Information & Ethics Committee on June 20th, 2023

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

It was reviewed in 2012, which was 11 years ago. Typically, these types of reviews happen every five years.

Why hasn't it happened, in your opinion?

[Nancy Bélanger]

That's a good question.

When I appeared at this committee on my nomination in 2017, I was asked if I could be ready in the spring of 2018 to offer recommendations. I said that it would be four months into my job and that I'd do my best, so I prepared. I started right from the time I started my position and the time went by.

In 2021, during an appearance here, someone asked me to make some recommendations, which I did. I prepared. I called them preliminary recommendations because there was no study at the time. I thought I'd say that these were preliminary in the event that there was a study. It gave me the opportunity to change my mind or add some.

That was in February 2021, so now it's been more than two years.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Typically, who would initiate that update?

[Nancy Bélanger]

In this case, according to my act, I think it would be the House. You could, if you want to.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

That's good to know.

[Nancy Bélanger]

That is good news—isn't it?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

I'm going to ask the committee members just to hold back. I do have a couple of pieces of information that I have to deal with. One includes the study budget.

Ms. Bélanger and Madam Robinson-Dalpé, thank you for coming before the committee today. I appreciate your willingness, especially Madam Robinson-Dalpé. I know this isn't in your job description, but you did acquit yourself very well. You were very knowledgeable in front of the committee, and I want to thank you for that.

I'm going to dismiss the witnesses and then we're going to continue. We're not going to suspend.

The first item I have is a study budget for this particular motion we are dealing with. The amount requested is up to $500. Do I have consensus on the $500?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

The second thing I have is a letter that came to the committee from the chair of the Standing Committee on Finance reminding us that pre-budget consultations are taking place. If there's any direction on pre-budget consultations that this committee would like to give to the finance committee, that opportunity is available to us.

I have Mr. Kurek on that issue and then Mr. Villemure.

Go ahead, please.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I understand there are some questions around the timelines and whether or not we need this by the end of June, or if it can maybe be into the fall.

With one of the independent officers of Parliament and another office represented in the meeting here today, I think it's especially relevant that one of the concerns we've heard consistently is that, when the funding for these offices is contingent upon the political will of a current government, certainly there are some challenges with that.

I am not sure if other members have more to add to that, but that may be one of the suggestions we give to the finance committee.

I know that on the other committees I've been on we've been faced with these questions as well, but particularly relevant, I think, is that every commissioner has said that we need to take the politics out of how their offices are financed and make sure that Parliament is the one that makes that decision, since they are independent offices of Parliament.

Certainly from my perspective that would be a valuable message to pass along to the finance committee. It's not necessarily asking for more money—as a fiscal conservative that's certainly a concern—but more of a process to make sure that the politics and the appearance of conflict, especially when you have.... We were talking about a former Liberal cabinet minister who has taken a lucrative job in a corporation. There are questions surrounding the integrity of that and ensuring that it's not friends of that cabinet minister—whether it's the current government or any previous government—but Parliament, as the chief arbiter of the land, making those decisions, not a particular cabinet minister or a particular cabinet or a particular government.

I think that's a consistent theme we've heard from all of the commissioners who have come before this committee, and it would be worth passing on.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Just so the committee is aware, Mr. Fonseca did submit a deadline of July 31 on a couple of issues.

Number one is whether we would like to appear before the committee, as a committee making a request or any suggestions we might have.

The floor is yours, Mr. Villemure.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I'd like to move the following motion, Mr. Chair:

That, notwithstanding the committee’s decision to respond in the affirmative to the request of the Standing Committee on Finance regarding pre-budget consultations, the committee reserve the option of reviewing its priorities when the House returns in September 2023 and that, within the first week back, the committee discuss its priorities and the scheduling of its work and studies.

We'll distribute English and French versions to everyone.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

It is a motion.

Have you given the motion to the clerk in both languages?

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

All right.

You can continue, Mr. Villemure.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to explain why I'm moving this motion.

Apart from the point made by my colleague about the fact that the three commissioners should have more latitude and financial independence, I believe this matter deserves consideration. We've been sent this request rather late. I believe we should take it very seriously and be given the time we need to examine and respond to it more thoroughly.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

The Standing Committee on Finance is also asking us whether we would like to hold the meetings in question before the pre-budget consultations in order to determine whether we have recommendations for them.

On the motion, Ms. Khalid, go ahead, please.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I agree in principle with this motion—it's absolutely fine—but I, obviously, have been waiting a very long time to start my TikTok study. I think that is the more pressing issue of the day.

I would like, if Mr. Villemure would allow, to limit this to a maximum of one meeting to have that conversation. If that's okay, one hour is preferable. I think we all know what our priorities are, but I'm really wanting to get to that TikTok study.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you for that.

We'd have to amend the motion to reflect that it just occur for one hour. We still have the issue, though—and this is the challenge that I have—that Mr. Fonseca wants us to meet before July 31.

I'm just going to get clarification on this from the clerk. Stand by a second, please.

I appreciate your patience on that. It's the first time I've had to deal with this as a chair on pre-budget consultations.

The first question that Mr. Fonseca has for the committee is whether we'd be interested in participating in next fall's pre-budget consultations. They're reaching out similarly to other committees.

The second thing that he is asking us is whether the committee would be interested in participating in the study of “any such subject matter contained in the bill.” That's something that we would have to determine, but I think Mr. Villemure's motion may address that.

It was amending it to say “one hour”. Is that right?

Are we agreed on that?

We're going to amend the motion to reflect one hour of committee time on this.

First of all, is there any other discussion on the amendment for one hour? Are we good?

(Amendment agreed to)

(Motion as amended agreed to)

Lastly, I don't have any other business before us before the end of the session. We do have a meeting that's scheduled on Friday. At this point, I'm still going to hold on to that meeting, but it may be required that we cancel that meeting—just to make everybody aware of that.

That's it for today. I want to thank—

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

Mr. Chair, I have a motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

That was close. Go ahead.

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

I'd like to move that we adjourn.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Telling jokes.... This guy has jokes.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Okay. You had me worried too. He was going to get it.

We have a motion to adjourn.

Before we do, I just want to say thank you to the analysts, our clerk and all of the technicians for all of the work you have done this session.