Evidence of meeting #36 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was code.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Mario Dion  Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Miriam Burke

1 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin

I call this meeting to order.

This is meeting number 36 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics.

I'd like to remind members that today's meeting is televised and will be made available on the House of Commons website.

Today, we are studying the main estimates of 2021-22, vote 1, under the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. Following the commissioner's appearance, if members do agree, all members will be voting on the estimates and discussing some committee business as well.

Just a reminder to committee members, we have set aside next week for the consideration of the draft report on the study of the questions of conflict of interest and lobbying in relation to pandemic spending.

First up this afternoon, we have the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Mr. Mario Dion.

Thanks so much for joining us. I know you've been a very busy commissioner. We appreciate that you've made time available to us in our study of the estimates.

Mr. Dion, the floor is yours.

May 28th, 2021 / 1 p.m.

Mario Dion Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, thank you very much for inviting me to appear as you consider the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner's submission for the 2021-2022 main estimates.

As many of you were not involved in the committee until last year, I will quickly describe the goals of my office since its creation 14 years ago.

Our primary goal is to help regulatees, that is, public office holders and members of the House of Commons, know and follow the rules in the Conflict of Interest Act and the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons.

In order to help the individuals subject to the rules, we continually improve how we communicate and engage with regulatees. This not only supports our primary goal, but also helps build trust in the office. It is important for us to work together with regulatees to help them comply with the Act and the Code as much as possible.

It is important that a continuous dialogue take place to avoid breaches. There must be trust between elected and appointed officials and their advisors in the office based on mutual respect and professionalism.

Over the years, a solid information management system has been created as it is key to providing the informed advice we try to give to regulatees. It also improves our efficiency because we don't have to reinvent the wheel each time advice is sought. It also ensures that we provide consistent advice from one individual to the next.

Our already established movement towards a digital office helped us tremendously when we moved to a virtual office in spring 2020 due to the pandemic. The process was nearly seamless for us.

The office operates with a total of 51 indeterminate positions. Most of the office's resources are dedicated to our primary goal, helping regulatees meet their obligations under the act and code. These resources are not just in our advisory and compliance division, although this is where almost one-third of our employees work, including your advisers, but it's also located within the communications group that provides educational documents and develops presentations for regulatees.

We also have a legal services and investigations division, which offers the legal opinions we rely on and, of course, conducts investigations. Finally, our corporate management division handles blind trusts, in addition, of course, to providing us with all the HR, information technology and financial support that we need.

In the past two years—and I use two years because I haven't been before this committee since May 2019—the number of reporting public office holders has increased by 7%. The office helps them, as well as the MPs, as well as the other public office holders. We have a total group of about 3,200 people we serve. In the vast majority of situations, we help them through email and telephone. This was the case already before the pandemic, so that's why it was relatively easy for us to switch to that mode when the pandemic hit.

Requests for presentations have dropped obviously because, of course, the pandemic has caused people to focus on their real delivery priorities, so we've had fewer presentations given in the last fiscal year. However, requests for advice were up through the pandemic, particularly in the last two quarters. We have already revised the presentations and have placed the focus recently on very specific, high-interest subject matters, such as recusals, outside activities and post-employment, that appear to reflect the most concerns for regulatees.

I had a session on recusals a few months ago, which was very well attended by over 300 [Technical difficulty—Editor]. On June 8 and June 16, I have already invited all the reporting [Technical difficulty—Editor] holders to a session on offers of outside employment and post-employment obligations.

Requests from the public for information have also increased 27% over the last fiscal year. There has been a steady interest from the media in the work of our office. Given the restrictions placed upon me by the act, we've worked hard to ensure that we are as open and transparent as possible with both the public and the media. Our approach has included more active use of Twitter to share information and updates. We have over 3,000 Twitter followers at this point in time. Last year we increased by 52% the number of tweets that we sent out in order to be of interest to our followers.

Since I was last before you, I have issued nine investigation reports under the act, and four under the code. We've always been able to complete our analyses and conclusions in less than one year, which was one of my initial goals when I was appointed back in early 2018. I set out this goal to complete—unless it was exceptionally complex or unless there were exceptional circumstances—any study, any review and examination that we do under the code or the act within one year. We've managed to do that in the 13 reports issued in the last two years, and 18 since I've been in my position in January 2018.

I hope you will share my view that we have produced quality work each time.

I'm here today, and I'm pleased to let you know that we currently have no investigations ongoing under the act—no backlog. Therefore, we're ready to accept the next complaint or the next situation where I have reasonable grounds to start an investigation. We have a couple still ongoing under the code. In fact, I'll be tabling a report before the House rises as a result of an investigation under the code.

We receive a fair volume of complaints and information, if you wish, from the public, from the media, so we've reviewed over 100 files, 100 situations, where my staff reviewed incoming information to determine whether we should investigate. There is a good flow of information that comes in all the time.

I will now talk about the budget, since that is what brings us here today.

This year, we are operating with a budget of $7.67 million. That represents an increase of about 2% over last year. That is what I requested. Last year, we also secured funding for three additional communications advisor positions and to keep our information technology system up to date. Since the office was created 14 years ago, the budget has grown by about $1.6 million over the original budget.

Let's talk a little about the pandemic. Obviously, that is what's on everyone's mind; as we heard earlier before the meeting started, the patios are opening tonight.

The pandemic hit us suddenly, as it did everyone else. Personally, I had a medical condition two or three years ago that made me more vulnerable. So I remember very well leaving the office not knowing, like all of you, when I was going to come back and how. We all thought it would be a few weeks. However, we had to take steps gradually.

We were lucky, because our employees already had tablets and could work from home. In addition to our policy to provide equipment in a controlled manner to facilitate telework while ensuring ergonomics, we took steps with each employee regarding Wi-Fi availability. For 51 employees, supplies cost $28,000, from equipment to paper, pencils, and so on. Those costs were offset by decreases in other costs, such as printing. We have saved a lot of paper and a lot of trees. We also achieved significant savings on mail-outs.

In general, employees really like being able to telework. So we have a positive workplace. We use technology, as Parliament has, to keep channels open and have a constant dialogue with employees.

All this work, of course, has been accomplished because of the 50 people who work with me, who have been very good throughout the pandemic.

We did not actually measure productivity, because we have no backlog, in any respect, anywhere in the organization. We've been able to cope with the volume of work in spite of the pandemic, while trying to minimize problems and help employees as much as possible vis-à-vis the maintenance of a good balance and a good mental health situation.

That's what I have this afternoon. I would be pleased, of course, to answer any questions that members might have.

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin

Thank you, Commissioner.

I will turn to Mr. Barrett for the first six minutes.

Mr. Barrett.

1:10 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Thanks, Chair.

Thank you, Commissioner, for joining us today.

I will start by saying that I appreciate the volume of work you've had to undertake since you last appeared before the committee. While I do have a lot of questions that I would like to ask as a matter of context on any of the number of reports you've undertaken with respect to public office holders, particularly cabinet members, including the now former finance minister and the Prime Minister a couple of times, I'm going to focus my first questions on the “Trudeau III Report”, the third report into allegations that the Prime Minister broke the Conflict of Interest Act.

My first question is with respect to the actual process you undertook in the report. I note that a few individuals—Rick Theis, who's a policy and cabinet affairs adviser in the Prime Minister’s Office, and Amitpal Singh as well—were interviewed by you when you did your report. I wonder if these individuals volunteered or were requested to provide a virtual, in place of a face-to-face, interview with your office.

1:10 p.m.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mario Dion

The way it works, I'm afraid the answer is neither. They were asked to come for an interview and they agreed to come. That's usually the case. Very few people actually volunteer for an interview. That's how it goes.

We basically review the documentary evidence. We determine what more information we need from anyone, and we call witnesses. I have the power to subpoena people. I have not had to issue any subpoena since my appointment back in early 2018. They did come voluntarily, but as a result of a request that we had made of them.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

In your study for your report entitled “Trudeau III Report”, I again note that Mr. Theis and Mr. Singh were asked to provide interviews but Prime Minister Trudeau was not.

Are you able to provide us the context in which Mr. Trudeau did not provide an interview in your preparing the “Trudeau III Report”?

1:15 p.m.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mario Dion

Mr. Trudeau was not asked to provide an interview because we had enough material using some 40,000 pages of documentary evidence. We required the Prime Minister to give us a sworn statement in writing to fill some of the information gaps that we needed to fill, but it was not necessary to require an interview with the Prime Minister, so we didn't do so.

That's our general practice. We only ask somebody to come to an interview when there is a need to do so. An affidavit is just as good, as you know, Mr. Barrett, as an interview. That's why things took place that way.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

For context, Commissioner—and I appreciate that answer—in preparing the “Trudeau II Report” and “The Trudeau Report”, were interviews conducted with the Prime Minister?

1:15 p.m.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mario Dion

Yes, they were conducted, and this is indicated in each of the reports in appendix A. Mr. Trudeau is listed as a person who was interviewed in both “The Trudeau Report” and the “Trudeau II Report”.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Again, for my context, I'll turn quickly to the “Morneau II Report”, which found that Mr. Morneau violated the Conflict of Interest Act. Was Mr. Morneau interviewed by your office?

1:15 p.m.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mario Dion

No, he was not. Appendix 1—there's only one appendix—lists the witnesses. For the same reason that we did not have to require the Prime Minister to come for an interview, we did not have to require the former minister of finance to either. We had enough by way of documentary evidence and the sworn statement that we required from Mr. Morneau through his solicitors.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Turning to another part of your investigation, I'm wondering what information you were furnished with or uncovered regarding the Canada 150 events that took place on Parliament Hill. You'll recall, Commissioner, that those events featured the Prime Minister's mother, who was paid, and the WE organization was given a million-dollar contract to undertake those activities.

Was that part of your investigation?

1:15 p.m.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mario Dion

It was part of what we had to look at by way of background to determine the nature of the relationship between the Trudeau family and the WE Charity, but it was not the focus of our examination. It was contextual information that was useful for us to know about in order to properly assess the nature of the relationship.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Did you uncover any evidence or were you presented with any evidence demonstrating that Madam Trudeau was not paid to be a speaker at that event?

I'll ask if you can engage in a hypothetical, to help folks understand the difference between the appearance of a conflict and an actual conflict. If Madam Trudeau had been paid in that case, would it have put the Prime Minister in a position of a conflict of interest?

1:15 p.m.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mario Dion

Madam Trudeau had been paid. We established that through reviewing the documents. Madam Trudeau, the mother, has been paid on several occasions by the WE Charity. As to Madam Trudeau, the wife, the report details what we have by way of background information.

For the 2017 event that you're talking about, I don't actually recall whether we have any evidence that she was paid or not paid, but I can of course provide the committee with that information if it's available to us. I simply don't recall that.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin

Thank you, Mr. Barrett. Your time is up.

We'll go to Ms. Lattanzio now for the next—

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Chair, before moving on, I appreciate the commissioner undertaking to provide that information and ask that you make a note of that.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin

Thank you. I think the commissioner did indicate that he would supply that, and we appreciate it.

Ms. Lattanzio, we'll turn to you now for the next six minutes.

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

Thank you, Commissioner Dion, for joining us today.

I understand that the budget has been increased, but despite that, what are the main monetary challenges? Of course, $1.6 million has been accrued in the budget or otherwise, but what is the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner facing over the short and medium terms?

1:20 p.m.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mario Dion

I think our greatest challenge is still to properly communicate, to explain to MPs and to public office holders their obligations under the code and the act. These instruments, these documents, are complex, and the vast majority of people who are regulated by the act and the code have a relatively shallow understanding because it is complex.

Unlike me, they don't spend their lives thinking about these things, so we're trying to find better ways to provide guidance through documents we've put on the web, through videos and through webinars, because I believe, first of all, that each MP and public office holder is the first person responsible for making sure they comply with these instruments, but our job at the office is to assist them in doing that. The best way to avoid problems is to make sure that we have an educated group of people who are able to identify the situations where they should consult with us.

We receive a fair volume of consultations as it is. We had 2,000 consultations by public office holders in the last fiscal year, and 500 from MPs, but sometimes MPs call about things that are menial and maybe don't call about things that are really important. You need to have the reflex to identify those issues.

I understand that the member is a lawyer. I don't know if the member has had a chance to go through the documents. They are short, but relatively complex, and vague as well at times. That's the greatest challenge that we still have: to demystify, explain, vulgarize.... I don't know what other words to use to describe what I'm trying to get at.

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

Thank you, Maître Dion.

You have identified the difficulties, perhaps, that are incurred on a daily basis in terms of making distinctions. Also, I think number one is a confusion with regard to the distinction with the act and the code.

That being said, how do you plan on measuring the progress in this regard in terms of making more people aware and maybe making more people cognizant of what their responsibilities and obligations are?

1:20 p.m.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mario Dion

We do measure attendance at the events we organize, educational events such as the ones I mentioned during my opening remarks. I was very pleased when we attracted 302 people to a session in each French and English to deal with the subject matter of recusals a few months before we published the “Trudeau III Report” and “Morneau II Report”. It was topical. People registered in large numbers.

That's one way: attendance. The second way, of course, is the degree of contravention.

We'll have to see how it evolves. If we have a wave of contraventions, it will probably indicate that we're not very successful in our efforts. On the other hand, if we have very few contraventions, it's one factor. That's why we do education—in order to prevent problems.

Also, we will do a survey at one point in time of the regulatees to determine whether we are using the proper means to communicate with them as well.

1:20 p.m.

Liberal

Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

Based on what you've just said and based on the fact that you have no backlogs under the act and just a couple under the code, I would conclude, based on what you've just said, that things are going pretty well.

Some of your provincial counterparts have a dual mandate: that of the registrar of lobbying and that of Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. You have signed an agreement with the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada with respect to education and outreach, given some of the links between the two mandates.

Would you see any benefits, financial or otherwise, in merging the two federal offices into one?

1:20 p.m.

Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Mario Dion

I have never studied the question in depth. I know that in any major reorganization—it would be major for the staff at both offices if there were to be a merger—my experience in several places, in almost 40 years of public service management experience, is that it's very unsettling. It takes months, if not years, for an organization to stabilize after a major reorganization, and I really wonder whether it would be worth the effort to do that.

We currently have a good degree of co-operation with the Office of the Lobbying Commissioner. Our budgets in the global scheme of things are very small, and it's probably not worth the effort, but that's my superficial opinion, not having studied the question in any depth.

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

Patricia Lattanzio Liberal Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC

I appreciate the sincerity of your answer.

I would like to now bring you to the strategic plan of 2018-2021. The office will focus on certain key priorities, including the modernization of technology and information management structures. How is the modernization unfolding, and given the cost of technology, does such a modernization require unusual or additional expenses?