Evidence of meeting #31 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lobbyists.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's not true. None were adopted.
Liberal
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
Two recommendations were adopted by the committee, but the report was adopted on division.
In your opinion, among the recommendations that you made at the time, which ones should we give priority to? In your opinion, should we review the Conflict of Interest Act under the mandate of our committee?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I mentioned that list in my opening remarks.
It included rules on post-employment and on transparency in relation to gifts and other benefits.
I even recommended that there be fewer rules for the participation in outside activities and trusts. That causes problems with no good reason.
The most important aspect would probably be addressing the issue of fundraising. There are enough problems, perhaps six or eight. I have talked about them before.
October 27th, 2016 / 12:40 p.m.
Liberal
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
I would like to hear you talk about something else, sponsored trips. I think other authorities have banned the practice. I think it's no longer allowed in Quebec. There are MPs who take part in trips that are paid for by different organizations.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
This is part of the code.
The issue came up five years ago in the media. I think it is just an exception to the rules on gifts. The right to sponsored travel should be amended, if not eliminated. I understand that the problem is that members do not have a travel budget, but they think that doing some travelling is a good thing.
Actually, at least a rule on conflicts of interest could be added, but it would be a big exception for the rules on gifts.
Liberal
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
Is there a trend within the various governments, whether in Canada or elsewhere in the world?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I have not checked, but I don't think this regulation exists in most governments. However, you said that the regulation is in Quebec.
Liberal
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I have never heard of that regulation in other provinces.
Liberal
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
In your remarks, you said that the requests you receive have increased steadily.
Why do you think your opinion and that of your office is being sought out more and more?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I think it is because we are working hard to explain the act. People are more aware that we exist and that there are regulations. Increasingly, people want to understand and follow the rules.
Liberal
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
Do you think that you have the proper resources and funding to meet this increase in requests?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
So far, I think so. We don't need to have an office with a lot of resources in order to provide consistent advice. We must find a balance. At the office, we must have the ability to know what is happening. I have not had any problems so far with the resources at my disposal.
Liberal
Joël Lightbound Liberal Louis-Hébert, QC
In your opening remarks, you mentioned the increase in penalties. I think you talked about increasing them. Have you observed a deterrent effect when the act has more bite and sharper teeth? Can that be observed in other jurisdictions?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I think the penalties are less important than the education and information. The report suggests that the errors and problems be made public. The most important sanction is disclosure.
I noticed that there is a big difference between the penalties under the Conflict of Interest Act and those under the legislation governing the Commissioner of Lobbying, which provides for significant penalties. I'm not trying to impose substantial penalties. I think the information, education along with the penalties and awareness are important.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Blaine Calkins
Thank you very much Mr. Lightbound.
That takes us to the end of the seven-minute round. We'll now start with our five-minute rounds, keeping in mind colleagues that we have about 15 minutes left in the committee time.
Mr. Kelly.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
Ms. Dawson, as our expert on conflict of interest, do you think that having the Privy Council Office in charge of enforcing a declaration on open and transparent government is in itself a conflict of interest?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
These are the Prime Minister's guidelines. He didn't have to make the guidelines. I don't know the extent to which the Privy Council tries to enforce those. All I know is that it is the designated enforcement agency. I don't know anything about how it works.
I think there is some room for some rules that I don't enforce. It's nice to go above and beyond what you need to go to, but if you want it enforced, then you put it in my act.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
That's just it, and one might question why he made the declaration, if there was not going to be a meaningful enforcement mechanism, or that it was not going to be taken seriously.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Bear in mind, these were pre-existing guidelines, too. They were there when this government came in, so they've been there for a while.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
I'll maybe shift gears a little.
There have been ministers who have mentioned the existence of conflict of interest screens that have been put in place by your office, and they more or less invoked the existence of such a screen as the end of discussion on whether or not a conflict of interest exists, either with their own activities or within their offices. My understanding is that such screens require reporting of recusals. When a person for whom there is a screen in place has to recuse themself from a discussion or a decision-making process because of the screen, then they have an obligation to report the recusal to you. Is that true?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
No, there is some confusion around the recusals and the conflict of interest screens. Basically, the screens are put in place so that information doesn't get to the person who has the screen. In other words, a decision-making situation doesn't penetrate the screen. Someone is designated to enforce the screen. There is no recusal involved because no information has gone through. If something penetrates the screen by accident, then they would have to recuse.
I have an action taken against me in the Federal Court for misusing the act by making this system of conflict of interest screens, but the whole purpose of those screens is to prevent a conflict of interest happening. It doesn't negate the recusal system at all, if necessary. Sometimes it may be a surprise that something comes up. You wouldn't have foreseen it, and then you'd have a recusal.
Conservative
Pat Kelly Conservative Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB
That's just it, indeed. Is it possible or even realistic to think that such a screen could prevent any...?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
It's not intended to do that. It's directed to a particular...say somebody had a wife who had some connection with some company. The screen would say that nothing relating to that company can come to you for a decision, but if something for some other company that nobody ever thought of that had some connection with you comes to you, then you'd recuse. Then I'd look at it and say that you had better put a screen up, and so they'd put a screen up for that one, too.
The screens are directed toward particular problems. They're not something that avoids all recusals, if I can make myself clear. People seem to have trouble with this.