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

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number three of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. The committee is meeting today to begin planning our future business.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of November 25, 2021.

Members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. So you are aware, the webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the room.

I would like to take this opportunity to remind all participants in this meeting that taking screenshots or photos of your screen is not permitted. I guess that's primarily for you today, Mr. Dion.

Given the ongoing pandemic situation and in light of the recommendations from health authorities, as well as the directive of the Board of Internal Economy on November 19, 2021 and the House order of November 25, 2021, to remain healthy and safe, all those attending the meeting in person are to maintain two-metre physical distancing and must wear a non-medical mask when circulating in the room. It is highly recommended that the mask be worn at all times, including when seated. You must maintain proper hand hygiene by using the provided hand sanitizer at the room entrance. As the chair, I will do my best to enforce these measures, and I'm sure that I will have everyone's co-operation.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to outline a few rules to follow. Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of floor, English or French. If interpretation is lost, please inform me immediately, and we will ensure that interpretation is properly restored before resuming the proceedings.

The “raise hand” feature at the bottom of the screen can be used at any time if you wish to speak or alert the chair.

For members participating in person, proceed as you usually would when the whole committee is meeting in person in the committee room. Keep in mind the Board of Internal Economy's guidelines for mask use and health protocols.

Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. If you are on the video conference, please click on the microphone icon to unmute yourself. For those in the room, your microphone will be controlled as normal by the proceeding and verification officer. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly. When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute.

This is a reminder that all comments by members and witnesses should be addressed through the chair. As today we have our first visitor to our committee, I would just like to reiterate that rule. I would appreciate it if all comments by members and witnesses are addressed through the chair.

With regard to a speakers list, the committee clerk and I will do the best we can to consolidate the order of speaking for all members, whether they are participating virtually or in person. I understand that we have speaking orders for all parties.

I would now like to welcome our witness, Mr. Mario Dion, the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. He will be with us for up to 90 minutes. Then the committee will move to in camera to conduct some committee business.

Mr. Dion, we appreciate your sharing your opening statement with us in both official languages. I would now ask that you please proceed with your opening statement.

Welcome to PROC.

[Mario Dion, Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner]

Thank you very much, Madame Chairperson.

I'd like to begin by thanking the committee for inviting me to discuss the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons.

Given the virtual meeting considerations, I'll focus on helping you better understand the fundamental tenets of the code and how it functions.

I've been the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner for nearly four years now, as part of a seven‑year term under the Parliament of Canada Act. As an officer of the House of Commons, I'm solely responsible to Parliament and not to the federal government or an individual minister.

I believe that the Office of the Commissioner can play a major role in helping improve the confidence of Canadians in their elected officials and public sector leaders. At the Office of the Commissioner, we have three tasks. We provide advice and direction; we investigate when needed; and we help educate through a variety of private and public forums.

The code was adopted in 2004 and was last modified in 2015, within the cadre of the exhaustive review provided for in section 33 of the code.

My primary role, and that of the office, is to provide members of Parliament with the assistance needed to understand and follow the code on an ongoing basis. It is their responsibility to follow the code. It is our role to assist them in making sure that they do follow the code.

At times, the assistance provided is more rules-based, as is the case now with the initial compliance process. We are busy working with each of the 338 MPs to complete the initial compliance process. This process is outlined in the code at sections 20 and 21 and commences when each MP's election is published in the Canada Gazette.

We also undertake broader educational programs, as per section 32 of the code. There is an obligation in the code for me to make sure that we provide educational services both to MPs and to the public. We try to create an internal jurisprudence, if you wish, which we share during those educational sessions and in providing advice to individual members and members of their staff as well.

As set out in the preamble, the code's purpose—because it's important to always remember the purpose of the code, which is that it's not an end in itself—is to “maintain and enhance public confidence”, to “demonstrate to the public” that the standards the MPs are held to are being applied and to make sure that you get the assistance you need to “reconcile”—that's the crux—your private interests with your public duties.

I strongly believe that Canadians should receive as much information as possible to ensure that elected and appointed officials are held accountable. That's why we have the public registry maintained by the office. Once your disclosure statement for section 23 has been prepared, your information will be listed in the registry. Any Canadian, at any time, 24-7, will be able to go and look for each particular MP—their own MP or any MP—to determine the state of their assets, liabilities, outside activities and so on.

Nevertheless, my overall assessment after four years of working with the code is that the code is working. The code is not broken. There are situations where some people, including our office, would wish the code would say something different, but they are very few and far apart.

We are here to basically assist the committee to see how we can contribute to the comprehensive review, if the committee decides to conduct a comprehensive review, and also to answer any questions you may have. It's important that we work together. My role is to assist you, the House of Commons and every MP. It's important that we ensure that the manner in which we carry out our duties is in line with the needs of the MPs.

My objective here is to not to give you an exhaustive list of members' obligations and the Office of the Commissioner's functions, but to allow us time for a fruitful dialogue.

I would be pleased to answer the committee members' questions about the code and the administration of my office.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Mr. Dion, for those opening comments.

Based on the motions we passed, I understand that now each party will have six minutes in the opening round, starting with Mr. Brassard.

Mr. Brassard, the floor is yours.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Dion, for being here today. I will admit that in my new role as ethics and accountable government critic, I googled your name. You've been extremely busy over the last four years.

One of the things you've talked about is the review of the code. As you know, the last time the code was reviewed as a requirement under section 33 was in 2015. You've been here for four years. We're coming up to seven years now. Is it your opinion that a review of the code is required at this point?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Through the chair, please, Mr. Brassard....

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Dion, the floor is yours.

[Mario Dion]

I think section 33 is clear. The wording is unequivocal. There should have been a comprehensive review as early as 2020. It has not yet been conducted.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Go ahead, Mr. Brassard.

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

Thank you.

Is it your opinion that the review is required at this point, notwithstanding the requirements of the code? In your opinion as the ethics commissioner, is that required right now?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I don't believe you want my opinion, so we will go through the chair to Mr. Dion.

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

Through the chair, I'm asking. Thank you.

[Mario Dion]

If the member wants to know my opinion about whether in the absolute a review is required, in my view a review is not required at this point. The code is working. There are no situations where we are prevented from doing what is right, what is in keeping with the objectives of the code, because of a loophole, because of an obstacle in the code.

A review is not required at this point in time, although section 33 seems to mandate one at this point in time.

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

Thank you, Mr. Dion.

Through you, Madam Chair, Mr. Dion mentioned in his opening remarks that there are some other things that not just his staff but he would like to see as part of the code. If there were to be a review of the code, what changes would Mr. Dion like to see enhanced within the code and administered within the code?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Dion, go ahead.

[Mario Dion]

Madam Chair, since I accepted the position four years ago, I have been keeping a list of my own, with some of my staff, of things we will put forward to the committee if and when a review takes place. We do have a few things. I don't think it would be appropriate for me this morning to start naming such examples, because I would really like to explain it well in a document that I would table with the committee in short order should a review be initiated.

I do have ideas. Maybe I'll give a couple of examples if that's useful to the committee, but I don't think it would be appropriate for me to name them all because the list is not up to date. It has not been revised since COVID because we've been busy doing other things. I would like to have a few weeks to update it and properly present suggestions to the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Dion, Mr. Brassard has signalled that he would like a couple of suggestions.

[Mario Dion]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'll pick a couple of easier ones. For example, in my view the committee and the House of Commons should consider modifying the code so that friends are included in the prohibition against a member furthering private interests. Currently it's only relatives, members of the family, who are included as people you cannot favour—unlike the Conflict of Interest Act, which clearly indicates that friends are in the same category as members of the family. That's one suggestion.

I would also suggest that we have a minimum threshold for the acceptability of gifts, so that if a gift is worth less than an amount to be decided by the House of Commons, such as $25 or $30 or $40, we do not collectively waste our time trying to analyze whether such a gift is acceptable given its minimal value.

Those are two examples of the things that would appear in my list.

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

Thank you.

Those are two perfect examples, Mr. Dion, of why a review of the code is required. At this committee, I'm sure the members look forward to engaging with you further on that.

One of the things you talked about is public confidence, making sure that we have public confidence. In your four years in your position, have you seen an erosion of public confidence, given some of the circumstances that have occurred with respect to the Conflict of Interest Act, or is public confidence at the same level it was when you started?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Dion, the last 35 seconds will be yours.

[Mario Dion]

As you know, Madam Chair, there have been several polls conducted in Canada and abroad during the period in question, and there's no question that there is a decline in public confidence according to these polls, attributable not only to the code or to the Conflict of Interest Act, but to the confidence that people have in their governments generally, both in Canada and abroad.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Mr. Turnbull, the floor is now yours for six minutes, through the chair.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thanks, Madam Chair.

I would like to welcome Mr. Dion to PROC. It's nice to finally meet you.

Through you, Madam Chair, I would ask Mr. Dion a series of questions. From my perspective, there are probably three or four areas that I'd like to touch on, hopefully, if I have the time.

Mr. Dion, through you, Madam Chair, I'd like to ask about the educational function of your role, which, to me, is extremely important. I know that in some of the past work done at this committee there was talk, when Ms. Dawson was in your position, about guidelines and about how PROC actually had to approve guidelines.

Could you maybe speak to how you think guidelines might assist in interpreting the code and whether you have prepared any guidelines to help members of Parliament.

As we know, ethics can be challenging. In moments when we have conflicting duties, I would say ethical dilemmas are commonplace in our work. They arise often. I think having guidelines is often very useful for members of Parliament.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr. Dion, go ahead.

[Mario Dion]

Madam Chair, I would agree. I think it would be useful to have guidelines. We will be pleased to draft and table for discussion such guidelines, if that is the wish of the committee, on a variety of subjects.

I suggest that we should only do that once we've determined whether any changes would be made to the code, so that the guidelines actually reflect the code as amended, if it is amended after the comprehensive review.