Government Operations Committee on Dec. 17th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Give a brief response, please.

[Harriet Solloway]

I can't say.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Is it linked to resource challenges that you don't know the timeline?

[Harriet Solloway]

No. In this case, I don't believe so. It's an active investigation that's getting its full resource complement.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks very much.

Mr. Sousa, you have the floor.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you for being here today.

I just want to clarify a couple of things.

In 2015, there was a strategy to formalize the integrity framework for government. In 2015, the government introduced the integrity regime based on a policy to assess some of these agencies and departments. As a result, we undertook to expand Canada's tool kit to address corporate wrongdoing in 2017. As we went forward, cabinet, in budget 2018, announced further measures to initiate some of these integrity regimes, which then provided a consultation with the public through the Treasury Board in 2018 to have the integrity regime.

We assessed these elements of the proposed regime in 2019 and 2023. We tried to enforce greater transparency. You're a big part of how we address some of the issues that are relevant to the large number of contracts and actions that have been taken by this government.

As my colleague referenced recently, we put forward an approval to increase funding by $308,000, and the Conservatives voted against it, regardless of what they're putting forward. There are a number of initiatives that we recognize need to be enhanced. It's not unique to the federal government. I think you mentioned in your opening statement that other levels of government, other organizations, are also facing an increase in activities.

Can you explain why you see that or what is happening in this respect?

[Harriet Solloway]

I think it's a greater awareness that we exist.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Is that appropriate?

[Harriet Solloway]

Yes.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

We want people to act accordingly. We want them to be transparent. At times it may not even be in their own awareness that they're faltering. Who knows? However, we want to make certain that they abide by the system.

The number of cases that have been made in 2023 and 2024 is 308, and only two resulted in a founded case of wrongdoing. Of the 308, there were probably a number of other submissions made to you.

Can you explain how this came to be? What is it that this took place? You reviewed 308, and out of that, only two came back as being wrong. Is that what that says?

[Harriet Solloway]

There's a definition of wrongdoing under our act, and it's very clear that there are certain thresholds that need to be met.

First, there's the burden of proof. It has to be proven on a balance of probabilities. If we don't have that, we cannot have a finding of wrongdoing.

Second, even if there's some indication that there might be wrongdoing, unless we can get evidence on a balance of probabilities, we will not have a finding of wrongdoing.

Third, many of the cases that come in do not meet the thresholds established by our act. For example, if it's not gross mismanagement—if what they're alleging is something of a smaller nature—that is outside the scope of my mandate. I'm not even allowed to take that on. I cannot.

I do believe that one of the elements in Bill C-290 would change “gross mismanagement” to “mismanagement” and “a serious violation of a code of conduct” would become “a violation of a code of conduct”. As things stand right now, and based on case law—and Brian can inform you better—our thresholds are quite clear.

Very often, people come, and there are issues for which there should be a grievance or a case before the CHRC or some other entity, and then there are some times when we cannot take on a case because the act prohibits it if it's already being dealt with by another mechanism established by Parliament. There are a variety of reasons.

One thing that we want to address in our new website, which we're working on, is allowing people to self-triage. What is your issue? Is it this, or is it that? People would know right away and earlier on, before submitting something to us, whether it falls in our jurisdiction or it doesn't.

Part of our communication strategy is to try to make it clear, because I know very well that if somebody thinks that we're going to help them and we come back and we say it doesn't meet the threshold, they're going to be disappointed. I'd rather they not be disappointed. I'd rather they understand at the start what we can and cannot take on.

I don't know if that answers your question.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

It does.

I just want to try to assess the co-operation from the government.

It's in everybody's interest to have greater integrity and transparency and to have greater assurance that these deals and things that are taking place are done properly and that whistle-blowers are protected in enlightening us on that wrongdoing.

Do you find there is some sort of mechanism at work that is trying to prohibit you from doing that? You're independent.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We're past our time, so just give a brief answer, if you can. Otherwise, you can respond in writing.

[Harriet Solloway]

I'm not aware of anybody working against me. Maybe I'm being naive, but I'm really not aware of that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, Mr. Sousa.

Thanks for being with us again, Mr. Radford. It's good to have you, as always.

Ms. Solloway, thank you, and welcome back.

Are you able to provide us with a brief on the implementation of Bill C-290? That came through this committee about the same time you were appointed. Are you able to update the committee on how the changes have affected you so far?

[Harriet Solloway]

Not at all, because it's in the Senate, I believe.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Okay, that's fine.

Thanks again for being with us.

Colleagues, I'd like to take a moment to thank our analysts, Olivier and Ryan, and our clerk, MOG—Marc-Olivier—for all their help.

To everyone else, including, of course, our interpreters and all the support teams, thank you very much. Have a wonderful Christmas.

For those of you watching at home, I hope you'll tune in tonight for an OGGO version of Dickens' A Christmas Carol, in which Chairman Scrooge is visited by the estimates of past, present and future.

Have a wonderful Christmas, everyone. The meeting is adjourned.