Information & Ethics Committee on May 5th, 2016

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

We cooperate fully with the Ethics Commissioner, with Ms. Dawson's office. For those of us who have been members of Parliament before, we all work with her and her office on an ongoing basis as ministers, and previously as members of Parliament, and we will continue to do so.

I want to ensure that she—

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

The point is, though, that she can't verify that you are cooperating, particularly where it comes to the Minister of Justice and her husband. It seems to be a direct conflict of interest, but the Ethics Commissioner does not have access to the documents to be able to verify that.

That's where I'm hoping you will be able to provide a yes or no answer, which would be great, on whether that would be something you would be open to.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I'm absolutely open to providing a yes or no answer if you ask me a yes or no question, but you're asking a pretty complex question. It's my view and my understanding that all ministers of our government have engaged fully and honestly with the Ethics Commissioner, and take very seriously her recommendations and any approach to ensure there's no conflict.

Anything we can do to strengthen it, we're open to that. Our ministers take that responsibility very seriously.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

I guess that's a roundabout yes, perhaps.

Just quickly, yes or no, would you be open to the Ethics Commissioner having access to cabinet confidential documents when it pertains to instances like the justice minister and her husband?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Well, even in Sweden's example there are cabinet confidences that are protected around certain measures. Take a justice minister as an example. In her work, she would have.... A cabinet deals with public security, national security, financial policy, which is government or cabinet broadly, supervisory activities, public authorities. This is from Sweden, Mr. Jeneroux.

What I'm saying is that there are—

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

But we have a specific example that I'm pointing out, with her husband being in conflict of interest with the justice minister.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I'm not being argumentative, but I don't believe the commissioner has said that. In fact, I'm certain she hasn't said that there is.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

She can't verify it; that's the point. She can't verify it through the cabinet confidential documents. You know this, Minister. I was hoping to get a yes or no answer; however, it doesn't seem that you're open to that today.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I can assure you that the Minister of Justice is somebody of the highest ethical standard, and I feel very strongly about that.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

We would love to verify that as well.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

That is consistent with the Ethics Commissioner's opinion that in fact there's not a conflict here—

[The Chair, Conservative, Blaine Calkins]

I think we've exhausted this—

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

—but I appreciate that very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blaine Calkins]

Thank you, Mr. Jeneroux.

Ms. Murray, welcome to the committee.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to join in this discussion.

I want to talk a bit more about the culture of secrecy, because that seems to be a key thing that has come up at this committee. I acknowledge that I'm here as a visitor and so haven't been part of your previous discussions.

One of the members talked about information systems and the difficulty of organizing information. I think it was Mr. Massé. I just wanted to note, with the report of the Auditor General this week, that in his remarks to the public accounts committee that was certainly a theme: that data is not being used effectively. I think that is a challenge.

What I wanted to bring forward is the idea of risk aversion as being one of the bases for the culture of secrecy. Risk aversion is a long-term aspect both of the political side, but I think also of the bureaucracy side. I think that is directly connected.

Minister, you're working on public service renewal. One thing you've talked about is that you want to get young people into the public service. In terms of public service renewal, there has also been discussion about having a culture in which it's okay to fail or to try something that doesn't work. I want to ask you what your thoughts are about how these things connect: enabling the public service to take risks without there being terrible consequences, and then how that might connect with the idea of a culture of secrecy.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Thank you, Joyce.

Joyce and I first met when she was a cabinet minister in B.C. and I was Minister of Public Works. We were dealing with issues of shared services between the federal and provincial government—that was back around 2005, I believe—and she brings with her that experience.

We need to renew our public service. We have a first-class public service. One thing is that the average age of new hires within the public service now is 37, which would seem ancient to Mr. Lightbound over there. Millennials represent the most digitally connected generation in the history of Canada, but also the most educated and informed, and we need to find ways to attract them. They want to know that they can make a difference, and the only way you can make a difference is if you can try new things. The problem is that if you try new things, some of those things won't work out, and if you create a culture of fear in the public service that if you try something that fails you're going to be in trouble, that cover-your-butt kind of culture is anathema to innovation.

We have to create a culture of intelligent risk-taking within the public service enabling some level of entrepreneurialism within it. Mr. Long has been an entrepreneur. I don't see any reason why the best instincts of entrepreneurs cannot be harnessed in government, in both politics and the public service. We want to do that.

That's why I've been totally transparent this morning, saying that as we do these things we will err sometimes and will try something that doesn't work, or we may find that something we hadn't thought about makes a lot of sense. We can hear from you and others. We really want to do that.

For young people who want to make a difference, public service still represents one of the best places to do it, in the government as a public servant, in politics—and in opposition as well as in government. Don't take for granted for one moment the opportunity, the privilege you have to make a difference, wherever you sit in the House of Commons. There is no bad seat in the House of Commons.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blaine Calkins]

Agreed.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

There's no place from which you can't make a difference.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blaine Calkins]

Committees do look better from the chair, that's for sure.

Thank you, Ms. Murray

We're going to move on quickly to Mr. Saini.

[Raj Saini, Liberal, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I have one question for you Minister. We're investing a lot of time and energy into coming up with a framework we believe would satisfy government and the public. My only worry is, how are we going to disseminate this information to the public, and how are we going to educate the public as to what we're doing, the rights and obligations, or the rights they have and the obligations we have?

How do we disseminate this information so the work we've done here doesn't stay in a bubble or doesn't stay located to certain privileged access, or to certain institutions or people? How do you feel the education rollout should happen? Should it happen from the commissioner? Should it happen from the government? Should it be a hybrid model? All this work is being done for the benefit of Canadians. How do we make sure they receive that benefit?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

That's a great question. It's one I have not thought of before. Part of it will happen organically because when you make an announcement it gets carried. There will be stories on it. News will carry on that. You make a good point. To what extent should we proactively promote these changes? I'd be interested in the committee's view on that. The one thing about social media is that the ability to do that cost effectively is significant through social media. We do want to get the word out about these changes, so that people are aware of them.

My initial thought would be some of it happens organically, but I think we need a proactive approach, particularly in terms of social media making people aware of it and being able to participate in it. Your point is quite good. People who may never have thought of seeking this information may think of it as important, as opposed to the people who think all the time about this, and are the only group of people who are the stakeholders and who are aware of it. I haven't thought it through, but maybe part of your report could be on how we could disseminate some of the information.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blaine Calkins]

We have just a minute left. If colleagues don't mind, I have a quick question for you, Mr. Brison, dealing with frivolous and vexatious requests. Part of this deals with an issue I dealt with when I was a member of this committee years ago in a previous Parliament, and it involves Mr. Drapeau, who was also a witness, where a crown corporation, namely the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, would hide behind a clause concerning journalistic integrity and not provide information many people thought was sufficient.

Frivolous and vexatious would in my mind impugn the motives of the person who was asking the question, and I think we need to be careful about these things. I don't disagree that it happens. Common sense would often tell you when something is being frivolous and vexatious, but how do we quantify that in language so we get clear instructions and directions to those who would be administering those policies?

I would be curious if you, sir, had any thoughts on the recommendations from the commissioner who talked about having more access to information in our crown corporations and not necessarily directly government departments? I know she has some recommendations there, and I think the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation would fit into that. Do you have any comments, sir?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I think for any agency of government, whether it's a department, an agency, or a crown corporation, the transparency bus has left the station. These changes we make as a government in terms of overarching policy will affect everyone and will have an impact. I think for all intents and purposes, the demands for more information from all agencies associated with the crown will grow. You can't make these kinds of changes without it affecting crown corporations at some level.

We will work with the information commissioner, and we will work with crown agencies. That includes everything. That includes port authorities, as an example, or airport authorities. Anywhere you are managing public assets, or expending tax dollars, there will be some level of .... Anyone who says to me the reasons .... You had better have some reasons, whether it's national security, or privacy, or something. There are compelling reasons, let's be clear, but they had better be compelling.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blaine Calkins]

I agree. Thank you very much for that answer.

Just as a matter of curiosity, there are three members of Parliament at this table today, who were born after Access to Information. Sir, you are going to be having a birthday in the very near future, I won't name the date, but I wish you many happy returns, I've calculated your age both on the Gregorian calendar and on the after Lightbound calendar. I won't say what that number is, but we wish you a very happy birthday.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Thank you.