Evidence of meeting #89 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was policy.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
February 26th, 2018 / 4:50 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
The number of cases has not been high enough to need recommendations. When a report indicates that the claim of harassment is unfounded, there are no recommendations. In members' cases, recommendations are very difficult to make. That's not how it is in our environment, where disciplinary measures or suspensions can be imposed. In the case of members, it is up to the whip to decide what measures should be taken based on the report.
In most reports related to members, the allegations were unfounded, partially founded or founded, and all the specifics that implies. It was the whip's duty to make decisions in that respect.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Steven Blaney Conservative Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC
Do you think it is important to ensure that the act has teeth, so that, in the case of an MP's office, would recourse be possible if recommendations were made, but were then not applied?
4:50 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
We would have to see what kind of a recommendation is involved. I will not venture into issues of parliamentary privilege, since some of my colleagues are more qualified than me in that area. In fact, we have to establish what kind of a recommendation an independent investigator can issue, since the member is a member and not an employee.
In the case of an employee, if one of our managers has committed a wrongdoing, it is much easier to determine what kind of a penalty can be applied. A whole range of penalties have been established by the jurisprudence. The situation is different for members. In a member's case, we are talking about another level of penalties. For example, we may be talking about expulsion from the caucus. There may be other penalties the whips can think of.
In a way, we import principles that apply to employment and try to apply them to members.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Steven Blaney Conservative Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC
That said, the political price to pay is huge, and that is a high penalty. Thank you.
I will now turn to you, Ms. Potter.
Have you ever used independent investigators for complaints you received at the Library of Parliament?
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Steven Blaney Conservative Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC
In such cases, were the recommendations implemented?
4:50 p.m.
Director General, Business Support Services, Library of Parliament
Absolutely.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Steven Blaney Conservative Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC
Have there been a number of such cases?
4:50 p.m.
Director General, Business Support Services, Library of Parliament
There have been two of them over the past few years.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
NDP
Karine Trudel NDP Jonquière, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will also take advantage of my last few minutes.
Thank you for your presentation and for joining us.
A question came to mind earlier when Mr. Parent brought up parliamentary privilege.
Mr. Robert, can I ask questions about that?
4:50 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
It depends on the circumstances in which the question of privilege was raised.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Karine Trudel NDP Jonquière, QC
I don't want to stir up controversy.
This brings me to ask a question as a member. If I was accused of sexual harassment, for example, what would my parliamentary privilege involve? Would I be covered by parliamentary privilege or would I be investigated?
Do you understand what I am asking?
4:55 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
If I may, here is a potential answer. Since this issue is very delicate, it would really be up to you to decide whether it is appropriate to raise a question of privilege to protect yourself.
4:55 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
So it could depend on the circumstances. Parliamentary privilege is normally used to protect you. However, when a claim of harassment is made, do you think that invoking the privilege is the best way to protect yourself? I think that is a very delicate issue.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Karine Trudel NDP Jonquière, QC
Great. That question was asked recently, so I am glad to get your opinion on it.
Let's now go to you, Mr. Parent. What is the impact of social media on public denunciations by victims or other individuals? Can it tarnish investigations, since the information is already public and therefore impossible to control? What is your take on that?
4:55 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
In such a case, investigators whose services we use have their methods, and they are familiar with evidentiary requirements. For them, comments on social networks are just that—comments. Those specialists are skilled enough to determine what evidence is relevant in a harassment investigation.
The impact of social media goes beyond that context alone. When allegations against a public figure, such as an MP, are made, it is a matter of the individual's reputation. However, during the investigation, those aspects are not necessarily taken into account.
4:55 p.m.
NDP
Karine Trudel NDP Jonquière, QC
Do you think they should be taken into account? Earlier, we talked about definitions and the possibility of covering social media or cyberbullying in regulations or in the bill. Sometimes, the issue goes beyond a building's walls.
I will give you the last word.
4:55 p.m.
Director General, Business Support Services, Library of Parliament
We follow a code of ethics and values for media use. So I think that element should absolutely be included.
4:55 p.m.
Chief Human Resources Officer, House of Commons
The issue of cyberbullying is another matter. In some investigations, electronic elements were submitted as evidence, such as text messages, emails or something posted on a Facebook wall. If that evidence is relevant to the investigation, it can be submitted. If it is not relevant, however, it will not be taken into account. So the investigator must sort through it. Therefore, that evidence can be ruled admissible in some cases.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bryan May
Thank you very much.
Thank you all for being here today and contributing to our understanding of the current situation on the Hill. This is really important legislation. We all understand that. I think you can gather from the tone of the questions that we're all relatively on the same side here. I do appreciate all of your making the time to be here with us today.
We're going to suspend for a few minutes and come back for some committee business.
Thank you very much.
[Proceedings continue in camera]