Evidence of meeting #112 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Ms. Tremblay can answer that best.
Director, Corporate Management, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
There was no requirement for additional human resources.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
In the time of this term—we'll call it 2021 until now—how many complaints were filed?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Melanie, do you have the number?
Director, Communications, Outreach and Planning, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Complaints in what sense? Could you please clarify what you mean?
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I mean complaints to your office, formal written complaints that you would have had to consider whether to pursue or not pursue.
Director, Communications, Outreach and Planning, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I don't have the number of cases we looked at specifically in front of me at the moment. They are recorded in our quarterly reports, which are posted online. I'd be happy to compile those and get back to you.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
If you were to ballpark it, what I'm trying to get a sense of is how many active complaints you receive versus how many you pursue. It's to get an understanding of the volume of work and whether or not it's adequate for your office.
I hear today that there are only two, so I would imagine that even within the last year or so, there would likely have been more complaints. Could you comment on how many complaints you've had within the last fiscal year, starting in 2023 until now?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Mr. Green, you're using two different terms here. One is complaint and one is investigation.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Which number do you want? We can give you the number of investigations right now. There are two, as you know.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
You've already done that, sir. I'm asking how many complaints, because I want to see how many complaints you receive versus how many you actually pursue. It's a very—
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Okay, that's fine. We can get you that number. There's no problem. I have nothing to hide. I just don't have it here.
NDP
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Green.
This concludes our first round of questions. We'll now begin the second round.
Mr. Brock, you have the floor for five minutes.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you and good morning to our witnesses.
I publicly congratulate you, Commissioner, on your full-time status.
I want to follow up on some of the questions posed by my colleague Mr. Barrett with respect to the two ongoing investigations regarding SDTC. I trust that you're probably not at liberty to tell us at what point you're at in the investigation, but obviously it will be wrapped up soon enough.
At this point in time, have you uncovered any element of criminality associated with the complaints?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
I want to spend a little more time on the issue of criminality because I know you have a mandate to report to the RCMP. This was fleshed out the last time you appeared with former commissioner Dion. You had legal counsel assisting in the answering of the questions I put to former commissioner Dion, but I don't think there was sufficient time for me to get a fulsome response.
If I understand correctly, where you detect criminality, the threshold from your perspective is reasonable and probable grounds. Is that correct?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
With regard to “reasonable”, definitely. As for “probable”....
Like all discretions, you can't define them. That's part of the problem. However, when we investigate and come across something that gives reasonable suspicion that there's some criminality, at that point in time we stop the investigation and call the RCMP to look at it.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
I'm really pleased to hear that, Commissioner, because the takeaway from former commissioner Dion and legal counsel surrounding the SNC-Lavalin matter was that they felt there were no probable grounds to make a referral to the RCMP, although the RCMP relied upon their report and the evidence contained in that report. I thought this threshold from a non-law enforcement entity—your office—was completely inappropriate.
What is appropriate, based on your response, is mere suspicion, and I think that's the lowest standard you can have for any criminality, so it's very pleasing to me to hear that during your tenure, that is going to be the legal threshold.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Mr. Brock, I said “reasonable suspicion”. I didn't say “suspicion”.
You're a former prosecutor, so—
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
—you know the standard.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Yes. It's “reasonable suspicion”, which is a very low standard.
In relation to SDTC, you said you read the papers and you currently know what's going on in the House. It's been dominating the news for some time.
We have another scandal with the Justin Trudeau government, which is the arrive scam. Have you received any complaint to date from any member with respect to the arrive scam?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner