Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Oct. 17th, 2017

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

I'll carry on from what you were speaking about.

You mentioned in your introduction and again just now that your main role is to make sure that everyone is following the Conflict of Interest Act. You were saying that Bill C-50 is a small piece of legislation. There are a whole bunch of different regulations and other things that the minister is hoping to bring forward as well.

How much does this small piece of legislation, which is trying to create a little bit more transparency, actually help you to do your job in the administration of the Conflict of Interest Act?

[Mary Dawson]

Where this comes up for me more often is after the fact. It's not whether they attended the fundraiser or not. If somebody comes in looking for something from them two months later, that's when it's very useful for me to know what their connection is with that person and whether that person has given them money. My main fundraising provision is quite deficient basically. It's the relationship between the minister or whoever and the person who's provided funding when that person is looking for special treatment of one sort or another.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

That's probably a large portion of the types of complaints and allegations you investigate when you look at what is being traded and where the conflict exists. Now you can put together the two pieces and find out if there truly was some interaction that may have led to that.

[Mary Dawson]

That's right. It's one check to see what the relationship is with that person.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

It's a good step forward, then?

[Mary Dawson]

That's right.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Okay.

Previously, the witnesses who were before us mentioned—and you mentioned—that this act could potentially cover other people. Chiefs of staff were mentioned, and PSs were just mentioned by you. Our previous witness mentioned that covering the leaders of opposition parties is a good idea because, especially when we're in minority governments, we're often having a swing back and forth every 18 months, and you don't know who is going to hold power in the very near future.

Do you think it should extend to critics, the shadow cabinet, as well? How far should this go?

[Mary Dawson]

I think it's probably gone where it should go.

I like the leaders idea, because it makes some sort of a fair balance between the two sides, so to speak.

I don't know how far down it should go.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Okay.

You gave some testimony in which you said you had thought about the idea of it applying to all PSs, ministers, and maybe all parliamentarians—not doing these types of events. I heard that, but then you kind of said, “Well, I'm not sure about that thought; it's just something that's crossed my mind.”

I think back to the testimony we had just prior to yours. Because of how we function in our democracy—the way it is set up, practically speaking—parties do need to raise funds. It's not just parties; it's us as individual members. Parliamentary secretaries and ministers, when I think about it, are responsible for their own ridings, not just for their political cabinet portfolios. They're responsible for their own ridings, and they have to raise funds for their riding associations in order to even become an MP. You can't be in cabinet if you're not an MP, right?

Going to that fundamental level, I feel that at some point we're trying to solve some problems. As the previous witness said before that, there may be some perverse consequences that we may end up facing if we take this too far. How are they supposed to do their civic duty, to take leadership and run in a campaign, if they're a cabinet minister, but they can't raise funds in their own riding for their own riding association?

[Mary Dawson]

That's a traditional problem, because the ministers have two roles.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

How do we create balance? How do we make sure that they can become an MP again and thus be a cabinet minister regardless of—

[Mary Dawson]

Under my legislation, I have to look at the distinction sometimes as to whether they're acting as a member or as a minister. That makes a difference in some of the decisions I have to make.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

As far as this legislation goes with regard to listing the people in attendance, you're more easily able to connect the dots as to whether this is a constituent who really has nothing to do with the minister's portfolio whatsoever and is just doing a small fundraiser for his or her own riding or a lobbyist or someone with a great interest in the minister's portfolio. Do you agree?

[Mary Dawson]

It all comes down to the facts that you're faced with in a particular situation.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

A couple of meetings ago a suggestion was made that this should also apply to people under 18. The witness went so far as to suggest that minors who were seven or eight years old should be listed as having been brought to a political party. I think that could inhibit the ability of a parent to perhaps be civically active and attend a fundraiser if they have parental duties at the same time and perhaps need to take their children with them to one of the events. They may hesitate in the future to go to that event because they don't want their children, who have no real desire to be there or no political motivation to be there, listed on these lists. Do you think 18 is the right age for this legislation to hit, or do you think it should be older or younger?

[Mary Dawson]

Eighteen is quite a common cut-off. I think that's as good a cut-off as any.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Okay.

Do I have any more minutes?

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

You have ten seconds.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Quickly, you mentioned that there had been various complaints in the last two years. How many complaints were there in the previous administration, if you have some kind of idea, because I see that you've listed various reports here that you had to undertake because of conflict of interest rules broken by previous ministers, and you had to go through full investigations. Where there not numerous complaints at that time as well?

[Mary Dawson]

When I said 20, I was probably overspeaking the amount. More often, we'd get letters that weren't actual complaints; they were just griping. That was more common than an actual request of any kind. We either get requests to investigate something, or if there's nothing to investigate under the act—

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

And this happens throughout many administrations?

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

That's time. Thank you.

[Mary Dawson]

It got more attention of late, but as I said, I've had cases involving these kinds of issues since way back.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you very much.

We'll now go to Mr. Nater.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to both of the commissioners for joining us this afternoon.

I'll begin by thanking both of you for your service in your positions. I know, Ms. Dawson, you're over a decade in your position, and, Ms. Shepherd, over eight years. I want to thank you for that. I know you've both accepted multiple reappointments on a temporary basis. I thank you as well for that.

With both your terms coming to an end, has either of you been consulted on the process for your replacements?