Information & Ethics Committee on Dec. 12th, 2017

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you again.

You mentioned a few moments ago, in conversation with my colleague, social media. Have you participated on Facebook or Twitter in the past?

[Mario Dion]

Yes, I have participated, as you put it—Facebook not very much; Twitter more, for a few years.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I'm given to understand that you've pulled down your Twitter account or put it into limbo. I'm just wondering. Is that because of prudence, given the impending...?

[Mario Dion]

If I'm appointed, it's clear to me that the nature of this position makes it absolutely impossible for me to continue to publicly express views about virtually anything. I don't know what the technical word is, but essentially I did close my account many days ago, because if I am appointed I will not go on Twitter whatsoever, except insofar as the institutional account is concerned.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

The penalties for violation of the Conflict of Interest Act are very modest. Commissioner Dawson has said that, in effect, naming and shaming is really the only penalty. The finance minister, for example, when he was found in violation of the disclosure of holdings, was fined barely $200. I wonder if you have any thoughts on, perhaps, stiffening the penalties for violations, serious and minor.

[Mario Dion]

As a citizen I have been a news buff all my life, so I'm therefore aware. I have followed the work of Mary Dawson ever since she was appointed. As a citizen, I do find those penalties.... It's a bit like the NHL, when a player gets fined $500 and you know that he earns $5.8 million a year. They may not be sufficient to create the disincentives we're trying to create.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I have one final question. Commissioner Dawson has recommended, or called, actually, for the merger of her office and the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying. The former commissioner and the newly nominated commissioner both disagree with that, saying that they are two sides of some of the same ethical issue but that the offices should remain separate. I wonder, again, about your thoughts on whether there should be a merger, or closer co-operation and integration at some level.

[Mario Dion]

One thing that's clear in my past, my career in the public sector, is that I am not territorial. Another thing that's clear is that I do abide by the law, however, as it exists. I have an open mind. If I'm appointed, I will of course, once we both have been briefed, if Ms. Bélanger is appointed.... We will meet and we will discuss the operations of each of our offices.

If we come to the conclusion that it would be more effective or more attuned to serve the public office holders and Canadians at large, I can assure you that I have an open mind vis-à-vis reorganization and restructuring, because structures should serve the purpose, as opposed to the opposite. Structures are there to serve a purpose. If they prove to be inadequate, then they should be changed. Of course, it would be for the government or the House of Commons and the Senate to decide whether to change those structures.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Certainly, again, Commissioner Dawson some years ago submitted to this committee and to the government a list of recommendations for changes to the Conflict of Interest Act, the operation of the office, and so forth.

Again, would you commit to at some point—not early in your term but at some midpoint—offering a consideration or updating of recommendations that had been made by Commissioner Dawson in the past and whether the government should consider implementing those recommendations now?

[Mario Dion]

I see this as part and parcel of the role of the commissioner. I did that at PSIC. We basically started to work on the series of proposals shortly after I was appointed. You have to have enough experience, of course, to have a foundation on which to base it. I think it's part and parcel.

I've already answered your colleague earlier. I did indicate that I will study what Mary Dawson recommended back in 2013. It's part of my role, and I will be pleased to present recommendations if and when I'm in a position to do so.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

Thank you, Mr. Kent.

Next up is Mr. Picard for five minutes, but we have one more question. I'm going to let the time go a little longer than 4:30. We've had some delays.

Continue, Mr. Picard.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome, Mr. Dion. I'm pleased to meet you for the first time.

You talked with my colleague Kent about a fine that is clearly insignificant in terms of the ongoing financial issues. We are talking about a hypothetical fine of $500 while the contract is $5 million. I am curious to know what sort of culture you would like to instill in the office of the commissioner.

Would you opt for exemplary measures or a fair understanding of the facts?

[Mario Dion]

I really believe in deterrence. When I was the public sector integrity commissioner, our organization's work was preventive.

As I said earlier, we are trying to educate. People are fundamentally honest. When a complaint is lodged and the investigation reveals an offence, I think it's important to impose a penalty that reflects the seriousness of the situation. As with any system designed to regulate the conduct of individuals, it helps others understand the consequences of breaking the law.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Many members say that from the moment we are elected, we no longer have a life, particularly because the people we know become potential sources of conflict of interest because of the professional relations that we have with them. Is that true?

In your opinion, once we become a member of Parliament, a minister or even more, do we feel the downside of the profession?

[Mario Dion]

Canada has systems like that. The first code is from 1973, so about 35 years ago. Since then, things have grown and grown, and the obligations have become more and more stringent. If I were a member of Parliament—which I have never been—I would always keep those obligations in mind. Those provisions regulate the conduct of individuals 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They must always be kept in mind.

Some things don't come naturally. It's not like the Criminal Code. We do not have to read the Criminal Code to avoid committing an offence. We generally have an intuition for what is criminal and what is not. But in these laws, some things do not necessarily follow an implacable logic. We must study those provisions and understand them.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Does it leave room for interpretation?

[Mario Dion]

It leaves a lot of room for interpretation.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

You held the position of public sector integrity commissioner. In my opinion, the “integrity” aspect of this function from 2011 is similar to that of the new function.

What points do those two functions have in common?

In the medium term, what causes do you see yourself able to promote, based on what you know from a public perspective?

[Mario Dion]

The common point that comes to mind is accessibility, the need for a truly accessible office to make sure that people who want to make a complaint know that the office exists and know the parameters of filing a complaint. That's what the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner did. It promoted the office and the parameters of what it regulates and what it does. This is one of the things I would like to do.

The philosophy focuses on accessibility, giving full force to the act and providing every opportunity for the spirit of this legislation to be upheld. There are not many complaints. At her last appearance in 2014, Commissioner Dawson said she was surprised to find that only one-quarter to one-third of the files she was studying were complaints. The other files were about issues she had decided to investigate on her own.

Complaints are a way of self-regulation. A truly accessible office is another way of ensuring that MPs and public office holders remain honest, as a complaint might be filed at any time.

[Michel Picard, Liberal, Montarville, QC]

Are you telling me that you would encourage the culture of whistleblowing?

[Mario Dion]

I think the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act has encouraged the culture of whistleblowing, and I also encouraged it when I was in office. It depends on the spirit of each piece of legislation. In this case, members have the opportunity to file a complaint, but very few members do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Zimmer]

Thank you, Mr. Picard.

Mr. Cullen, you have three minutes, then Mr. Kent will have 30 seconds.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you.

I'll take you back to an email you sent as the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner on February 2 to Mr. Wouters, who was one of the top officials in the government at the Privy Council.

I'm quoting an email that you sent to him:

There is one issue that your office is currently not privy to and that the clerk must be briefed on. A former senior official at the office has retained legal counsel in order to pursue a claim for constructive dismissal. I will be pleased to provide details to a PCO officer to ensure Wayne—

That's Mr. Wouters.

—is not blind-sided.

Do you regret sending that email at all?

[Mario Dion]

It's hard for me to regret because I don't recall. Frankly, I do not remember. I'm not saying I did not write the email, but I don't recall what the subject matter was.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

The email came out through documents. It's in The Globe and Mail.