Canada's former public sector integrity commissioner, Christiane Ouimet, still has not responded to repeated requests sent since mid-December for her to appear before the House Public Accounts Committee at its first meeting of the Commons winter session on Feb. 1.
The committee's chair, Liberal Joe Volpe (Eglinton-Lawrence, Ont.) told The Hill Times last week that he'll ask the committee whether it wants to give him the authority to track down Ms. Ouimet and get her before committee.
That might mean issuing a summons. He will also ask if the committee wants to expand the study of Ms. Ouimet's former office to hear from experts in governance and transparency who have asked to appear on the topic.
Ms. Ouimet suddenly retired Oct. 18 three years into a seven-year term. She was the first head of the office created in 2007 to shield whistleblowers in the public service from reprisals.
Three complaints about Ms. Ouimet's managerial style led Auditor General Sheila Fraser to investigate her office and release a report Dec. 9 that found that Ms. Ouimet berated her staff and "failed to properly perform her mandate." During her tenure, Ms. Ouimet handled 228 cases, many with no investigation. She found no wrongdoing or reprisals for whistleblowing stemming from the complaints received.
The House Public Accounts Committee tasked with studying Ms. Fraser's report asked that Ms. Ouimet appear Dec. 14. But it had trouble reaching her without the proper coordinates.
The committee authorized Mr. Volpe to write Ms. Ouimet to ask her to appear Feb. 1. A letter was sent Dec. 16.
"The committee clerk has left messages on her voicemail. We sent a letter by priority post," Mr. Volpe told The Hill Times Jan. 25. "[The clerk has] followed up with another phone call and we're still not getting a response."
The messages were left at her home address, said Mr. Volpe.
The committee didn't get to the point of knocking on her door, but it might come to that.
"I anticipate that, on the basis of the committee's view before we broke for Christmas break, that it was the committee's intention to have her here. So we'll just look at how to do that," he said.
It could issue a summons and Ms. Ouimet would be obligated to come. Only MPs, Senators and the Governor General can choose not to attend when summoned to a committee, Parliamentary Law Clerk Rob Walsh told the Ethics Committee last June.
Besides Ms. Ouimet, the committee has invited Privy Council Clerk Wayne Wouters to appear Feb. 1.
This study is a priority for the committee, said Mr. Volpe. But there are other important items on its agenda this winter including the study of the 2010 Public Accounts, the auditor general's fall 2010 report on the acquisition of military helicopters, and perhaps even aspects of the contracts issued by the public works department for renovation of the Parliamentary precinct.
Public Accounts is not the only House committee with a busy schedule of hot topics to study this winter. Others include:
Government Operations
It sparked an RCMP investigation, the Prime Minister's sacking of a Cabinet minister and banishing her from his caucus, a media firestorm and a week in Ottawa that no one could go through a day without hearing the term "three busty hookers." And then the G20 fake lake stole the spotlight and the issue died.
But the story of former Conservative MP Rahim Jaffer, his former Cabinet minister wife Helena Guergis (Simcoe-Grey, Ont.), and his alleged unregistered lobbying on green energy projects, remains unfinished.
Before breaking for the summer last year, Yasmin Ratansi (Don Valley East, Ont.), then-chair of the Government Operations Committee studying the alleged unregistered lobbying presented a report to the House highlighting what the committee said appeared "to be a breach of its privileges and/or a possible case of contempt of Parliament."
It said Mr. Jaffer did not fully comply with orders to give the committee documents it requested and that he misled the committee through his testimonies.
Since then, the committee does not appear to have further studied the issue, according to records on its Parliamentary homepage. Yet, minutes of a private portion of the committee's last meeting before the winter break, Dec. 14, show that it agreed to adopt a draft report on the subject called "A Question of Privilege."
Committee chair, Liberal MP John McKay (Scarborough-Guildwood, Ont.), last week told The Hill Times he couldn't say anything about the issue other than what's in the minutes because the meeting was held in camera.
Hill watchers will have to wait and see whether the confidential report sees the light of day, and if so, what it will say.
Besides the Jaffer affair, the committee is also nearing an end to dealing with two other hot topics: the government's G8/G20 summit spending, which some opposition members have said was a billion-dollar boondoggle and government members said was justified for security reasons; and $9-million allegations of cash-for-contracts in Parliamentary renovations.
Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics
While this committee's priority upon return is continuing its study on opening up government datasets to the public online, it has two other significant issues coming down the pipe: a five-year legislative review of the Lobbying Act likely to start this winter, and the probing of the CBC over concerns about its response to Access to Information requests.
Acting on an agreed-upon motion Conservative committee member Paul Calandra (Oak Ridges-Markham, Ont.) tabled in December, the committee has decided to call CBC president Hubert Lacroix and Canada's Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault to appear in March, said chair Liberal Shawn Murphy (Charlottetown, P.E.I.) last week.
Mr. Calandra's motion came after QMI Agency published several stories on what it described as the CBC's attempts to block access to certain requested documents using legislative exemptions. Mr. Lacroix has accused the rival news outlet of using its journalists to smear the public broadcaster.
The CBC investigation is part of the committee's larger study of federal departments and agencies Ms. Legault has noted in recent report cards to Parliament are having difficulty responding to access to information requests within set time limits.
While the CBC was not included in Ms. Legault's last annual report card, he said, "I think it was pretty well unanimous everyone wanted to hear from them because there had been some ongoing issues and it was something that's in the public interest."
The committee is also set to start hearings this winter on the legislated five-year review of the Lobbying Act. The issue was referred to it in mid December and though the committee has not set a timeline yet, Mr. Murphy said he hoped it would start in the next couple months.
"That is an important issue," he noted, adding that there has never been a conviction since lobbying legislation has been on the books 22 years ago, and there has only been one violation of the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct reported to Parliament.
"There is an overarching serious problem with the enforcement of the act and the code," he said.
Charles King, president of the Government Relations Institute of Canada, an industry organization representing lobbyists, noted that a subcommittee of his board is working to identify issues it wants to highlight before the committee during the review.
There are several problems with the current legislation, he noted. The lobbying community needs further clarification of when lobbyists' political activities constitute improper influence on a public office holder outlined in Rule 8 of the Lobbyists' Code of Conduct. The current 20-per-cent-rule is also flawed in that it requires corporations or not-for-profits to register as lobbyists only when a group's combined lobbying time amounts to 20 per cent of the duties of a single paid employee.
"How do you calculate 20 per cent? Who's in? Who's out?" asks Mr. King. "My view is lobbying is lobbying; there's no half-lobbying."
Also, Mr. King took issue with the provision that only the most senior paid officer in a corporation or not-for-profit is listed on monthly reports as having met with government officials when it, in fact, could have been their employees. The registry should reflect the names of the people who do the meetings, not their bosses, said Mr. King.
"If you are in fact committed to transparency and accountability, I would argue the system has to be transparent."
These and other issues are sure to arise during this year's review of one of the Harper government's signature accountability reforms.
Procedure and House Affairs
This usually tame committee broke in December amid heated debate between government and opposition members in determining the course of the study of an issue that appears to be, as Speaker Peter Milliken (Kingston and the Islands, Ont.) ruled in November, a prima facie breach of MPs' privileges. The House referred to House Affairs the issue about a Finance Committee confidential pre-budget report that a now-fired Conservative MP's staffer leaked to five lobbyists.
"We will return directly to that high point," said Conservative chair Joe Preston (Elgin-Middlesex-London, Ont.) last week.
Privilege breaches take precedent over other committee work, said Mr. Preston.
The committee will look for ways to ensure future reports don't get leaked, especially given the electronic age in which they are forwarded to members by email in confidential draft form and it is easy to, at the press of a send button, distribute them further.
Mr. Preston confirmed the committee had discussed inviting Federal Lobbying Commissioner Karen Shepherd to appear.
Some committee members had expressed their desire to hear again from Russell Ullyatt, the staffer who leaked the report; his boss, MP Kelly Block (Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar, Sask.); and the lobbyists involved. "If the committee would like that to happen then it would happen," said Mr. Preston.
Last fall, the committee agreed to study the issue of whether ministers' and Parliamentary secretaries' exempt staff should be allowed to appear as witnesses before Parliamentary committees. The issue arose after committees called several Cabinet ministers' staffers to appear before them last spring but their bosses showed up instead, much to the chagrin of some opposition members.
The House Affairs Committee said it would report its findings to the House no later than March 31. The committee has yet to start the discussion, having been busy reviewing recommendations from the chief electoral officer's report about the last general election, of which it is only about halfway done.
Also on deck this season is further study of a motion the House referred to the committee about reforming Question Period, championed by Conservative MP Michael Chong (Wellington-Halton Hills, Ont.).
Afghanistan Committee
Recent media reports suggest the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan will soon deliver its first disclosure of security-screened documents relating to Afghan detainees captured by Canadian Forces.
The Associated Press reported Dec. 9 that Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe (Laurier-Sainte-Marie, Que.) had said that the multi-party committee would start releasing "an important number" of documents in January. The Liberals, according to the same article, said the first document drop would come "very soon."
QMI Agency reported Jan. 11 that the committee could be finished vetting the secret documents—which reports estimate could be some 40,000 pages—by the end of January, but committee members wouldn't confirm the timeline. The article said the committee had so far reviewed 20,000 to 25,000 documents.
MPs from each party except the NDP—which disagreed with the process—have been working since the summer to decide which documents can be publicly released and which are too sensitive to national security. Three retired judges are available to resolve disputes.
Parliamentarians hope to review the documents to determine whether Canadian authorities handed Afghan prisoners over to Afghan forces to face possible torture. Speaker Milliken (Kingston-and-the-Islands, Ont.), in a historic ruling last spring, prompted the parties to work together to resolve an impasse between the government and opposition over the document release.
The Hill Times tried contacting committee members Liberal Bryon Wilfert (Richmond Hill, Ont.) and Conservative Laurie Hawn (Edmonton Centre, Alta.) last week for comment, but neither was available before press time.
Finance Committee
With its pre-budget report killed in its draft stage because it was leaked to lobbyists, the Finance Committee has moved on to study tax evasion and offshore bank accounts. It's set to hear this week from a witness from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and former OECD secretary-general and former Liberal Cabinet minister Donald Johnston.
Bloc member Daniel Paillé (Hochelaga, Que.) is also set to introduce a motion Thursday for the committee to study Canada Revenue Agency and two of Quebec's largest construction firms, Constructions Louisbourg Ltd. and Simard-Beaudry Construction Inc., which have been charged with tax evasion after a CRA investigation. Mr. Paillé said he had opposition support when he originally sent the motion to the chair in December, but he's not sure if the government will be behind him.
The committee may also inevitably be tasked with studying parts of the upcoming budget that propose to modify existing legislation, said Mr. Paillé. That's if it gets through the House first and does not trigger an election. Mr. Paillé is set to meet with Finance Minister Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Oshawa, Ont.) Wednesday to discuss the Bloc's $5-billion demands for Quebec.
"If he says yes to the majority, we will vote for it. If not, he knows we will vote against," said Mr. Paillé in English last week.
Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney is also a highly anticipated visitor before committee in March or early April. He appears before the Finance Committee once every quarter for an economic update.
Copyright Committee
The chair of the Legislative Committee on Bill C-32, An Act to Amend the Copyright Act, says at the rate it's going now, the committee will be meeting for months, likely until the summer recess, to hear from everyone who wants its members' ears.
More than 200 people or organizations want to appear, said Conservative MP Gord Brown (Leeds-Grenville, Ont.) last week. Since starting up to study the bill after its second reading passed the House in November, the committee has been hearing hour-long panels of three or four witnesses during two two-hour meetings a week.
"At that pace, it would take months to do this," said Mr. Brown last week. "If they want to move this ahead, they would have to have more meetings."
It's up to the committee, not him, to decide, he stressed.
The many people that want a say on the bill reflects its contentious nature. Mr. Brown said he's observed that two key parts of the bill are the most touchy subjects: a provision that would make it illegal to break digital locks, and an education exemption that some say would clarify the fair use of books, articles, songs, etc. in teaching, and others say would hurt content creators' intellectual property rights.
kshane@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
Source: The Hill Times
0 comments:
Post a Comment