Evidence of meeting #4 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was tribunal.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:50 p.m.
Registrar, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
I understand your question very well.
First of all, whistleblowing comes under the jurisdiction of Ms. Christiane Ouimet, the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner. If an employee had concerns about actions taken by a senior official...
3:50 p.m.
A voice
Not by a minister?
3:50 p.m.
Registrar, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
No, am I mistaken, Jean-Charles? That is not provided for in the legislation.
3:50 p.m.
Senior Legal Advisor, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
No, if it is a minister, that is something else.
3:50 p.m.
Registrar, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
That's right. So, if an employee had some concerns about the activities of a senior official, he would have two options. Every department has a senior officer who has been appointed by the deputy minister for the very purpose of receiving complaints from employees. The employee could, first of all, go to this individual. Or the employee could also choose to make a direct complaint with the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner. It is then up to the commissioner to carry out an investigation in order to determine whether or not there has in fact been any wrongdoing.
The mandate of the tribunal deals with retaliation exclusively. If the employee has suffered retaliation after filing this complaint, or even beforehand if he has raised the issue or if his supervisors have thought that he was going to go down this path, the employee may also file a complaint with the commissioner, Ms. Ouimet. He will therefore inform the commissioner that he is disclosing information with respect to wrongdoing and that he is also filing a complaint regarding retaliation. The employee has suffered retaliation because he has taken action. Once again, it is Ms. Ouimet who initiates the inquiry. If it is a difficult case or a case of public interest, Ms. Ouimet will decide whether or not to table a request with the tribunal to hear the parties.
I did not answer your question about the 60 days.
November 26th, 2007 / 3:55 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Thank you.
I want to thank our guests for coming to committee today.
Your work and the office you're setting up and will be working in is very important to me as a member of Parliament from this area. In fact, I was on the committee for Bill C-2. One of the concerns I had was around whistle-blower protection, so it's interesting to see you here today, and I'm glad to see that things are moving along.
I have a question to start off, just for clarification and for the record. The three people who have been appointed were appointed by whom? How did they become appointed?
3:55 p.m.
Registrar, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
They were appointed by order in council.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
I just wanted that for the record. In Bill C-2, as you are probably aware, there is also a process called PAC, or the Public Appointments Commission, which is as yet to come into force and to be put into place.
Again, I'm just stating that for the record, because it was our understanding that the Public Appointments Commission would actually be up and running, and by the time your office was up and running, the three judges would have had their appointments vetted through the Public Appointments Commission.
Am I correct in saying that to date no cases have come to you?
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Are you aware of how many cases there have been outstanding that are similar to what this legislation would do and protect? Any guesstimate on that, or has there been a study on that?
3:55 p.m.
Registrar, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
No, I'm not aware of any. The reason for that is there is complete independence between the tribunal and the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner. You would have to ask that question of the commissioner.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
I ask that only because of the numerous cases I've dealt with in my office that this legislation doesn't cover. These cases actually predate the coming into force of this legislation.
What I would say to my friends on the government side is that we had asked that the government appoint someone to clean up, if you will, to mop up the cases that are outstanding. I'm thinking of Shiv Chopra's case, of Chander Grover, who is well known. These people have fought and won, but the government continues to fight them in court with all of the resources of the Department of Justice.
I'm not sure how it would come into your focus, or if, for perhaps your own study, there is a way to look at how many cases in the last couple of years would have come to you--in the public domain, of course. I've mentioned two, and I have many others that I'd be happy to share with you.
I'd just plead to the government to...was on the verge of appointing someone, we know, to actually clean up the cases of previous whistle-blowers who still are in front of the courts. These are people--I mentioned Dr. Chopra, Chander Grover, and others--who blew the whistle, did their jobs, and the price they paid was they lost their jobs and are being litigated against in the courts. I'd again appeal to the government.
In terms of your office, have you all the resources you need? If someone were to bring a case forward tomorrow, would you be ready to go?
3:55 p.m.
Registrar, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
Absolutely. I've hired a critical mass of employees. It's a small group. The full salary budget would allow for about 12 or 13 employees. We are six at the moment.
Whether you have one case or you have ten, you do need a minimum critical mass. I have these people in place. We have hearing rooms available to us. Of course, the judges are already appointed and are quite familiar with the law. We have developed rules of procedure for hearings.
So we are ready to go.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
I have a question about your relationship with the Public Service Labour Relations Board. My understanding, from being at committee on Bill C-2—the other Bill C-2—was that there was a huge backlog with the Public Service Labour Relations Board.
Are you aware of their backlog, of how many cases they have in front of them right now?
3:55 p.m.
Registrar, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
No, I'm not. Again, we're a completely separate and independent organization with a different mandate. There are some similarities in terms of the scope, if you like, or the types of issues that would be looked at by the two organizations, but really, the tribunal is there to hear cases of reprisal, and reprisal specifically as a result of having come forward in the--
4 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
So a public servant may choose to take their case to the Public Service Labour Relations Board or yourself. I just wanted to be clear about that.
My question was based simply on the fact that at committee I was supportive of the setting up of your office because of the backlog at the Public Service Labour Relations Board, the experience of the aforementioned people, and the fact that they weren't able to get their cases heard in a timely fashion. It's maybe worthy--and it's on the public record--to look back or to phone them and look at how many cases they have in their backlog, because it is an issue of deep concern for many people.
I'll leave my questions at that. Thank you very much.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair. It's good to be back on this committee.
Thank you to the officials for being here today, and for your helpful presentation.
I have a couple of questions. First—and you may have mentioned this—does a tribunal take any cases outside of the referrals from the Integrity Commissioner?
4 p.m.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
So it's exclusively dependent on a decision of the Integrity Commissioner.
4 p.m.
Liberal
Omar Alghabra Liberal Mississauga—Erindale, ON
Is the tribunal public or is it private? And if it is public, are there provisions for private sessions?
4 p.m.
Registrar, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
Yes. I'm going to ask Jean-Charles to elaborate on that, but basically, yes, the law provides for hearings to be public and for the decisions to be made public as well. There are exceptions.
Jean-Charles.
4 p.m.
Senior Legal Advisor, Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal
The act provides, in subsection 21(3), that the hearings be public unless a party demonstrates to the satisfaction of the tribunal that it has to be in camera. So the rule is public per se, but there is room to have it in camera.
Regarding personal information, technically speaking, because it's public everybody can attend the hearing. So what is said there is supposed to be public. We cannot prevent what will be said.
What can be adjusted is the decision of the tribunal, which will be public. But that doesn't mean that everything that is personal would have to be in the decision per se, depending on what may be said, depending on the public interest. So all the details regarding personal information will be on a case-by-case assessment. But the rule is public per se.
