OGGO Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
Minutes of Proceedings
It was agreed, — That, pursuant to Standing Order 111.1(1) the committee consider the nomination of Harriet Solloway for the position of Public Sector Integrity Commissioner on Wednesday, June 21, 2023, for one five-minute opening statement and one six-minute round of questions per party.
At 4:24 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 115(5), it was agreed that the committee continue to sit.
Stephanie Kusie moved, — That, further to the evidence received by the committee subsequent to the motion adopted on Monday, April 24, 2023, in relation to the redactions and improper translation of documents ordered for production by the committee on Wednesday, January 18, 2023, the committee is of the opinion that there is a potential breach of privilege which must be reported to the House, and therefore, notwithstanding the decision of the committee on Monday, April 17, 2023, the committee adopt the report drafted by the analysts, entitled “Question of Privilege on Providing Documents to the Committee”, as amended, instruct the Chair to present this report to the House forthwith, and that the committee request a comprehensive government response pursuant to Standing Order 109.
Debate arose thereon.
At 4:50 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 115(5), the sitting was suspended.
At 5:15 p.m., the sitting resumed.
On motion of Michael Barrett, it was agreed, — That the debate be now adjourned.
The witnesses answered questions.
The committee resumed its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.
The committee resumed clause-by-clause consideration on Clause 33 of the Bill.
(a) by replacing line 26 on page 9 with the following:
“by department and region, as well as by type of wrongdoing, and the number of them that”
(b) by replacing line 30 on page 9 with the following:
“duration of each investigation, the various case outcomes for all investigations and a summary of”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Gord Johns and it was agreed to on division.
“(c.1) in relation to disclosures received and complaints made in relation to reprisals, statistics on the employment and health status of the public servant who made the disclosure or complaint, for the period beginning on the day on which the disclosure or complaint was made and ending three years following that day;”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Gord Johns and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Gord Johns, Julie Vignola — 2;
NAYS: Parm Bains, Michael Barrett, Kelly Block, Greg Fergus, Anthony Housefather, Majid Jowhari, Stephanie Kusie, Joanne Thompson — 8.
“(2.01) The Commissioner must conduct an annual survey to determine the extent to which public servants who have made protected disclosures of wrongdoings under this Act felt protected and supported in the disclosure process and include the results of the survey in the report under subsection (2).”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment and the result of the vote was announced:
YEAS: Michael Barrett, Kelly Block, Gord Johns, Stephanie Kusie, Julie Vignola — 5;
NAYS: Parm Bains, Greg Fergus, Anthony Housefather, Majid Jowhari, Joanne Thompson — 5.
Whereupon, the Chair voted in the affirmative.
Accordingly, the amendment was agreed to.
“(2.01) The Commissioner must conduct an annual survey to determine
(a) the level of awareness and trust among public servants in relation to the way disclosures are managed under this Act;
(b) the frequency of perceived occurrences of wrongdoings within departments;
(c) the perception among public servants of whether corrective actions were taken in relation to any wrongdoing; and
(d) the extent to which public servants who have made protected disclosures of wrongdoings under this Act felt protected and supported in the disclosure process.
(2.02) The Commissioner must include the results of the survey in the report under subsection (2).”
Debate arose thereon.
Stephanie Kusie moved, — That the amendment be amended by
(a) adding, in the English version, the word “and” after paragraph (b);
(b) deleting, in the English version, the word “and” from paragraph (c); and
(c) deleting paragraph (d).
At 5:30 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 5:42 p.m., the sitting resumed.
The question was put on the subamendment of Stephanie Kusie and it was agreed to.
Debate resumed on the amendment of Gord Johns, as amended.
By unanimous consent, the amendment, as amended, was withdrawn.
Clause 33, as amended, carried on division.
On new Clause 33.1,
Gord Johns moved, — That Bill C-290 be amended by adding after line 37 on page 9 the following new clause:“33.1 (1) Subsection 39(1) of the Act is replaced by the following:
39 (1) The Governor in Council shall, by commission under the Great Seal, appoint as Public Sector Integrity Commissioner a person not employed in the public service after consultation with the Leader of the Government in the Senate or Government Representative in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, the Leader or Facilitator of every other recognized party or parliamentary group in the Senate and the leader of every recognized party in the House of Commons and approval of the appointment by resolution of the Senate and House of Commons.”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment and the result of the vote was announced:
YEAS: Michael Barrett, Kelly Block, Gord Johns, Stephanie Kusie, Julie Vignola — 5;
NAYS: Parm Bains, Greg Fergus, Anthony Housefather, Majid Jowhari, Joanne Thompson — 5.
Whereupon, the Chair voted in the negative.
Accordingly, the amendment was negatived.
On Clause 34,
Greg Fergus moved, — That Bill C-290, in Clause 34, be amended by replacing line 4 on page 10 with the following:“writing, to a supervisor, a person referred to in paragraph 12(b), a senior officer, a person designated under subsection 10(2.1), the”
After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Greg Fergus and it was agreed to on division.
Clause 34, as amended, carried on division.
By unanimous consent, Clauses 35 to 37 inclusive carried on division.
After debate, by unanimous consent, Clause 38 was allowed to stand.
Clause 39 carried on division.
By unanimous consent, Clause 40 was allowed to stand.
On new Clause 40.1,
Stephanie Kusie moved, — That Bill C-290 be amended by adding after line 4 on page 12 the following new clause:“40.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 51.3:
Regulations
51.4 The Governor in Council may make regulations prescribing anything that by this Act is to be or may be prescribed.”
The question was put on the amendment of Stephanie Kusie and it was agreed to on division.
Clause 41 carried on division.
On new Clause 42,
Greg Fergus moved, — That Bill C-290 be amended by adding after line 14 on page 12 the following:“Coming into Force
42 The provisions of this Act come into force on a day or days to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.”
The question was put on the amendment of Greg Fergus and it was negatived on the following recorded division:
YEAS: Parm Bains, Greg Fergus, Majid Jowhari, Joanne Thompson — 4;
NAYS: Michael Barrett, Kelly Block, Anthony Housefather, Gord Johns, Stephanie Kusie, Julie Vignola — 6.
“Coming into Force
42 This Act comes into force on the second anniversary of the day on which it receives royal assent.”
Debate arose thereon.
At 6:23 p.m., the committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.