Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Dec. 4th, 2008

[Gail Lidstone]

I didn't have the chance to answer your question about gifts. With respect to tickets that are not available to the general public, that is something we must consider. Everyone would like to have tickets, especially tickets to VIP seating. Right now, there are no guidelines with respect to gifts. However, in the case of tickets with no set value that are not available to the general public, the office does not try to determine their real value. Rather, it considers that these tickets do have a value of some kind. Perhaps we cannot publicly state their value, but nevertheless, accepting the tickets might be unacceptable, if they are not offered to the public.

Again, I realize that my answer is vague and that I may not be answering your question, but it depends on any number of factors.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Monsieur Proulx.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mrs. Dawson, I have a couple of questions that could very directly affect members of Parliament.

Can you comment on the ethics of offering members of Parliament incentives to switch sides, to switch from one party to another, particularly during a political crisis, but anytime, especially when those incentives are as large or as important as cabinet positions or Senate seats?

[Mary Elizabeth Dawson]

I wouldn't want to make a specific comment there.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

No, no, in general.

[Mary Elizabeth Dawson]

In general, there is a very difficult line to figure out between a political activity and a non-political activity. My office should not get too far into the realm of political activities. Frankly, it's a question we continue to struggle with as to just where that line is. That particular question would be a very difficult one to answer.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I know that the line is very thin, but are there any limitations as to what can be offered by a prime minister or by his office or by his party in return for support from members? For example, would you tell me that half a dozen roses would be acceptable whereas a dozen would not be?

[Mary Elizabeth Dawson]

Roses are usually okay.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

There you go. Are there quantities on okay?

[Mary Elizabeth Dawson]

It's all a question of each specific case and the surrounding circumstances. They're questions I can't give you a quick answer to. Certainly half a dozen roses is generally fine; it's customary--even a dozen.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

What about if it's half a dozen roses every hour of every day of every week?

[Mary Elizabeth Dawson]

Precisely. And that's why there's a rule in the code that says cumulative gifts. If you get a whole bunch of gifts and they're cumulative, then it starts to be a problem. Similarly, with invitations out to dinner or something, there's a cumulative aspect to all those things.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

So you can't or you don't want to answer my question.

My next point was going to be that there are sanctions under the Criminal Code if the proof is done, etc. Do you think that there should be other sanctions, particularly strictly to members of Parliament or members of a political party, or do you find that the Criminal Code is sufficient?

[Mary Elizabeth Dawson]

Those are value judgments, and it really belongs to parliamentarians to make decisions on them. The problem I'm having with certain parts of this code is that there's very little guidance on just what parliamentarians want their rules to be. That's why I wanted to have the discussion at some point, particularly with respect to gifts. I could put out a bunch of similar problems like you're putting out, but it is a code written by members for members, as I said, and I have to take my guidance to some extent from the members on these questions.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

My last question, Mr. Chair, if you will allow me....

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Very quickly.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I want to refer back to the Robert Thibault case--not that particular case, but in that direction, in that sense. Do you have any recommendations or any thoughts in regard to potential legislative changes or accommodations that could be made to prevent a member of Parliament from being sued or from being found guilty of contempt or from being found liable? Should there not be legislative changes so that MPs would be protected in this regard?

[Mary Elizabeth Dawson]

I think it would be very worth while considering that. It's not within my realm, of course, but it is a problem, and if it becomes an increasing problem.... I struggled with the Thibault case for a long time, putting out the report. As you know, I found technically that he had contravened the code in the sense that it was a private interest. Of course the reaction of the House was to amend the code slightly.

I personally feel that disclosure is the important thing. The issue there was disclosure and recusal in the House. Personally, I feel that disclosure is always a good idea. Recusal is not necessarily always a good idea. That's my take on this Thibault situation.

I would have no problem contemplating there being some rules in legislation to circumscribe libel suits with respect to MPs.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

In order to protect the MPs.

[Mary Elizabeth Dawson]

Sure. But again, that's not my bailiwick, and it would be a parliamentary decision.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Ms. Block.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Thank you.

As I'm listening to this discussion, I'm thinking what has always guided me in any work I've done is that if you have to ask the question, is this a conflict, that might be your answer right there.

The other thing I might suggest is this. Even though we are where we today and hearing what we've heard, would it be appropriate to form a subcommittee to take a look at some of the issues that Madam Dawson has brought forward today, rather than contemplating it as a large group?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Is that a motion? Is that a request of the committee? I'd certainly take the guidance of the committee on that one.