Subcommittee on Food Safety Committee on April 22nd, 2009

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

I'm sorry, did you request the e-mail correspondence between the PMO, the minister's office and officials? Have you asked for the e-mail track?

[Sheila Weatherill]

In response, I don't have a definite answer to that question. We've requested a substantial amount of information. We have literally millions of pages. And we will continue to follow that line of evidence.

I wanted to answer the question about whether we have expertise in communications and governance of the senior-level people who understand how the departments interface with the Prime Minister's office, that type of thing. Yes, we do have that expertise on our team. We have outside advisers on communications, because it is part of our investigation, and we do have an individual who is very senior with a lot of expertise in this level of governance.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Who is that?

[Sheila Weatherill]

Alan Nymark is his name. He is a former president of the Canada Revenue Agency.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Do you need just a few seconds more?

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

No, that's fine, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

We'll move on to Mr. Shipley for five minutes.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Weatherill, for being part of this investigation and this committee report that we're going to have by the end of June, before we break for summer.

Following this, we have the Public Health Agency of Canada coming in. There seems to be some innuendo today that actually there are some things happening behind the scene that you don't have the opportunity to investigate. In fact, there's more than innuendo that your investigation isn't going to be thorough because it isn't going to get reported; that it's going to go to the minister, and the minister isn't likely going to make it public.

I can tell you that this report of yours will be made public, the one that you're going to produce. The public needs to know what will be in it. So that's recognizing a little bit about what's coming afterwards.

At Monday's meeting--I wasn't able to be here, but I have the notes from it--both Maple Leaf and CFIA said that they're fully cooperating with you.

I guess we're going to have to say a few things over and over again, because the innuendoes keep coming: well, maybe they are cooperating, but are you actually getting the papers; are you getting the documents? But you're saying yes, you have millions of pages of documents.

So the statement is correct that what you're asking for, what you're needing...and not necessarily asking for; it's what you need. Is there full disclosure of all the documents that you know of that you're getting?

[Sheila Weatherill]

Mr. Chairman, to date, all documents that we've requested we have received. We continue to request documents. There has been full cooperation from Maple Leaf, from other organizations, from federal government departments, as well as from the provinces when we've made requests.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

I want to move on to other agencies, not just federal agencies but those outside the federal realm. You touched on this a little bit earlier. I think you indicated that the officials from the Ontario provincial health ministry were cooperating also.

[Sheila Weatherill]

Yes, we've had very good cooperation from them. We have met them on more than one occasion and have received documents that we've requested. Certainly they've offered their help and advice to us.

As I mentioned, a former Ontario medical officer of health is now part of our team, and they understand the Ontario system.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

We know that Toronto Public Health was involved in other provincial.... Are they giving the same full cooperation in terms of all the documentation that is needed? Has all the documentation that they have been disclosed?

[Sheila Weatherill]

Yes. Our main contact for Ontario documents has been through the Ministry of Health, but yes, we've had very good cooperation from them.

We had a meeting recently in Toronto where public health people from across Canada came together—either electronically or in the room—and they were very open and very anxious to participate. There were some very good discussions. These people are keen to get to the bottom of what happened and interested in finding collective solutions so that this doesn't happen again.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Could I just have one more quick question, Mr. Chair, in this round?

Just for clarification--as I mentioned, there have been not just innuendoes but in fact comments made that there may be some things that would influence you--I would just ask you this directly. Has the Minister of Agriculture or the Prime Minister--or any other minister, in fact, of the crown--in any way interfered to change or interfere with your investigation or give you a reason to make some decisions or recommendations that would be not fully coming from you and your team?

[Sheila Weatherill]

Mr. Chairman, there has been no attempt to influence or limit the investigation in any way, from any source.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

Mr. Easter, five minutes.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Let's go back to these terms of reference. I'll start where I left off, Mr. Chair.

I asked you, and I believe you responded yes, that you're to submit this report to the Minister of Agriculture, of whom there are certainly questions about, as the minister responsible. In submission of that report, what does he then do with it? Is it his choice what he reports to the public? Does he have to turn over the total report to the public? Or is it his determination what he shall do with that report?

[Sheila Weatherill]

Mr. Chairman, with respect, those are questions that would need to be addressed to the minister. My responsibility is to provide our findings and our recommendations to the minister by July 20.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

So then the bottom line is that we are reporting, at this stage, to the minister, who really should be under question.

In any event, you said a number of times that you are getting full cooperation, that anything you've requested you have obtained. How do you really know? Is it part of your investigation to determine the political control? Ms. Bennett talked about the e-mail, the conference call that has leaked out. How do you know in that area?

In your remarks, you've always talked about the agencies, the government departments, and Maple Leaf. There are two major offices involved here. One is the Minister of Agriculture's office, which is ultimately responsible at the end of the day, under ministerial responsibility. The other is the Prime Minister's Office, which we have some concerns about.

[Sheila Weatherill]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When I refer to the two agencies and the department, I should speak more broadly. We do have an opportunity to direct our questions and our requests for information and to meet with people anywhere. And we are.

Mr. Chairman, on the question of how we are ensuring that we are getting what we need, we have good, sophisticated investigative techniques set up. We have staff. We have advisers, people on the team who are expert in discovery. We have people who are expert in document retrieval. We are able to look at what people tell us and then look for the documentation to support it.

I do believe this type of independent review, coupled with an environment of collaboration where people are so anxious to describe what happened and to give us advice on what we can do so that this doesn't happen again, Mr. Chairman, is the best environment to obtain full disclosure. In my experience, it is a positive environment to obtain substantive results.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

I hope it works.

In your conduct of the investigation, it says, “...ensure that where there is reliable information”--for you to ensure, I gather--“that could affect individuals or organizations if the Independent Investigator was to make use of this information in her report,”--and this is where it gets serious--“that the concerned individuals or organizations will have an opportunity to review the portion of the report that may affect them and that their views will be sought before the report is finalized”.

Now, if there's something in your report, can they actually take it out, or is it something that's relative to a legal impact on somebody else? It seems to me that you're drafting a report. You have statements from individuals. They can double-check that report to see if they want it released or not.

[Sheila Weatherill]

Mr. Chairman, this approach is consistent with procedural fairness and the principle of courtesy in common law. While individuals would be shown relevant parts of the report, it in no way binds us to make changes. This is the practice of the Auditor General's reporting as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Bellavance.

[André Bellavance, Bloc, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you.

A little while ago, Ms. Weatherill, you said that, to date, no one has refused to give you any information or documents. I would like to explore that a bit further. Under your mandate, do you have the authority to request evidence and subpoena witnesses? If someone, whether from the government or not, refuses to meet with you at your request, do you have the authority to compel that person to meet with you and answer your questions? Also, do you have assurance that your report, which you will submit to the minister by July 20, will not be altered if it is made public? We do not really know what the minister intends to do with the report. We know that you will submit it to him and he will then decide when and if to release it to the public. When you were given your mandate, did you receive assurance that your report would not be put on a shelf to gather dust and that the public would have the chance to read it, as written? Or does the minister or his office, or even the Prime Minister's Office, have the discretion to take what they want from your report?

[Sheila Weatherill]

To be consistent with our terms of reference, my report, my findings, and my recommendations are submitted to the minister. Regarding follow-up on the report, this is a question to be directed to Minister Ritz.