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

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Okay.

My question concerns implementation. In the social sciences and humanities, you work with concepts and try to implement them in order to take more action and to act more thoughtfully.

Subsection 6(1) of the Conflict of Interest Act states as follows:

No public office holder shall make a decision or participate in making a decision related to the exercise of an official power, duty or function if the public office holder knows or reasonably should know that, in the making of the decision, he or she would be in a conflict of interest.

Do you think that the implementation of this subsection of the act could be improved?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Dion, you have 15 seconds to answer the question.

[Mario Dion]

Great, Madam Chair.

Everything can be improved, and that's the case with all the provisions of the act. I have ideas to offer on this subject, as on many others.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Before I pass it over to Ms. Blaney for six minutes, I remind all members that observations and comments go through the chair. I look forward to a very productive committee. I think it's important that we set that tone here.

Ms. Blaney, you have the floor.

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

Thank you for that reminder, Chair.

Through you, I would like to thank Mr. Dion for the incredible work that he and his staff provide. I appreciate the work and understand that these are very complex issues. I cannot imagine some of the very interesting questions this office must receive.

I'm just wondering, through you, Madam Chair, if Mr. Dion could speak to the realities that he faces as an employer. Does he feel that his office has sufficient resources to do the work that the office is tasked with?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Go ahead, Mr. Dion.

[Mario Dion]

Madam Chair, when I started in the position, that was one of the first things I looked at. I looked at the budget and complement, and we have asked for a small increase in our budget and complement since I came to the position in 2018. I feel we currently have enough to carry out our role fully in the manner I would like to see it carried out. There is no lack of resources at this point in time to meet the challenge.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Go ahead, Ms. Blaney.

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

Thank you, Chair. Through you, I thank Mr. Dion for that response.

One of the things I found compelling about the conversation I heard today is the idea of training and members using the access to training that's provided.

There is a question I have for Mr. Dion, through you, Madam Chair. We've just gone through this, the recent time of onboarding when new MPs are introduced to the House of Commons and educated in so many different ways. I'm just wondering if Mr. Dion feels that there are enough resources in place and enough training for new members as they are onboarded into this new experience.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Go ahead, Mr. Dion.

[Mario Dion]

Madam Chair, I'm afraid I don't know enough about the program offered by the House of Commons to pass any judgment, except insofar as conflict of interest is concerned, which is my subject area.

In February, we will participate in a program at the House of Commons for MPs on the topic. It's good, but it will be general. I think we have to go further. I have already started to offer specialized sessions on specific topics for members of Parliament and their staff—but not order staff. I think members should take a few minutes—30 minutes or 60 minutes—to inform themselves about key subject matter such as recusal, for instance, or section 6, which the member was talking about earlier, as opposed to a general overview of the code. I think it's important to stop and look at the most frequently used provisions, if you wish, to develop the reflex to make it part of your normal practice to think about these things.

There isn't enough, from my point of view. I would like to offer much more, and we've already started to do that. If you look at our successive annual reports, we are doing more and more.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Go ahead, Ms. Blaney.

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

Madam Chair, I would like to ask Mr. Dion, through you, to clarify something. I just want to make sure that I understand this. When an MP is newly elected and goes through the training, that, of course, covers a wide range of issues. Is Mr. Dion's department part of that? Is there a section? Is that fulsome enough, or does Mr. Dion want that expanded in the onboarding process?

That would help me greatly.

[Mario Dion]

Yes, I would like to see it expanded. I think we should have more time and we should have more attendees as well. I was quite concerned about the low attendance at the recent session that we offered for newly elected MPs.

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

Thank you for that. That's very helpful.

The next question I have for Mr. Dion, through you, Madam Chair, is.... I heard clearly that the training isn't accessed as much. I'm just wondering if there should be a process where not only new MPs are put into that frame where they are learning. I really heard what Mr. Dion said about that automatic reference point within your brain—if you're educated on something enough, as soon as you have something exposed to you, right away you think of that—and how meaningful it would be to have that automatic connection, but we don't necessarily see it.

For members who have been around, should there be refresher courses? How could this place better engage members to participate?

[Mario Dion]

One potential solution—it's never a solution—is that maybe some training could be made mandatory. That would be one approach. It could be a small number.... We're not talking about a big investment; we're talking about maybe 10 hours at best over the course of a year and a half or something like that. However, the training should be mandatory so that people actually do attend and listen.

We're still getting a good proportion of requests for advice on what I usually refer to as “101”. They're very, very basic. I don't mind getting those requests for advice, but I'm always surprised that a member of Parliament would not know something so fundamental, so elementary, if you will.

Training is a way to develop that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Ms. Blaney, you have 25 seconds.

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

Thank you for that.

I know that members of Parliament are being asked to take certain types of training, so I really hope that this committee heard the request for mandatory training that you just made.

I will leave it at that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Dion, do you want to make a quick comment?

[Mario Dion]

I think that's it on the topic of training. We'll see if it comes up again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Excellent.

We are entering our five-minute round, and we'll be starting with Mr. Brassard.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to pick up on some of the comments that Mr. Dion finished with in my first interaction with him as it relates to public confidence. He cited several opinion polls that show that public confidence has eroded.

I would suggest that there is further erosion in public confidence when situations arise where, for example, sole-source contracts or untendered contracts are given. Understanding that there is a distinction between the act and the code, is there anything in the code that you would suggest needs to be changed to address that type of situation, which could restore public confidence?

[Mario Dion]

Frankly, I have not seen any situation where the issue of awarding contracts and the code have had much of an interaction because, usually, contracts are awarded by the government, not by members of Parliament. The members of the government who are involved in awarding contracts are governed by the Conflict of Interest Act and they do take appropriate measures. We review their situation—each of them separately, upon appointment—to ensure that we minimize the risk of a conflict of interest, and I'm quite satisfied with the measures that are being taken at this point in time on a case-by-case basis.

There could always be situations, of course, that fall between the cracks, but I'm not aware of any at this point in time.

[John Brassard, Conservative, Barrie—Innisfil, ON]

I want to move on, then, to the expansion of family and friends under the code. We saw in the “Ratansi Report”, for example, that Ms. Ratansi thought of a member of her family as being a friend.

Would you consider an expansion of that definition as part of a potential review—not just family and friends, but those particular situations as well?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Please address your questions clearly through the chair.

Mr. Dion, go ahead.