moved:
Motion No. 5
That Bill C-9, in Clause 38, be amended by adding after line 15 on page 25 the following:
“(1.1) A port authority shall establish a code of conduct and system of practices respecting avoidance of conflict of interest by its directors and officers.”
Motion No. 6
That Bill C-9, in Clause 41, be amended by replacing line 4 on page 26 with the following:
“referred to in subsections 38(1) and (1.1) were, in the”
Motion No. 7
That Bill C-9, in Clause 41, be amended by adding after line 11 on page 26 the following:
“(2.1) An examiner shall be a person appointed by the Minister from suitable persons in the office of the Auditor General of Canada or the Department of Justice.”
Motion No. 8
That Bill C-9, in Clause 41, be amended by replacing lines 24 to 25 on page 26 with the following:
“about the plan, the matter shall be referred to the Canadian Transportation Agency and the Agency shall make a final determination with respect to it and shall report its determination to the Standing Committee of the House of Commons appointed to deal with matters relating to Transportation.”
Motion No. 9
That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting clause 43.
Motion No. 13
That Bill C-9, in Clause 85, be amended by adding after line 8 on page 54 the following:
“(1.1) A not-for-profit corporation shall, in respect of its operation of the Seaway establish a code of conduct and system of practices respecting avoidance of conflict of interest by its directors and officers.”
Motion No. 14
That Bill C-9, in Clause 87, be amended by replacing lines 29 to 30 on page 54 with the following:
“tems and practices referred to in subsections 85(1) and (1.1) were, in the period under examination”
Motion No. 15
That Bill C-9, in Clause 87, be amended by adding after line 36 on page 54 the following:
“(2.1) An examiner shall be a person appointed by the Minister from suitable persons in the office of the Auditor General of Canada or the Department of Justice.”
Motion No. 16
That Bill C-9, in Clause 87, be amended by replacing line 3 on page 55 with the following:
“shall be referred to the Canadian Transportation Agency and the Agency shall make a final determination with respect to it and shall report its determination to the Standing Committee of the House of Commons appointed to deal with matters relating to Transportation.”
Motion No. 17
That Bill C-9 be amended by deleting Clause 89.
Mr. Speaker, I thank the House for its courtesy in speeding things up here.
When I spoke earlier today I was looking at things which have already happened, things which I thought might have been improved in the bill. Now I would like to speak specifically to the 10 related motions which Reform has on the order paper and which call for greater transparency and accountability in the commercialization of the ports and the St. Lawrence Seaway.
Unlike the amendments which we introduced in committee, these amendments are not stakeholder driven. Instead, they reflect the dedication of our party to the principle of public accountability of public institutions.
This new bill will do away with Ports Canada which is known fondly by its friends and admirers as “Pork Canada”. While we have the opportunity, let's build some safeguards into the new regime.
These amendments I am going to pair as I speak because they are mirror amendments relating to port authorities and to the seaway. For example, Motions Nos. 5 and 13 say basically the same thing, but because of the nature of the bill we had to write amendments to apply to the two situations.
These address the problem of conflict of interest. Hopefully, they will avoid situations such as the one that developed when NavCan was created. I recall that the government's financial adviser on privatization slid laterally into work for NavCan before the financial adviser's contract had even expired. Incredibly, Transport Canada made no objection to this clear conflict. This is the type of thing we would like to avoid.
Motions Nos. 7 and 15 would tighten up section 87 which provides for an outside audit every five years. Notwithstanding that five years is an inordinately long time between examinations, we will accept that. The amendment proposes that the outside examiner be totally independent of the Minister of Transport and that the person or persons come from the office of the auditor general or from the Department of Justice. These departments have the experience and the background to enable them to spot problems and avoid repetition of mistakes.
Motions Nos. 8 and 16 would remove the power of the minister to adjudicate between the special examiner and a port authority's audit committee.
One of the objectives of commercialization is to remove the minister from the decision making process. This is what the bill is about. If there is a problem with an audit, an arm's length organization, and we are suggesting the Canadian Transportation Agency, should be the adjudicator. Its determination would then be reported to the transport committee. Ideally it should be the transport committee itself that would act as adjudicator but since our parliamentary committees as constituted are quite toothless, the CTA has proposed to be the referee.
Finally, Motions Nos. 9 and 17 are merely consequential to the other eight motions. They simply remove the power of the minister to interfere in the selection of auditors with respect to port authorities or the seaway.
Because everyone was courteous and allowed me to get this on the record, I will relinquish the remainder of my time.