Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Dec. 14th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Mr. Dion.

We'll start the two‑and‑a‑half‑minute rounds of questions.

Mr. Therrien, you have the floor.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Dion, you would consider increasing the limit on gifts to make it easier for everyone. I'm sorry if this has already been said, but I didn't quite understand.

[Mario Dion]

Madam Chair, I don't think I said that. I think that it's the—

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

I didn't say that you had said that; I said that I didn't want you to repeat it if you had already said it. I just wanted to know if it was a possibility.

[Mario Dion]

Madam Chair, I think the current limit of $200 is perfectly adequate. It used to be $500, and it was changed in 2015. In fact, the committee decided at that time to change the limit to $200, so that it would be the same as in the Conflict of Interest Act.

However, I pointed out in my opening remarks that there could be a minimum value. I think it's unacceptable, if not a little absurd, to suspect that a member could be influenced by a gift worth less than $25, $30 or $40. I don't know what the minimum amount should be, but we spend a lot of time discussing issues of very small gifts. The problem could be solved by setting a minimum amount at which there are questions to be asked.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Section 2 of the code refers to gifts or benefits that may or may not be accepted.

I would like to ask Mr. Dion what a benefit is. How do you define it? The word “gift” is clearer, but how could we define what a benefit is, to make sure mistakes aren't made?

[Mario Dion]

Actually, it's easy because the word “benefit” is defined in section 3 of the code.

Firstly, it is said to be “an amount of money if there is no obligation to repay it”. This is the clearest case, meaning when someone gives you money, whether it is cash or a bank transfer.

It can also be “a service or property, or the use of property or money that is provided without charge or at less than its commercial value”. For instance, if someone loans you a condo or rents it to you for $100 a night when the normal rental rate is $200 a night, this is a benefit. This means that you are making a profit because you are paying less than someone else would pay for the same property or service.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

I understand.

Is my time up?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Yes, your time is up.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Thank you for your answers, Mr. Dion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Ms. Blaney, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you again for this interesting conversation with Mr. Dion today.

To go back to my other questions around training, I was wondering if there is a handbook for members. I apologize for not knowing this off the top of my head, but I'm wondering if there is something especially for new members that orients them.

In listening to the conversation today, Madam Chair, I couldn't help but reflect on how many websites have “frequently asked questions”. Mr. Dion talked about having to answer these questions repeatedly. I understand that it's a lot of work. I wonder if there is a place where we can gather this information and if that is a gap within the services provided for MPs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Please go ahead, Mr. Dion.

[Mario Dion]

Madam Chair, we do have a website, and it does contain information that would be useful to members of Parliament, but the manner in which the code is currently constructed tells us essentially that I have no authority to talk about any issue—section 26 of the code prohibits me from publicizing any advice that is sought and any advice that is given—unless I do so in a manner that doesn't reveal the circumstances of the member who asked me the question.

We used to have information notices on our website, which at the suggestion of our legal services we removed, because we were not in a position to actually prove that each of those information notices, and everything in each information notice, was the result of a request having been made by an MP in the past. That's the box we're in, essentially.

Earlier during our discussion, we spoke about guidelines, which are different. We could table guidelines and propose guidelines, which, once they are approved by the committee and referred to the House of Commons, would be useful to MPs. It would tell them more about their obligations under the code, but without the committee's approval, I cannot proceed with publishing anything of this nature.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Ms. Blaney, you have 20 seconds.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Through you, Madam Chair, with just 20 seconds, I want to thank Mr. Dion for the impossibleness of this task at times. Hopefully, I will get another round.

Thank you.

[Mario Dion]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Now we will go back to five-minute rounds, starting with Mr. Calkins.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Through you to Mr. Dion, I have some questions in regard to whether or not the committee should actually undergo the statutory mandated review. In your earlier testimony, I believe you indicated that you thought the code was working well, yet a number of questions from my colleagues around the table have arisen here suggesting that there is some concern about clarity. I would re-ask the question, based on the questions you've received so far from my colleagues.

Madam Chair, does the commissioner believe that perhaps a review is actually warranted?

This committee will likely be deliberating on whether or not we're going to go down that path based on your advice. Do you wish to give us any more clarity on what your thoughts would be on updating the code?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Go ahead, Mr. Dion.

[Mario Dion]

Yes, Madam Chair, I have just talked about this. A review, in my view, is not essential. A review is certainly warranted, because there are a number of areas that we could look at.

Of course, it's for the committee to declare its priorities and whether reviewing the code is more important than some important work that you might have to address as well during the session that just began—it's not for me.

But it's not essential. It certainly would be useful, however, to do a review, and in any event, the code mandates one under section 33 as it is written.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Go ahead, Mr. Calkins.

[Blaine Calkins, Conservative, Red Deer—Lacombe, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The commissioner has said quite a bit in regard to family and friends and has even addressed the issue when questioned about handing over investigations to police.

I am a little concerned, and I wonder about the nature of relationships, because the role of being a member of Parliament is a complicated one, and it's one that is best understood by those who have held the role. Your job is to try to pass judgment on those of us who hold this role and to keep us in line, according to the rules that we ourselves make.

I am concerned about the roles of growing influence, of friendships—through the guise of friendships, not necessarily family—that foreign state influence might actually have. I am wondering if your office has given any consideration to any changes or amendments to the code where somebody might be using gifts or influence or some other type of furtherance of a benefit to a member of Parliament, or might even themselves be an agent of a foreign government put in place in our democracy. Have you given any consideration to that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Dion, go ahead.

[Mario Dion]

I haven't in a very important way, because we have not come across many situations where.... The test for gifts is influence, so whether it's domestic or foreign, it's still inappropriate to accept a gift if it can be seen as having been given to you in order to influence you in your judgment in your public duties. Frankly, we have not come across many situations where there was a foreign limit to gift-giving, but it would apply equally to domestic or foreign.