Public Accounts Committee on Nov. 30th, 2010

[Michelle d'Auray]

I think I'll ask Ms. Meredith to talk about the issues we are working our way through.

[Daphne Meredith]

In terms of the conflict of interest policy per se, as Madame d'Auray pointed out, one of the issues we are working on is the influence of social media and its impact on employees and their obligations given the pervasiveness of social media and the instant nature of communications. That's an interesting issue for us going forward.

I think as well we're looking at some issues of how to strengthen deputies' responsibilities for looking at implementing conflict of interest risk assessment in their own organizations. We know that there's an opportunity to strengthen the approach there, so how do we do so? What kind of direction do we give to deputies that might strengthen the regime in that area?

As well, we want to look at issues of post-employment and how to strengthen our regime in terms of the obligations of employees who leave the public service.

[Terence Young, Conservative, Oakville, ON]

Thank you.

In your report you say that the code is a condition of employment. Presumably, if it's a condition of employment there are sanctions. Can you talk about what sanctions are codified in the existing process for employees who break the rules and whether there are any proposed changes in the new process coming in the spring of 2011?

[Daphne Meredith]

Yes, you're quite correct in saying that the current code is a term and condition of employment. So departments can use the code for disciplinary purposes if they find evidence of wrongdoing by employees. We can identify instances when breaches of the code have resulted in discipline being levied, right up to and including termination of employment.

[Terence Young, Conservative, Oakville, ON]

Thank you.

Also, there's a reference to putting in place mechanisms so that employees can be totally comfortable to ask a question on conflict of interest and disclose any conflict, real or potential, related to grants and contributions. How does that work in the office? What does an employee do when they think there's a potential conflict of interest or a real one? I think what is critical is what is the difference between a perceived conflict of interest and a real conflict of interest.

[Michelle d'Auray]

If I may, I will answer that, Mr. Chair, since I raised the issue of grants and contributions.

When I headed an organization the primary responsibility of which was in fact the management and overseeing of grants and contributions, we launched a number of discussions among employees, because sometimes the issue, as you've quite rightly pointed out, of what is real versus what is perceived is in fact a very complex discussion to be had.

One example is that of a small community in which federal public servants were clearly identified and had a responsibility for assessing applications for grants and contributions, as was the case in my organization at the time. Their kids were at a hockey game and spent a lot of time together because they were in a bantam hockey group. So two parents, one a public servant and another parent, therefore met fairly frequently.

One day the other parent asked the public servant, “Do you know anything about this current application?”

At that point the discussion stopped, because we had had a discussion internally about the circumstances under which you should engage in these kinds of discussions and whether informal discussions of that nature were allowed. In a community where everybody knows everybody, the conflict and the potential conflict then become apparent. It meant you couldn't stop friendships, but at the same time the public servant had to be confident enough to say “Okay, the boundaries of the discussion now should move to a professional situation”. But you don't write those discussions down. You have to create an environment in which people feel comfortable enough to raise them and to have a discussion as to whether that would be perceived as a conflict.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you, Madame d'Auray.

We'll hear from Madame Bourgeois now, s'il vous plaît.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Fraser, ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to see you again, this time at another committee.

First of all, I feel that it is extremely important that we work on a code to deal with the management of conflicts of interest. I believe that both the Canadian and Quebec people want transparency and integrity. Conflicts of interest cast grave doubt on the integrity and fairness of decisions made by public officials. We know that, for the most part, public servants are very honest. Unfortunately, there are some slightly rotten apples in the barrel and so we need to implement a mechanism, hence the code to manage conflicts of interest.

Ms. Fraser, in today's presentation, you strongly emphasized the need for developing strategies to resolve conflicts of interest. I believe that you were talking about the development of government strategies. I believe that you were calling on the Treasury Board to do so first, and then you were looking to the various departments.

Do the strategies include or exclude consideration of whistleblower public officials?

[Sheila Fraser]

We did not give any specific consideration to whistleblower public officials, the role of the commission or any of that part.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Why?

[Sheila Fraser]

It is different from detecting and managing conflicts of interest. I consider these to be very different things. This audit focused on the awareness of public servants with respect to conflict of interest, existing policies, mechanisms—for example, training and risk assessment. The disclosure of wrongdoing is another aspect.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Could you say that this could be one mechanism among others?

[Sheila Fraser]

Yes, in certain cases, that could be.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

In your recent report, in paragraph 4.69, it is written that "PWGSC also provides mandatory training in ethics for all public servants.”

Since when has this been occurring? Why is this training provided? Is it because of something that occurred internally?

[Sheila Fraser]

Every department has an obligation to set up a process or implement a code of values or ethics for the entire government. We noted that the five departments that we audited had all met the requirements, namely they were providing courses or had appointed a senior official who would be available to employees in order to discuss such cases. PWGSC has done this—I do not know when, probably in 2003—in adopting the values and ethics code.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you very much.

Ms. d'Auray, you must respond directly to the Auditor General. She has asked you to implement an action plan. I have examined this one here. Is this your action plan? It is very vague and is lacking in details. It does not indicate who is responsible for a given task, nor does it provide any deadlines.

I would imagine that the recommendations in the Auditor General's report were tabled before the summer or in September. How do you explain the fact that, since then, you have been unable to produce a more substantial action plan? Indeed, your plan simply repeats that you are going to develop the educational material and say what needs to be modified or developed. That's all that you get from this report. I find that quite disturbing.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Madame Bourgeois, we're way over time.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

May I have the answer.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Please give a quick response.

[Michelle d'Auray]

First of all, we responded that we were in favour of the recommendations made by the Auditor General.

To answer your question, I would tell you that the action plan that we have developed will be carried out in compliance with the new code and the new policy.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you.

Now we'll go to Mr. Shipley, for five minutes, please.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses.

In terms of the conflict of interest code, it is for public servants, not for ministers or members. Is that correct?

That is to the Auditor General.

[Sheila Fraser]

That is correct.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

I just have a comment, and then I'll have a question following.

We continue to bring in more enforcement, more oversight, and more looking over shoulders and making sure that people are doing things the way they actually should be doing them. I'm trying to understand. Has there been a cultural change in attitude? Why do we need to continue to reinforce and reinforce ethics and a code of practice?

I don't know if that's to the Auditor General. I would go to your report. Then I would go to Madame d'Auray also.

[Sheila Fraser]

I think questions of ethics and values need to be continually discussed, communicated, and reinforced with public servants. A large number of people come into the civil service every year who need to understand the values of the public service.

As we mentioned in the report, we saw some cases that appeared to us to be pretty obvious conflicts of interest, and yet they had not been identified. They had not been addressed. That said to me that there was an issue of understanding conflict of interest. That's why we started the audit. It was to ask about what training and communication is being given to public servants to help them recognize these situations and then deal with them.