Evidence of meeting #76 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 australia.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
Thank you, Professor.
I'm going to give you two straight questions so that you can utilize the time to answer them.
You stated that the Canadian model does not meet international standards, or it falls short of international best practices. Is the Australian model more in line with international best practices?
Prof. A.J. Brown
There is no single international best practice, but in many areas, parts of our law are doing better than I think your law is.
Prof. A.J. Brown
There is no single, off-the-shelf best-practice model. That's part of the challenge of this.
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
That's the part of the challenge: we cannot go to square one because it is hard work. However, I am looking at both the models and there was a comparison about how your process works. You stated that our process is reactive rather than proactive, so I'd like to understand how the process becomes more proactive. What is the preventative mechanism? Should the internal mechanism that the agencies and departments are following at the moment, i.e., reporting to the supervisor or CEO, be enhanced? Should there be some strengthening of it? Should it be an audit, or should the Public Service Integrity Commissioner take a more intervening role?
Prof. A.J. Brown
I think all of those things. We need to know what the procedures and processes are. We need good standards for those at the agency level as well as mandatory reporting of what's going on with disclosures received and how they're being handled. We also need a more proactive role for the Integrity Commissioner. These would all be fundamental steps.
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
You are comfortable, however, that the internal processes have to remain. You would not eliminate those internal processes.
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
Okay.
You had some concerns about the term “good faith” and you wanted it eliminated. Perhaps it could be changed. I understand that “good faith” was put in to stop the vendettas or frivolous questions. What would you replace “good faith” with? This is something I'm struggling with. How would you replace “good faith”?
Prof. A.J. Brown
In Australian law, the threshold is simply that there is an honest and reasonable belief, or that the conduct or information actually shows wrongdoing, irrespective of the subjective state of mind of the whistle-blower.
People can disclose information where they really don't understand its own significance. It might be a minor fraud, but this might be evidence of massive corruption that they don't even know about. I think basic tests of an honest and reasonable belief more than do the job. For the same reason, Australia is systematically removing any good faith requirements from its law, as is being done in the U.K. and elsewhere.
Liberal
Yasmin Ratansi Liberal Don Valley East, ON
With the model you have in Australia, do you think people have more of a speak-up culture in the public service? We don't seem to have the same thing, and we're looking to enhance our law.
Prof. A.J. Brown
I think it's possible. We haven't done the empirical research to really know, but certainly on most of the comparative international research—and I'm sure this is true of Canadians as well—Australians generally come off as a very egalitarian people. There is a general culture of being prepared to say, “There but for the grace of God go I; that could be me”, and this fairness dictates that we value whistle-blowers quite highly, even though we agree that people shouldn't go telling tales on one another for no reason. Nevertheless, it's a great leveller. Australians are happy to challenge authority in all the most constructive and positive ways.
I wouldn't pass judgment on the Canadian people or the Canadian public sector, but I think these are values that we in Australia are pretty proud of, and I think they are one of the reasons we place such value on making sure that we get the whistle-blowing systems right.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Professor Brown, thank you very much for your testimony. I think I can honestly say, without fear of reprisal, that your testimony has been most informative and I think it's helped our committee. I'm not sure if it's going to put us back to square one or not, but it certainly has given us cause and pause for thought. I appreciate your taking the time out of your busy schedule.
Colleagues, we have about 20 minutes before our votes start in the House of Commons so we will adjourn now.
Once again, Professor, our thanks to you.
We are adjourned.