Evidence of meeting #162 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pco.
A recording is available from Parliament.
February 25th, 2019 / 4:50 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner
I leave that in your very capable hands.
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
Yes.
Between 2017 and now, how many complaints have you received? What is the nature of the complaints?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner
Very interestingly, in 2017 and again last year, we noticed a significant increase. We were averaging about 85 to 100 disclosures of wrongdoing, and that went up last year to 147, I believe. This year so far—and the fiscal year is not over—we're up to approximately 130.
I do think that demonstrates something very important—a measure of success, in my view—which is that people feel comfortable coming forward.
Having said that, the majority of cases we get are still not necessarily within the purview of our legislation. For example, we still get many individual harassment complaints that really are not the reason for the existence of our legislation. Every time I make a founded case of wrongdoing, I have to make a public report to Parliament.
There is a lot of education to be done about what kinds of cases we deal with, but I am very pleased to see that more people are indeed coming forward.
The majority of disclosures of wrongdoing that come to our office are allegations under the definition of wrongdoing. There are several heads to wrongdoing. The two most frequently cited are gross mismanagement and a serious breach of the code of conduct. The majority of our 16 case reports have actually made those kinds of findings.
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
Has there been reconciliation? What does your department do to reconcile? Has anybody been fired or has anybody been reprimanded?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner
I'm happy to say I have tallied up some statistics in regard to the 16 case reports that we tabled to date.
In two cases, the wrongdoer was fired.
In six cases, the alleged wrongdoer—who turned out to be a wrongdoer, as we made founded cases—resigned during the course of the investigation.
In one case, a statutory inquiry was triggered to determine appropriate discipline. That person's appointment expired and was not renewed during the course of that inquiry.
In six case reports, we recommended discipline and we were advised that discipline was carried out.
In three of the 16 cases, the wrongdoing—and I think this is important to note because the definition of “wrongdoing” can be so broad—was really not attributable to a particular individual. Sometimes wrongdoing can be systemic or almost corporate in nature.
For example, we tabled a case of wrongdoing against the RCMP for flying overweight planes, or for not maintaining the flight logs in a way that could be determined to be safe. No one died and no one was hurt, but that wasn't attributable to one individual. That practice emerged over a long period of time.
In all cases, we advise the chief executive of our findings and under our act—and it's a fine part of our legislation—the chief executive has the ability or the right to respond directly to our recommendation. I have the obligation to publish the chief executive's responses.
What happens after we make a finding and after we make recommendations for corrective action is done very transparently, which I think is a very strong part of our legislation.
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
Would you attribute the increase to the education? Are you educating people or are you making it known on your website? Is there a secure website for anybody to make complaints?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner
Yes, we're in our second year of having an online secure form to either blow the whistle or make a complaint of reprisal. I think that certainly has been a part of the reason why we have an increase in the number of cases. That took us a while to do, to be able to do it securely, but it's up and it's running in our second year. This is our second year of a notable increase.
We do have outreach and education. Under our legislation, it's the president of the Treasury Board who's responsible for making the act known and creating a climate in which whistle-blowing is supported, so I would be very happy for any efforts that Treasury Board is able to make to continue to support that.
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
The last one is this. You've asked for $5.5 million, and you said it's three-twelfths of what you had asked before, but the number of people you have—and you're talking about not being able to meet your mandate—is it sufficient? Are you looking for more money?
Conservative
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner
I currently have sufficient funds to carry out our duties under the act, and I'm not looking for more money, but this will be the first year in the history of our organization that we're actually spending our entire budget, so if I could have a holding spot to come back and ask for more money, if I need it, I promise to give you appropriate advance notice.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Thank you for that.
We'll go to our five-minute round.
Mr. Deltell, you have five minutes.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Madam, gentlemen, welcome to your House of Commons committee.
I will focus on the Transportation Safety Board of Canada. I would also like to thank my colleague Mr. Blaikie, who asked you about rail safety earlier. You will understand that, as a member from Quebec, I cannot ignore the excellent work of my colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable and that, as a Quebecker, I am clearly very sensitive to those events. I would therefore like to thank my colleague Mr. Blaikie for asking those questions, allowing me to address other issues.
I would like to begin by thanking you for your communications service, of which I am a loyal customer. As an ultralight pilot myself, I consult your investigation reports every month. You know this better than I do, but I would like to explain to taxpayers that these reports do not assign blame. Instead, they explain the causes of an accident, thereby preventing other accidents in air, sea or rail transportation. I leave it to the guilty to take responsibility.
Ms. Fox, in your opening remarks, you write that much has changed over the past year, including the ability to “more quickly communicate factual information to the public.” Further on, you say that your results “show improvements in a number of areas—including, for instance, the timeliness with which we conduct and report on our investigations.” Just prior to that, you specify that the year is not yet complete and that you do not have all the required information. However, can you give us a concrete example of the changes you have made, which shows that the actions you have taken and the reasons for taking them now allow you to do the same work as before, but faster?
Chair, Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board
In 2018-19, we changed our event classification policy, and launched a new product we call a category 4 investigation, a strictly factual investigation that involves little or no analysis. The board provides no findings or conclusions, although it reviews and approves the report. The purpose of those investigations is solely to inform the public in a factual way about what happened in an accident, and to make industry aware of safety. We conduct this sort of investigation mainly in the aviation sector, particularly for recreational flights. We would not have investigated or reported on those cases in the past. However, we are now in a position to conduct a quick investigation and submit a final report to communicate the results to the aviation community.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Generally speaking, it takes about a year to complete an investigation into an aviation accident. Are you able to tell us more about it?
Chair, Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board
We estimate that it takes 200 days to issue a category 4 investigation report from the date of the incident. We have been successful in achieving this objective in some cases. One of the changes we made this year was to introduce timelines according to the level of investigation. For example, we are aiming for 200 days for a category 4 investigation, but up to two years for a more in-depth category 1 investigation.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
The very nature of your board is unique. Your role is to study accidents. However, they cannot be predicted. Under such conditions, how do you plan the budget for your human resources? What do you do with your staff when there are fewer accidents? What do you do when there are more?
Jean Laporte Chief Operating Officer, Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board
Our base budgets are based on historical data. A certain pattern repeats itself from one year to the next. We use this as a starting point and, depending on events, we reallocate resources during the year. If we have more activity in rail than in aviation, we reallocate resources within our programs, depending on the mode of transportation.
We also have a continuing authorization from Treasury Board that allows us to look for additional funding when there are major events. In the case of Lac-Mégantic, we requested additional funding. For that particular investigation, the funding was approved by Parliament. So this is a matter of managing resources, reallocating them to the various programs, and requesting additional funding for major events.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll be sharing about two and a half minutes of my time with MP McLeod.
Mr. Friday, I'll start with you. In your submission you highlighted the importance of changing the culture. One of the vehicles that you highlighted for measuring the extent of the cultural change is the public service employee survey. From that survey, you raised two areas of concern: values and ethics in the workplace and confidence in speaking up, and mental health and wellness. You indicated that these have remained largely unchanged. I'd like to focus on mental health.
I did a review of the DRR. Under "Results: what we achieved”, on page 11 it talks about an initiative that fostered a healthy, supportive and inclusive work environment that supports employee engagement. It says that the office organized consultation with all employees and adopted a mental health action plan—they've bolded that, so I believe there is an action plan out there—and that it's currently being implemented and includes the establishment of an employee mental health committee. In addition, the employee assistance program coordinator and the occupational health and safety officer ensure the office meets its obligations.
Can you help me reconcile the results of the survey vis-à-vis mental health and wellness with this report, which says that advancements are being made?
Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner
When I speak about the specific mental health action plan, that is from my own small organization. I'm happy to say that we have a mental health champion. We have a committee set up and a mental health action plan. I believe there's an obligation on all departments and agencies to take similar action. There's an unprecedented focus on mental health in the workplace now within the public service. I can say that I'm hopeful that by the time the next survey is done, we will see action across the board.
I think it's a good example of how the entire public service has to come together to help change a culture. The clerk's focus on mental health, for example, I think is very much a part of the increased awareness.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Unfortunately, to allow Mr. McLeod a couple of minutes, we'll have to interrupt.
Mr. McLeod, you have two minutes.
Liberal
Michael McLeod Liberal Northwest Territories, NT
My question is for the Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board.
I represent the Northwest Territories. Your organization is responsible for ensuring safety practices in the different areas from sea to sea to sea.
Over the last while we've started to see some changes across the country, more so in the north, as a result of climate change. Climate change is causing the sea ice to recede and we're starting to see more ship traffic in the north. I think there were about 70 ships two years ago that went through my area. When I say “ships”, I mean large sailboats and other kinds of boats.
Historically, we've never had that, so we don't have a lot of the infrastructure that is needed. We have no navigational aids, markers, maps or response teams; it's an accident waiting to happen. I'm just wondering if you are looking at that.
We have ships coming, and we don't know what they're doing with their grey water. We also know that the Inuvialuit artifacts are starting to disappear, because people are taking them. We've never had to watch them before.
Is there a plan? Are we doing anything? Is this a concern you've flagged?
Chair, Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board
First of all, from the perspective of marine safety, that really falls under the purview of Transport Canada as the regulator, and of course they've developed the oceans protection plan to look at those issues.
We do and have conducted a number of marine investigations involving vessels in the north. In 2010 there was the grounding of the Clipper Adventurer, and—
Liberal
Michael McLeod Liberal Northwest Territories, NT
Could I just back you up? I'm not talking about the issue of Transport Canada's responsibilities. I think the organization has the responsibility of identifying deficiencies, and I'm curious to know whether you've done that. Is that something you're watching?