Evidence of meeting #46 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was office.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
We have to remain very flexible.
NDP
Denis Blanchette NDP Louis-Hébert, QC
Okay.
I have one last quick question. You said that you currently have 25 employees. Your target retention rate is 85% annually, or basically one person per year. You now have three. How do you plan to reach that level given the office's track record?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
I'm very proud of having an 85% retention rate. We invest in our staff. We have to remain sensitive to the demands and interests of all staff. I am proud to tell you that our team is integrated—it is strong and proud—but that requires an investment in terms of time, spirit and resources.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
Thank you, Mr. Blanchette.
Thank you, Mr. Friday.
Next, for the Conservatives, we have Ms. Wai Young. You have five minutes, please, Ms. Young.
Conservative
Wai Young Conservative Vancouver South, BC
Thank you again for being here today.
I wanted to ask you, because you made some very interesting responses, how you know when a case is successfully resolved. Is it when someone loses or wins or when you feel as if you have gotten to the bottom of the matter?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
There are many ways to measure success, a large one being that we feel we have dealt with all matters in a fair and just way.
Perhaps this is an opportunity for me to underscore the fact that we do not represent one party or another in any investigation but we represent the public interest. So we remain neutral and objective.
From a purely operational perspective, we are very careful to ensure that our evidence gathering is complete and that it meets the legal standard to prove that wrongdoing has or has not taken place, or, in the case of a reprisal, that there are reasonable grounds to believe it has taken place.
We also have a process whereby we share preliminary investigation reports with affected parties to get a second round of information to clarify and confirm, and then to reassess all of the evidence that we have, recognizing, of course, that not only is it extraordinarily difficult in many cases for someone to come forward to our office in the first place—it takes a lot of courage to step forward—but also that the results of one of our investigations, the consequences, can be very serious.
For example, for the 10 case reports we've had today, five of the alleged wrongdoers resigned during the course of the investigation; two were terminated; and for one a judicial inquiry with respect to their ability to keep their job was triggered. The other two were more organizational in nature. So recognizing the impact of not only a finding but also even just our presence in an office.... If we don't find that wrongdoing has occurred, which the numbers indicate happens in the majority of cases, we still have to be extraordinarily sensitive to the impact of an office such as ours, an external agent of Parliament with an investigative mandate, being in an organization.
Conservative
Wai Young Conservative Vancouver South, BC
Could you share with us, and I know you just did a little bit, the range of possible outcomes from an investigation? Obviously there's termination, etc., but do you actually go beyond that to charge people? Do people go to jail?
Maybe we should just start with that.
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
Under the legislation, we have the authority to make a report to Parliament. We have the obligation to make a report to Parliament, a public report, on every founded case of wrongdoing. We make recommendations for corrective action.
One of the very delicate issues is that we don't step into the shoes of the chief executive of that organization, recognizing that our job is ultimately to hold that chief executive publicly accountable for making a decision to respond to what we find, to respond to a recommendation. To date, all chief executives have responded fully to our recommendations, and in the two cases of termination I mentioned, it was the chief executives' decision, following our finding of wrongdoing, to take what they thought was the appropriate action.
Conservative
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
Yes. We have the authority under our legislation to follow up on recommendations and actually come back to Parliament to present any issues we observe or encounter in the implementation of recommendations or findings. To date, I can say that chief executives have taken our presence and our findings very seriously and have responded.
Conservative
Wai Young Conservative Vancouver South, BC
How are these cases documented? In the case, for example, of an employee, are their records expunged? Does it even appear in their records or can they move to another part of the country, apply under a different arm of government and presumably start working again within the federal public service?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
Our involvement ends with the tabling of a public case report, which is a matter of public record. In the case of reprisal investigations, we would refer those to a specially constituted tribunal that has all the power of a court to order remedial action and also order disciplinary action. Those orders are enforceable as court orders in the cases of reprisal.
People who are found to have committed wrongdoing certainly go back into society, if you will. These aren't criminal charges, and we don't have any criminal authority. As I said earlier, we refer criminal matters elsewhere, to the appropriate police force, but there is a public record of our finding that remains a permanent Parliamentary record and a permanent record of our office.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
Thank you, Mr. Friday. Thank you, Ms. Young. That concludes your five minutes.
We have time for two more rounds—just barely. I'm going to suggest that we reduce the rounds to four minutes each instead of five, so we can get them both in.
Next on the list is Tarik Brahmi, for the NDP.
NDP
Tarik Brahmi NDP Saint-Jean, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Friday, I will continue in the same vein as Mr. Butt. You told him that some disclosures, although not a majority of them, come from outside the public service.
When you appeared on March 26, you said that, in addition to disclosures, evidence could also potentially come from outside the public service in the future. You also said you were working on implementing that system.
What financial implications could that have over the next few years? If you managed to quickly implement the new provision that would enable you to use evidence from outside the public service, do you think your case load would increase? Do you have any budget estimates for the next three years?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
We have the capacity to accept disclosures from members of the public. I honestly don't think that using evidence from outside the public sector will have a major impact. We have identification processes, as well as processes for gathering and analyzing the necessary evidence to determine whether or not a wrongdoing took place.
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
I must say that it is possible.
NDP
Tarik Brahmi NDP Saint-Jean, QC
Last, I will look at the risk assessment you carried out while developing your three-year strategic plan. What are the most significant risks you identified through the assessment?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
The most significant one is raising awareness, and that is a permanent challenge.
Information management, the electronic process and information security also play a part. We are now actually enhancing our internal processes for protecting information. For instance, we access files and check all the cases on an ongoing basis. We have to use all available tools to protect the confidentiality of the information, our files and all the documentation.
NDP
Tarik Brahmi NDP Saint-Jean, QC
Are the increasing prices of external computer services among the risks you identified?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada
That's a risk we are willing to take. After looking into the issue, we concluded that it was not too serious.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
Thank you, Mr. Brahmi, and Mr. Friday. That concludes your time.
Finally, we have a very special guest with us today. We're honoured to have the chair of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, Mr. Tilson.