Mr. Pierre Lemieux (Glengarry-Prescott-Russell, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank my
colleague for splitting his time with me.
I would like to speak to the House
about Bill C-2, the federal accountability act. I am
very pleased to show my support for this piece of
legislation. Accountability is a fundamental principle
of our democratic system and this bill will dramatically
change how the government conducts itself.
We are honouring our commitments,
clearly stated in our election campaign and in the
throne speech, to ensure a sound and honest government.
It is time to restore Canadians' trust in their
government.
The need to restore this trust is
an important element in the provisions of the bill.
These provisions, which I will address in my speech here
today, will strengthen the role of the Ethics
Commissioner.
I would
first like to thank the Prime Minister for making this
matter a real priority. Our government does more than
just talk about its priorities; it pursues them
relentlessly and spares no effort in getting the work
done. As you know, many hours were devoted to this bill
in committee.
I would also like to congratulate
the President of the Treasury Board for the results of
this important work, bringing the Prime Minister's
vision to fruition.
In the time allotted to me today, I
cannot possibly address all of the worthy reforms and
initiatives in the bill. I know that many of my hon.
colleagues have spoken to, or will speak to these
issues. The focus of my remarks is on the bill's
proposal to create a new conflict of interest act, an
act that would create a stronger conflict of interest
and ethics regime to be administered by a conflict of
interest and ethics commissioner.
As hon. members know, we made seven
clear commitments on how to strengthen the role of the
Ethics Commissioner. I will just reiterate them quickly.
We must give the Ethics
Commissioner the power to fine violators. We must
prevent the Ethics Commissioner from being overruled by
the Prime Minister on whether violations have occurred.
We must enshrine the Conflict of Interest Code into law.
We must close the loopholes that allow ministers to vote
on matters connected with their business interests. We
must end venetian blind trusts. We must allow the
public, not just politicians to make complaints to the
commissioner, and we must make part time or
non-remunerated ministerial advisors subject to the
ethics regime.
Bill C-2 clearly shows that we have
honoured every one of these seven commitments. The new
conflict of interest and ethics regime will guarantee
that elected representatives and public office holders
carry out their official duties and manage their
personal affairs so as to avoid conflict of interest.
Here is how we have honoured our commitments to
Canadians.
First, we have given the Conflict
of Interest and Ethics Commissioner the power to impose
monetary penalties on people who violate the act.
Sections 52 to 62 of the proposed Conflict of Interest
Act set out a detailed regime of penalties that the
commissioner can impose on public office holders who
violate the provisions of the act. The maximum penalty
is $500, and the commissioner is to determine the exact
amount based on criteria set out in the act. These
penalties may be recovered in the Federal Court, and
they must be made public, which is not the case in many
other similar regimes.
Second, the act clearly says that
the commissioner's decisions as to whether or not the
act was contravened may not be overturned. Section 47
clearly states that no one may alter the commissioner's
report. When the commissioner imposes a penalty, it may
not be appealed in court and the prime minister may not
overturn the commissioner's decision.
Third, the act enshrines into law
the substantive and administrative regime found in the
current Conflict of Interest and Post-employment Code
for public office holders. The act refocuses the regime
as a true conflict of interest regime similar to the
approach used in most provinces.
The conflict of interest and ethics
commissioner would also be mandated to provide advice
and support the Prime Minister on ethical matters beyond
conflict of interest.
Fourth, the proposed act was
designed to clarify the obligation that ministers not
vote on matters connected with their business interests.
Section 21 requires all public office holders to recuse
themselves from any decision, debate or vote in respect
of which they would be in a conflict of interest.
Section 30 gives the commissioner a
broad power to determine any measures that might be
required to ensure that the public office holder is in
compliance with these and other requirements of the act.
Subsection 6(2) of the act
expressly prohibits a minister or a parliamentary
secretary from debating or voting in the House of
Commons on questions that would place them in a conflict
of interest. This provision is an essential element of
the conflict of interest regime and is based on a
similar provision found in the code for members of the
House of Commons.
We are pleased that this provision
has been reinstated after it was deleted in committee by
an opposition motion. This restores the integrity of the
conflict of interest regime.
Section 27 of the new act, which
honours the fifth of our commitments regarding the
ethics regime, expressly prohibits the use of blind
management agreements, sometimes called “Venetian blind
trusts”. Consequently, as this section states, the only
way to divest controlled assets is to sell them in an
arm's-length transaction or place them in a true blind
trust that meets the requirements set out in the bill.
As for the sixth commitment, the
new law provides for a means whereby the commissioner
may receive complaints from members of the public.
Subclause 44(4) states that the commissioner may
consider information from the public that is brought to
his or her attention by any parliamentarian. In
addition, the law now permits MPs and senators to file
complaints against any of the 3,600 public office
holders, and not just the ministers and parliamentary
secretaries as is the case under the existing Parliament
of Canada Act. In addition to these changes, clause 45
of the bill gives the commissioner the explicit
authority to examine a matter on his or her own
initiative, an authority currently not in place. These
changes considerably improve the ability of the
commissioner to act on credible information and to
ensure that public office holders comply with conflict
of interest provisions set out in the law.
Finally, the seventh ethics regime
commitment has been fulfilled by expanding the
definition of public office holders covered by the
regime to include ministerial advisors.
Ministerial advisors are those who
occupy a position in the office of a minister or a
minister of state and who provide policy, program or
financial advice, whether or not the advice is provided
on a full time or part time basis, and regardless
whether the person is remunerated or not.
As part of the action plan, the
government has also committed to increase public
transparency about the numerous ministerial appointments
to advisory bodies who may be unpaid and working part
time, and who are not public office holders for the
purposes of the act.
I could continue to speak about the
considerable and very important changes that we
presented in order to strengthen the conflicts of
interest and ethics regime. These changes have produced
a regime that is autonomous, better focused and more
transparent, somewhat like our government.
I am honoured to speak to these
points at the third reading of Bill C-2. On their own,
these reforms warrant our support for this bill.
However, I would like to remind the hon. members that
they form part of a number of much more significant
measures designed to restore confidence in the
government. The other components of the federal
accountability bill also deserve our support and I ask
my honourable colleagues to carry out their
responsibilities and support this bill that will make
government more accountable to the Canadians who elected
all members to serve them.