Evidence of meeting #4 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was process.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Diane Marleau
I call the committee to order.
I'll officially welcome our guest, Mr. Morgan.
Normally what happens here is that the guest is given five to ten minutes to give a summary of whatever it is they'd like to say. Then the opposition gets seven minutes, including answers. If the question is too long, you may not have to answer. It'll then go to two of the opposition parties, then Conservative, then NDP. I just thought I'd give you that heads up.
Please.
Gwyn Morgan As an Individual
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Let me, first of all, thank the clerk and also the committee for their flexibility in scheduling this meeting. I know I was unavailable last week, unfortunately, because I was travelling through New York City and other places. I very much appreciate the invitation and your flexibility.
I'm going to discuss in my opening statement, Madam Chair, the Public Appointments Commission's mandate and also my nomination as its first chair. You have a copy, I believe, of the mandate of the commission before you.
The key objective of the commission will be to ensure that names forwarded for consideration as Governor in Council appointees possess the qualifications, background, experience, and personal attributes required for the position. In other words, the objective will be that merit determine appointments. The process will be transparent, and vacancies for Governor in Council appointments will appear in the newly created website.
I believe personally, Madam Chair, that developing the best possible public appointments process is very important to our country. Agencies of the Crown play important roles. Those who are appointed to leadership positions within them must not only be the best available for the job, they must also be seen to have been chosen by a process designed to ensure that they are.
Now I want to make a very important point. The commission is about how appointments are to be made; it is not about who is selected to serve on agencies, boards, commissions, and crowns. In other words--and this is my most important point of emphasis--the commission will neither select nor appoint anyone.
Madam Chair, I turn to why I have accepted the Prime Minister's nomination to chair the commission and what abilities and background I believe I bring to the role. You know from the information that has been provided that I dedicated half of my 60 years on this earth to building a successful Canadian-headquartered international company, a company that ranks among the largest corporations in the country, a company that prides itself in showing that Canadians can compete with the best in the world, a company that does its best to protect the environment and makes a positive difference in the community where we operate, and a company that employs Canadian representatives of our country's rich diversity of cultural backgrounds.
Of course I take pride in these things, and I am humbled by the personal awards and recognitions I have received over the months since I stepped down from the company. What I take the greatest pride in is EnCana's corporate constitution. I have always believed, Madam Chair, that true success can only be achieved by the disciplined adherence to a set of principles that stem from the best of Canadian values. These are enshrined in EnCana's corporate constitution. It is a document unique in the corporate world. I wrote it.
Madam Chair, I'm happy that copies have been made available to the committee today.
The constitution outlines shared principles, the first one being strong character. I'll read very briefly from that principle. People of strong character “lift one another up to greater success, we are determined...and disciplined, and we can be counted on”.
The second principle is ethical behaviour: “We function on the basis of trust, integrity, and respect. We are committed to benchmark practices in safety and environmental stewardship, ethical business conduct, and community responsibility.”
High performance: “We focus where we passionately believe we can be the best. We are accountable for delivering high-quality work that's continually enriched by...learning.”
Great expectations: “We have great expectations of one another. Living up to them will allow us to experience the fulfillment of being successful, and the pride of building a great company.”
I have longed believed, Madam Chair, that living by sound principles is the key to success of any organization. I am a passionate Canadian prepared to apply what I've learned to serving my country.
I accepted the Prime Minister's nomination because I bring two attributes that are well suited to service on the Public Appointments Commission. Firstly, my track record for principle-based leadership is there for all to see. I am gratified by the degree to which that has been recognized across the country.
Secondly, I've learned a great deal about sound private sector governance, much of which has applications to the agencies, crowns, boards, and commissions of government. I believe that if you look carefully at the mandate of the Public Appointments Commission, the specific mandate, you will see that the alignment is there between the skills needed and my experience.
I came from the private sector, I am not a politician, and reading media reports on some of my public speeches tell me I wouldn't be very good at it anyway. I must tell you, though, that after dedicating my life to building a sound reputation, it is painful for me and my family to see a couple of sentences taken out of context from one of my speeches leave such an untrue impression of my beliefs.
I emphasize once again that the commission will not make any appointments. In fact, the commission will not even be presented with the names of proposed public appointees. What the commission will do is to examine the process used in selecting proposed appointees to ensure that it follows the guidelines established by the commission, code of conduct types of guidelines, which will be based upon the principles of transparency and meritocracy.
I and the other members of the commission will need to completely avoid expressing views on any potential candidate for public appointment or, for that matter, any other political process or issue. We are about principles, process and governance; we are not about the selection of individuals. Madam Chair, I commit to your committee, and to all Canadians, that I will do everything I can to see that the process of making public appointments in this country is lifted to a level that is viewed as the highest standard among democracies in the world.
When I accepted this nomination, the Prime Minister and I agreed that five commission members should be spread across the regions of our country, and the commission should reflect a diversity of backgrounds. Now, Madam Chair, let me mention the other members of the commission, which was announced in yesterday's press release.
Starting from the west and moving east, we have Hassan Khosrowshahi. Hassan and his wife, Nezhat, came to our country as immigrants from Iran and founded and eventually sold the Future Shop. They are passionate Canadians who want to do everything they can to see that Canada continues to be one of the greatest places in the world, and they are stellar examples of the contribution that Canada's immigrant mosaic makes to our country.
From the prairie region, I humbly offer the services of this former farm boy from Alberta.
From Ontario, there's Roy McLaren. Roy McLaren has served this country as an MP, a cabinet minister, and as High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, among other things. I'm sure that his record, his abilities, his integrity need little explanation to the committee or, for that matter, to other Canadians.
From Quebec, there's Ms. Jacqueline Boutet, Order of Canada. Jacqueline was raised in Quebec City and now lives in Montreal. This French Canadian has a distinguished record both in business and in her service to her community and her country. She has served on both crown and private corporate boards and was first woman chair of Tennis Canada. I would be very proud to work with Ms. Boutet as we carry out the mandate of the commission.
Madam Chair, the fifth member of the commission will come from Atlantic Canada. I hope you can see the quality and diversity standards set by the names announced so far, and I know the Prime Minister will be proud to announce a commissioner from Atlantic Canada in due course.
Each person has agreed to work as a commissioner and is prepared to invest their time and bring their abilities and dedication to its mandate for one and only one reason, because we love our country and we want to help make it even better. That is why we have all asked that we not be paid any salary. That's not precisely true; we want to be paid $1 per year. I'm excited about this because it recreates some great history under Minister C.D. Howe and, more recently, that great Canadian, Mitchell Sharp.
Madam Chair, with that opening statement, I'm now prepared to answer the committee's questions.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Diane Marleau
Thank you very much.
Mr. Morgan, you're going to find that in this place there are many strong-willed, strong personalities, and they certainly don't always agree, nor do they always cooperate, and that can be quite a challenge. This is also a place where a few words can be taken out of context, and are on a daily basis. So welcome to this sport that we call politics, and it's a tough one.
I will now go on to our first questioner, Mr. Volpe.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Merci, madame la présidente. Bonjour, monsieur Morgan.
I would love to have that press release to which you made reference. We weren't supplied with it.
At any rate, compliments on your acceptance.
Notwithstanding the caution of the chair, I wonder, Mr. Morgan, whether you think this exercise is okay for you. We've had other people who, like yourself, have been in the public service. For example, last year--and I'm sure some of the members opposite will remember--we had an appointee by the Liberal government of the day, Mr. Murray. He was an accomplished public servant in a role that, by all other accounts, was one to which he was suitably matched. This kind of structure created some difficulties; I think you've alluded to them. You didn't want to be taken out of context, and I'm sure he didn't either.
You're okay with the system, though, where we get a chance to see what you're all about?
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Good.
That having been said, you talked about principles, process, and governance, because that's what you're about; that's all you're about. You're going to make sure that everybody who is going to be considered by the Government of Canada goes through those three items. Should it be our understanding that you think none of that has happened before?
As an Individual
Thank you for the question.
It's true that I haven't been in government before, so I don't know all of the ins and outs and processes here in Ottawa. But it's fair to say I believe that the people of the country are looking forward to some ways of doing things even better than they were done before.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
So, for example, in terms of selecting judges, you're probably aware there is a peer review that screens any potential candidate well before they come for the consideration of cabinet and the Prime Minister. Would you change that system, and if so, to what?
As an Individual
What I need to do today, Madam Chair, is to really stick to the mandate of the Public Appointments Commission. The Public Appointments Commission will have nothing to do with the appointment of judges. That will be another decision that is made by government policy, I suppose. We will not have an involvement in that.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
You did say in your introduction that, yes, you're not going to make any appointments but that you believe in strong character, ethical behaviour, and high performance as criteria for the other issue, which is meritocracy: meritocracy in the public service and meritocracy in all patronage appointments. Patronage appointments are the ones made by government of the day, presumably on the same high ethical standards.
Is there any one sector in which you believe there has not been a focus on meritocracy, or were you simply looking at some of the people who are going to be part of your commission; for example, Roy McLaren?
As an Individual
Madam Chair, the commission's mandate will not extend to the public service. But I must say that I've long tried to be a champion, if you like, in the private sector for the public service. I was a member of the board of the Public Policy Forum, and I co-chaired an awards dinner two years ago with Dalton McGuinty in Ontario for the Public Policy Forum.
I believe that one of the great advantages in our country has always been that we have an ethical, quality public service. I think that is a real advantage in our country, and at least for my purposes, I'm very satisfied. In fact, I think we need to do more to encourage our public servants.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
You can always reach higher and go faster; that's a function of our life and a function of any system. I wanted specifically to point out the places where it wasn't happening--where people weren't jumping, weren't running, weren't doing things according to merit.
Consistent with your own private sector approach to life, which is based on the principle of good solid leadership and presumes some research, and the private sector system of governance--in other words, bottom line, perform--when you accepted this job, presumably you would have already considered those. I imagine, because I hold you in some regard, that you would have done that kind of pre-study beforehand and would be able to give us an indication of where we have been missing meritocracy and transparency.
As an Individual
Thank you again for the question.
Madam Chair, I talked about the public service. The area in which I do have a concern personally, and have had for some time, and I think many Canadians have, is patronage appointments. I have had experience talking to people who have been on government boards and agencies, and I've found that sometimes people are selected without what they believe to be a process that determines who is best for the job. In many cases, some of the openings that have been available, potentially available, have been advertised in the Canada Gazette, and someone said to me, “All five people who read that know about it.”
Generally, there hasn't been a--
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
But it does point out, Mr. Morgan, that there is a process in place. And I'm just wondering which aspect of the process you didn't like. You've said you didn't know very much about the judicial appointment process. Are you familiar with another one of the issues that's related to some of the statements you claim have been taken out of context? The issue of selecting members to the Immigration and Refugee Board, commissions, or maybe citizenship arbitrators--are you familiar with some of the processes that go towards choosing people who sit part-time on boards for CPP or for the employment commission?
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
You're aware there is a process, that it's a very rigorous process, and that it involves examination, transparency, and meritocracy.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Diane Marleau
I regret, Mr. Volpe, your time is up.
Sir, you can answer that later as part of another question, if that's your wish.
Ms. Thibault, go ahead.
Bloc
Louise Thibault Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Morgan, thank you for being here this morning.
In your presentation, you alluded to the principles you set out for your company and to the underlying issue of transparency. The Conservative government often refers to it. I am having some difficulty reconciling the notion of transparency with the fact that the Prime Minister—and I'm not referring to the fact that he chose you personally—chose a chair and commission members while Bill C-2 is being considered by the legislative committee. This shows that the government, arrogantly—it isn't a sign of self-assurance so much as a sign of arrogance towards parliamentarians—carried out this entire process ahead of time. Moreover, you assure us that the process started by this commission will be absolutely exemplary. How can you reconcile these two things?
How can you—and I won't mention commission members, who are absent—accept a nomination to a position which has not yet been created?
As an Individual
Madam, honourable member, if you will, thank you very much for your question.
Madam Chair, as I said earlier, I am a person from the private sector who has been asked by the Prime Minister to do a job. All of the processes of Bill C-2 and of clause 228 of it, which specifically refers to a Public Appointments Commission, are things that are part of public policy and part of the acts of government.
When the Prime Minister asked me to do this job I had enough confidence that the House would pass the bill to say it was worth my while getting started and accepting the position. Of course, should that not happen, then we all know the commission will not actually take place.
There is a lot of history in Parliament, and I have some understanding of this history. With new government initiatives, at times things are started to get things going, and that is not a precedent.
Bloc
Louise Thibault Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
I don't know if the information I have here is correct. It was published in the The Hill Times. Apparently, you are so confident that you have appointed a director, Peter Harrison. Is that true or false?
As an Individual
Madam Chair, I think the same answer applies, that we are trying to get this commission going. We know a lot of appointments are pending and some will have to be made before the commission is operating, so the Prime Minister, under his own portfolio, has taken that initiative. It hasn't been my initiative; it's been his initiative to get things going on the basis that we need to be ready when the bill is passed.
Bloc
Louise Thibault Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you for your answer, but being ready and starting ahead of time are not the same thing.
Under the current process of which you are an example, governor-in-council appointees are invited to testify before the committee and generally do so. Because we have a number of questions, you may answer yes or no. Will this process be enshrined in the commission's procedures?
As an Individual
Madam Chair, I can't quite give a yes or no, but I'll give a very quick answer.
The procedures of the commission will be reflective of the procedures the government puts forward for various appointments. We will not have even any say on which goes to committee and which doesn't. What we will have a say in is the process of selection, to make sure, as much as possible, that it's transparent and based on meritocracy.
Bloc
Louise Thibault Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
On page 4 of the French version of your presentation, you referred to a couple of sentences being taken out of context and leaving such an untrue impression of your beliefs.
I'll read you this in English, because obviously, your presentation is in English:
It’s fair to say that most immigrants who abuse our society have come in as refugee claimants rather than “economic immigrants”. This not only means they are more likely to have violent tendencies, but also much less likely to have the skills, training and attitude necessary to contribute to our society.
Do you not consider these to be racist comments?