Information & Ethics Committee on May 1st, 2018

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you for that.

In the previous Parliament, I was sometimes unpopular with my colleagues because I was always in caucus reminding them that it's not just the letter, it's the spirit.

To that end, one of the discussions we had with Ms. Dawson many, many times was on how you influence a politician. She was very much interested in gifts. I said that when a purple blanket from the Insurance Brokers of Canada has been left, I don't even notice it's in the room. That's not influencing me. However, the potential for a lobbyist to hold a fundraiser for me could influence me. The interpretation was always, well, that's not a direct benefit. In the world of politics, if someone is holding a fundraiser for your riding association, to me that's always been a direct benefit.

The office never set out rules. Ms. Dawson always talked about dealing with it, but we never got there. Are you looking at issues like how to determine fundraising events in a fair way, so that we can have clear rules?

[Mario Dion]

You'll see in our annual report that we will have a graph showing the interest in gifts. We had 2,800 requests for advice, and I think 400 of those were related to gifts. The subject of gifts has a high area of interest.

The guidelines we currently have are pretty long and cumbersome. I intend in the coming months to review them carefully to give as clear and concise advice as possible. It has to be based on the act, obviously, and the code. It has to be accurate. I'm trying to make them a little more user-friendly and, to the extent that I can, give indication in advance of how clearly the office will interpret a situation such as the one you've raised.

It would be useful if members or the committee could draw up a list of the most common occurrences where it would be important for MPs to get clear direction, what is in and what is out under the code.

When we talk about MPs, we talk about the code. The act is not applicable to MPs. Members of the government, of course, parliamentary secretaries and ministers, are governed by both the code and the act. However, as far as MPs are concerned, if I knew precisely, I would have a better sense of the most commonly arising situations where it's not clear to MPs.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

On the issue of fundraising—and we talked about this with your predecessor—someone who may like my political position on say, telecoms, might buy a ticket to my fundraiser. I didn't sell them the ticket, but they buy a ticket to the fundraiser. That's an open event; they can do that. There's a difference when someone who is trying to lobby for a licence hosts a fundraiser for you. To me, that would be fairly clear.

We had issues where the Commissioner of Lobbying felt there was a very clear breach, but the Ethics Commissioner felt it was not quite as clear. When you talk about an MOU with the lobbying commissioner, are we going to try to move towards a common understanding of apparent conflicts and direct conflicts, so that the lobbying commissioner is not going after the lobbyist while the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner is saying, “Well, I don't know, it's a grey area”?

[Mario Dion]

To the extent it's possible. We're both independent, of course. We have started to talk. We've had several meetings already.

I'm in charge of interpreting the code; she's in charge of interpreting the Lobbying Act. Nothing in the act prohibits us from talking. If we can agree on a set of common rulings, I think it would be in the best interest of everyone. We'll work on that.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I noticed in one of the—

[Mario Dion]

We may have some disagreements, as well, profound disagreements.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

That's perfectly fair.

Again, I think parliamentarians want a general set of rules, because we all want a fair playing field.

In the previous Parliament, the Ethics Commissioner was bound—and still is, I believe—to suspend investigations if the RCMP opts to investigate.

[Mario Dion]

Or any police force, for that matter.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Very rarely do the RCMP or police actually follow through, so investigations are suspended. In the case of Nigel Wright, it went on and on.

[Mario Dion]

It's still suspended. In fact, it's been reactivated recently with the Supreme Court of Canada's decision, and we have so informed Mr. Carson.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Okay.

Would you feel it better if you still had the ability to continue an investigation so that you could report to Parliament? Do we have to define terms on when.... If a police investigation doesn't follow through, should we be able to get a report, within a timely manner so that it matters to parliamentarians?

[Mario Dion]

I may be wrong, Mr. Angus and Mr. Chair, but based on what I've read in the past—I've always paid attention to this area of practice, even though I was not in charge of it—it's a rare situation. It's important, but if you look at all of the situations, it's a small minority. I think it's true that in most subject areas, that's the practice: to stop everything if the police get engaged in something, until such time as the police have disposed of the matter. I think it's prudent to do that.

There could be more direction in the act, or the code, as to when or how quickly you resume afterwards. That would be fine with me. There's currently no such provisions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

Thank you, Mr. Angus.

Next up is Monsieur Picard. You have seven minutes.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Welcome back, Mr. Dion.

Good morning, Ms. Tremblay.

Before I start, I'd like to make a brief comment.

Allow me to say that your work does not only serve to maintain the integrity of the institution and of the elected officials who work there. More importantly, its goal is to ensure that the general population regains confidence in this important institution and that it loses its cynicism towards it. Ethics will increasingly become one of the elements that the public will take into consideration to assess the quality of its representatives.

I have a few questions for you.

First of all, are the sanctions that you apply monetary in essence?

[Mario Dion]

They are exclusively monetary and only cover a very restricted territory.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Do you think it's suitable?

[Mario Dion]

At the moment, the only thing for which we have the authority to impose sanctions is the failure to meet the required deadlines.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Are you considering different types of sanctions? Money is the sinews of war, but it might be different when it comes to ethics.

[Mario Dion]

When I came here on the 8^th of February, this was one of the issues raised. I believe it would be a good idea to consider the possibility of giving the Commissioner the authority to recommend other types of sanctions in the case of parliamentarians. As for people governed by the Act, the Commissioner could have the direct authority to impose a penalty. I think it would give teeth to the regime. Obviously, it'll be for Parliament to decide whether it is desirable to do so.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

The fact that we're governed by the Code instead of the Act takes a bit of the enforcement power away from you, doesn't it?

[Mario Dion]

Yes, and it's precisely because of parliamentary privilege. Parliament regulates internally.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

As for the sharing of information using new multimedia tools, the problem might not be to provide them to clients, but to make sure that clients take part in the process and use these tools to be better informed.

When developing your techniques, have you considered measures not to control, but rather to record participation? You said that people would act in full knowledge of the facts. Noone should ignore the law, but does not being aware of a measure constitute a...

[Mario Dion]

This can clearly not constitute a defence.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

This is not a defence. However, when a person is in doubt, a lack of knowledge or misinformation can result in a bad interpretation.

How do we ensure that a person acts in full knowledge of the facts?

[Mario Dion]

The Code distinguishes between the sanctions that can be imposed, depending on the degree of knowledge or oversight, and it contains a clause that governs MPs in that regard.

I simply haven't thought about this, but I believe that it would be difficult to have a regime that would allow us to know which MPs have seen such and such vignette on a given topic. As for training, we don't want to institute a police state. It should rather be voluntary. During the legislative reform of the Code, the issue of making certain training courses compulsory could be raised. It could be possible, but it would have to be imposed by your peers and not by me.