Government Operations Committee on March 27th, 2007

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

You have the floor, Mr. Rodriguez.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Harrison, I would like to go back to a previous statement because I am not sure that I understood you, and I may not be the only one who feels that way.

I am not clear on the role of the secretariat as compared to that of the commission. A few minutes ago, you said that the secretariat had to establish a code of practice for the commission. Is that right?

[Dr. Peter Harrison]

Yes. The secretariat acted as the public service for the commission. As is the case with all of the commissions that depend upon their public servants to advise them, the objective was to have the secretariat define the options for the commission. It was not up to the secretariat to make the decisions.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Therefore, it was the administrative arm of the commission. The commission made the decisions, and the secretariat carried them out. It's like having a board of directors working with management.

[Dr. Peter Harrison]

Absolutely.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

So it was a permanent arrangement. The secretariat worked with the commission on an ongoing basis.

[Dr. Peter Harrison]

Madam Chair, the secretariat was created and continues to exist. As I said, as of next Monday, there will no longer be any members, but the secretariat still exists.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

There will no longer be any members, but it will continue to exist?

[Dr. Peter Harrison]

It was created—

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

It just doesn't sound right to me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

It does exist, Mr. Rodriguez.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Yes, I know. Only—

[Dr. Peter Harrison]

Madam Chair, I have been gone now for a number of weeks, or even months, but I was told that there was a process underway to appoint an executive director for the secretariat. As is usually the case, this type of thing does take time. That is what I was told, but I can't say for sure.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Who recommended the names for the appointments and to whom were they recommended?

[Dr. Peter Harrison]

The system was a relatively simple one, even though it always seems complicated when I explain it.

The approach was multi-faceted, so I will try to provide a context. Some appointments to an advisory board are made by ministers, within their department, but that is not what we are talking about.

Some appointments are put forward to the governor in council by ministers, in other words, they are submitted to cabinet, and are approved by the governor in council.

Each department has a process to provide ministers with lists of qualified individuals. There is a practice among a growing number of departments to make a selection according to certain criteria and standards that are related to the qualifications of the individuals.

The word "appointment" has a different connotation in English and in French. The order is the instrument that is used to allow these people to begin serving in their position, and it is the ministers' responsibility. There are also, however, key appointments, for example, the CEOs of crown corporations, the presidents, and people who hold the higher-ranking positions. The Privy Council Office is responsible for the selection process for those individuals.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Generally speaking, in recent months or since the new government took office, has anything changed in the appointment process?

[Dr. Peter Harrison]

I believe so, but I am no longer working there. My opinion is based on what I hear from other people. I don't want to tell any tales, but after some discussions and round tables with various agencies and corporations, we realized that many of them had devised principles and selection processes that were then suggested to their minister.

As I said, I have no direct proof of that, but that is what I have been told.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

Ms. Thibault, you have the floor.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Mr. Harrison, in 2004, the committee heard from witnesses who explained that for some boards—and I don't remember which ones—the appointment process was rather loosely structured.

At the time, Mr. Poilievre and some of his colleagues sat beside me, and Madam Chair and her colleagues were across the table. The committee members found it rather disquieting to hear what some of these directors had to say. For example, one chairman told us that he had chosen one, two or three candidates. When asked how he ensured that these people were competent and able to do the job—they were business people, people with experience—if they represented a cross-section of Canadian society or if they were bilingual, he said that all of the documents used by the board of directors were translated and since most people spoke English, there was really no problem. That's the type of thing we were told, and many of us found that somewhat worrisome.

In your documents and in your presentation, you say that you want the selection process to be well advertised, and you want it to be fair, open and transparent, and based on merit. That means—and I hope you will confirm this—that criteria such as representativeness will be taken into account so that visible minorities, women, aboriginal people, etc., as well as bilingual people, anglophones and francophones will all be considered. I have no doubt about the merit, nor about the fact that both you and your successor were hoping to find qualified people.

I would like to come back to the question that I asked earlier. Do you think that in the short term, the secretariat, with the necessary staff to do the job—we know that come Monday morning, there will be nobody left to do it—will allow federal organizations to ensure that their recruiting will become a noble cause, as you said, with the criteria that I have just listed? We don't know who will be selected, but can we have the assurance that people will have the tools that they need and the ministers will have no reason not to appoint the most worthy candidates?

[Dr. Peter Harrison]

Thank you, Ms. Thibault.

Madam Chair, diversity and representativeness were key considerations in all of our discussions on the code of practice. Certain elements must be included because of the act, but, as you said, we must also take into account the representation of the regions, etc., of Canada.

I hope that these factors will play an important role in future appointments. The fact that these appointments are made by the governor in council provides ministers with the necessary flexibility to consider a list of competent individuals and use their best judgment to meet the objectives that you have listed.

You also mentioned boards of directors. For some time now there has been an attempt to define what qualifications are required. We were studying that for the clerk. It is obvious that in the case of a crown corporation's board of directors, depending on the field of activity and its objectives, you would require experienced people such as lawyers or engineers, people from eastern or western Canada, francophones, etc. We came up with an idea that was implemented some time ago by the Privy Council Office; it involved a structure based on qualifications. Therefore, when a position becomes vacant on a board of directors, the first question is the following one. In view of the type of activity in which this organization is involved, what type of skill do we require? That helped to define the type of selection process that should apply.

Take, for example, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. Sometimes, we need someone who is so specialized that there might be only two or three candidates in all of Canada, or even in the world. It is not quite the same as looking for someone who has business experience. In this case, a candidate's name would be considered by the board of directors, by taking into account those who are already there and what the shareholder had in mind.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

We will now move on to Ms. Nash, followed by Mr. Poilievre.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you.

Let me try to summarize.

It seems that after a year in office, and in spite of the Conservative campaigning on accountability, we now have no greater accountability in appointments. Our party joined with others to make stronger accountability laws that are now being ignored. Worse, the government is explicitly appointing only people who agree with them, thereby politicizing appointments.

We have a secretariat that spent half a million dollars. There are reports of travel not related to the secretariat, to Tuktoyaktuk and other places. By all accounts we have a secretariat where the lights are on but no one's home.

Mr. Harrison, are Canadians being well served by the secretariat you led and by this government's appointments process in general?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Point of order, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Yes.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I have always understood that questions like these are permitted.