to interview them to get their side of the story or whatever? What process do you use?

I know that in Ontario I don't think you have investigative powers, but maybe the other provinces that do perhaps could answer that.

[Bradley Odsen]

We have the same provisions in the Alberta legislation as there is in the federal legislation with respect to confidentiality and privacy. So we are faced with much the same kind of an issue with respect to that.

We've only had three instances when there has been a request for an investigation, and in two of those instances we conducted the investigation. The third instance is private, and that's the way it's treated with everybody.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Ms. Morrison.

[Lynn Morrison]

You're right that I don't have any investigation powers, but we do receive complaints, and we have established a process where I will notify the alleged lobbyists. I will try to educate them as to what the rules are, as well as the complainants. However, whatever the alleged lobbyist comes back to us with does not go to the one who lodged the complaint. We hope that the education process encourages the registration, but that's as far as we can go.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

We are out of time, but I'm going to allow Monsieur Casgrain and Ms. Denham a brief response.

[François Casgrain]

We won’t necessarily notify the people who have been reported. But during audits, we are going to have all the latitude we need to be able to find or provide the evidence. However, quite often, they are aware of this and we are called to meet with them directly. So very seldom are complainants not aware that we are conducting an audit or an investigation. We will carry out an investigation only in very rare cases.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Ms. Denham.

[Elizabeth Denham]

Our law says that the lobbyist must be notified and have a chance to respond before any penalty or any finding is made.

[The Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Great.

Before we close, Mr. Fedorak, you mentioned you could provide the clerk with a copy of the B.C. compliance document. That's great. We'll get that translated for members.

I want to thank the commissioners and staff who have come before the committee today. I think your testimony will be invaluable for the committee as they're continuing with the statutory review of the Lobbying Act.

Thank you very much, committee members.

The meeting is adjourned.