Government Operations Committee on March 13th, 2008

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

It's not a point of order. Ce n'est pas un point d'ordre.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

What can I do?

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Wait your turn.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Judge Gomery is being told tall tales. This is not true.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

We are going to allow Mr. Brown to continue. Mr. Gomery is capable of defending himself and of distinguishing between was is true and what is not.

Mr. Brown, continue for another two minutes.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Gomery recommendation 14 was also accepted by the Federal Accountability Act.

Gomery recommendation 15, “The Registrar of Lobbyists should report directly to Parliament on matters concerning the application and enforcement of the Lobbyists Registration Act”, has not only been accepted by the Federal Accountability Act and implemented, it has gone even further. It has extended the period to ten years in which violations can be investigated and prosecuted.

Gomery recommendation 17, “The Financial Administration Act should be amended to add a new section stipulating that deliberate violation of section 34 of the Act by an employee of the federal government is grounds for dismissal without compensation“, is also achieved in the Federal Accountability Act.

What I am trying to get to by pointing to these examples is to highlight to you and to those watching that your work has resulted in massive change, and that's why it's so appreciated that you're able to delve into this massive Liberal scandal with such an effect that we've been able to change the way in which government is done. That's why many people refer to the Federal Accountability Act as the toughest anti-corruption legislation ever presented in the House of Commons.

I want to note that the Federal Accountability Act was something that we all campaigned on. I remember that winter election where we would trudge through snow and we told this to Canadians.

It wasn't one person who came up with the Federal Accountability Act. It wasn't one person who decided on it. But it was the collective wisdom of Canadians who supported that, and I think, as a political party, when we presented this, and as a government, we had that obligation to Canadians, because it was Canadians who voted on it and it was Canadians who expected us to deliver on the Federal Accountability Act.

In terms of the four aspects of the Gomery recommendations that relate to the public accounts committee, obviously that's a decision of the public accounts committee. I know it's chaired by an opposition member. I don't imagine they're trying to sabotage those recommendations of yours. I know they've been preoccupied with some other things. It would be my hope that the opposition members on that committee would certainly adopt those.

But I want to close with a question. Given all the work you've put into this, are you satisfied that we're stepping forward in the right direction? And looking back, do you believe those Liberal operatives who were involved in this massive scandal have been adequately held responsible?

[John H. Gomery]

Well—

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

You don't have much time to answer, unfortunately.

[John H. Gomery]

I'll answer briefly.

I think I've already answered that the Federal Accountability Act is certainly a step in the right direction, but it was not a response to my report. My report hadn't even been filed and deposited at the time they drafted that. In other words, the Federal Accountability Act anticipated some of my recommendations. I think it did not anticipate the others, and the others have been ignored. I think that's the answer to your question.

As far as whether people have been held adequately responsible, that's a matter for the police and Parliament, and things like that. I was not allowed by the terms of reference to make findings of criminal or civil responsibility. That has to be left up to the courts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

To be fair, before I let anybody else continue, there was a piece of legislation that had passed under the Liberals, Bill C-11. Bill C-2, their accountability bill, amended some provisions of that and added to that, but they didn't invent the whole thing.

I just thought I'd square the circle.

[John H. Gomery]

I think all political parties were falling all over each other to work on accountability issues as a result of my first report.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

That's right. Absolutely.

I'd like to go now, for five minutes, to Mr. Holland.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Gomery, the truth is that all impropriety that happens at any point in time hurts not only the political party of the day but hurts our Parliament and hurts our system overall, and whether or not it was under Brian Mulroney or under a Liberal government, or whether or not it's the various affairs that this current government is involved in, this hurts us.

One of the things I take pride in is that our government, despite a very difficult time, made a very difficult decision, which was to ask you to look into this affair and ensure that it wouldn't happen again. Therefore, so that it's clear, I certainly can speak not just for myself but for our party, that we're happy to talk at any time, in any place, about your recommendations and the need for them to be implemented. I think it's essential that it happens.

I do not want to see my reputation or those of any parliamentarians hurt because we make the same mistakes again. We should learn from history and not be doomed to repeat it.

In that regard, whether or not it's fighting for a public complaints commissioner to be put in immediately, whether or not it's talking about the complaints the information commissioner has and the recommendations you've made in that regard that haven't been fulfilled, those key recommendations and those main recommendations that you talked about that haven't been implemented have to be. When we've put them forward, unfortunately we haven't gotten the progress that we want.

So I want to come back to this point just for a second, because it's crucial. We've heard from government members that they appreciate what you've said, but to be clear, you have never gotten a letter saying that. You've never received correspondence saying “We've read your report, we've considered your recommendations, we disagree with your recommendations, we're going to accept some, we're going to take another year to implement them.” You've received nothing back in terms of what this government intends to do with those recommendations. Is that correct?

[John H. Gomery]

That's correct.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

I think that's a poignant point, because we're all left to wonder where we are going with this. You yourself said those are the key recommendations and they leave others outstanding. I think they've already led to other problems and to other improprieties that damage not just political parties but our political process and us, as parliamentarians, overall.

I want to come back to this point of executive versus legislative power and the fact that over the last number of years we've seen an acceleration of the trend you've described toward a concentration of power in the hands of the Prime Minister and the PMO. You said we're heading toward a one-man government, if we're not there already. When I was in school, one-man government was called a dictatorship. So what we're heading toward is a dictatorship with term limits, almost.

How do we best combat this? Because this is something I'm concerned about. Would you agree that this trend has been accelerating in the last number of years, that we're seeing even more concentration in the PMO, and that your concerns, as you expressed them two years ago, perhaps would be even more elevated today?

[John H. Gomery]

I think it's a key problem, and it's hard to figure out the remedy. The last information I had, about 100 staff in the Prime Minister's Office were exempt. And if you go back to the days of Diefenbaker and Pearson, I doubt they had more than 10 or 12 political staff in their offices. So this has been a huge growth. I think it deserves attention, because as I've already said, these are unregulated personnel, and they aren't accountable to anybody except to the person who is the head of their office, the chief of staff, who is himself unelected.

I chose to deal with that by making certain recommendations that would have the effect of increasing the visibility and functions of individual members of Parliament, and I think this committee is a good example of the kind of check that can occur on the powers of the Prime Minister's Office. So I applaud the hearings taking place today, and I applaud similar committees, such as the public accounts committee, which deals with financial matters, and other committees.

I think this permits individual members of Parliament to hold the government to account. The traditional role of Parliament is to hold the government to account. I'm not so clear on restricting or checking the expansion of this exempt staff, except I think some rules should apply to these people. I've heard there are some training sessions. I'm delighted to hear that. I'm not so sure what training they're receiving, but in any event I think that's a positive step.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

One of the things that--

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you, Mr. Holland. Your time is up.

We'll go to Mr. Warkentin.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Gomery, for being with us this morning.

You could have said only one thing to endear yourself to my farmers even more this morning, and that was the fact that you are going to be involved in calving season shortly. They appreciate a man who understands what they're involved in, as well.

[John H. Gomery]

I know what's truly important.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Absolutely.

I'll tell you that those same farmers were very interested in the media attention brought to you a couple of years ago because of your uncovering of the huge Liberal sponsorship scandal. Thank you very much for doing that on behalf of Canadians, really.

You said something interesting about transparency, which was that Canadians are going to continue to demand more and more transparency. I think you're right. I think we live in a day and age when things in the past that could be held secret can't be. I certainly think there's a trend in terms of increased media availability and increased technologies that really do inform the electorate. I want to concur with you on that.

I think there's no question, especially as I look at my generation, the generations to follow, that we will live in a completely different world from what our parents and grandparents lived in.

Along with that, there's a responsibility, as far as the government is concerned, to continue to bring transparency and to open itself up to the public eye. Obviously, there are some challenges in doing that.

I think it's very interesting. I've read this letter that many people, eminent Canadians, have signed off on, including a Liberal candidate who's running in a byelection right now, Mr. Bob Rae. They talk about the report, and they talk about complex matters that could have far-reaching effects:

...effects that in some cases, we believe, would be very damaging. It is important that you should take enough time to make a careful assessment of your own before deciding which of Justice Gomery's recommendations should be implemented.

After two years, we look at the recommendations. We see that a good number of them have been implemented, a majority of them, at least in part. As we proceed, obviously, there is going to be more attention drawn to this. There's going to be more of a desire to see this.

Is there anything you felt, looking at it today, you left out of the recommendations, things that could have been added or things you see differently than when you put the report together?

[John H. Gomery]

Well, I'm not going to pretend that my report was perfect or that it was carved in stone, or should be carved in stone. Obviously, everything I've ever done could have been done better, I guess.

When we were discussing my report with my advisory committee, we talked about various possibilities. One would have involved a report that contained hundreds of recommendations, and we thought about that. It would have been very detailed. I said no, that's too easy for governments to forget. When they get massive recommendations, it is impossible for them to digest, so they don't.

We deliberately restricted it to 18 plus one, with the time delay. I remember saying I think we should shoot high; we should aim high, we should aim for a fundamental change. I'm afraid that it's the fundamental change that has not taken place.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I would differ from you in some respect on that. I don't want you to be discouraged about the effect you've had on Parliament, on society, or on the culture of government. I think it's important for you to know--if nobody else tells you, you won't know, I guess--that the Gomery report is considered often. It is referred to often, be it behind closed doors or be it within committees like this, as well. Absolutely, it is.

[John H. Gomery]

It's the subject of university courses.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

It should be, and I think that speaks to the impact it's had and continues to have.

Although you have some concerns with regard to the implementation or when the Federal Accountability Act was brought forward, I think it's important that you recognize the impact you had even before the report was completely finished. Obviously, you can understand the fact that the Federal Accountability Act was being promoted and was being put together prior to your report coming forward. So obviously there's complexity there.

Obviously the toughest anti-corruption legislation that's ever been brought forward has your fingerprints all over it, Mr. Gomery.