OGGO Committee Meeting

The Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates met in a televised session at 3:33 p.m. this day, in Room 253-D Centre Block, the Chair, Leon Benoit, presiding.

“(2) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable to a fine of not less than $5,000.”

The question was put on the amendment of Guy Lauzon and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 7.

Clause 19 carried.

On Clause 20,

By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

(a) by replacing line 14 on page 8 with the following:

“(2) Subject to subsection (2.1) , a public servant, or former public”

(b) adding after line 20 on page 8 the following:

“(2.1) A member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police may not make a complaint under subsection (2) in relation to any matter that is the subject of an investigation or proceeding under Part IV or V of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act unless

(a) the member has exhausted every procedure available under that Act for dealing with the matter; and

(b) the member has been granted leave by the Board to make the complaint.

(2.2) The Board may grant the leave only if

(a) the application for leave is made within 60 days after the procedures referred to in paragraph (2.1)(a) have been exhausted; and

(b) the Board is of the opinion that the issue of reprisal was not adequately dealt with by those procedures.

(2.3) The Board ceases to have jurisdiction if an application for judicial review of any decision relating to the procedures referred to in paragraph (2.1)(a) is made by the member.”

(c) replacing lines 23 to 34 on page 8 with the following:

“(a) 60 days after the date on which the complainant knew, or in the Board’s opinion ought to have known, that the reprisal was taken;

(b) if the complainant has made a disclosure to the President of the Public Service Commission in respect of the reprisal during the 60-day period referred to in paragraph (a) and the President has decided to deal with the disclosure, 60 days after the President reports his or her findings to the complainant and the appropriate chief executive; or

(c) if the complainant is a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the complaint is in relation to a matter referred to in subsection (2.1), 60 days after the member was granted leave.”

(d) adding after line 29 on page 9 the following:

“(6.1) The Board may make an order in relation to a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police despite subsections 42(4) and (6), 45.16(7) and 45.26(6) of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act.”

On motion of Marc Godbout, it was agreed, — That the motion be amended in the sub-clause 2.1 by adding the word “que” to the French after the words “Loi sur la Gendarmerie royale du Canada”.

The question was put on the amendment of Diane Marleau, as amended, and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 3.

(a) replacing lines 5 to 12 on page 8 with the following:

“(a) in relation to a public servant who is employed in the Public Service Labour Relations Board or a person whose complaint relates to a reprisal taken while he or she was so employed, the Canada Industrial Relations Board;

(b) in relation to any other public servant who is employed in any portion of the public sector referred to in Schedule I to the Public Service Staff Relations Act or a person whose complaint relates to a reprisal taken while he or she was so employed, the Public Service Staff Relations Board; and

(c) in relation to any other public servant, the”

(b) replacing, in the English version, lines 18 and 19 on page 8 with the following:

“against the public servant may make a complaint in writing to”

(c) replacing line 13 on page 9 with the following:

“(b) reinstate the complainant or pay damages to the complainant in lieu of reinstatement if, in the Board’s opinion, the relationship of trust between the parties cannot be restored;”

On motion of Louise Thibault, it was agreed, — That the motion be amended in the French of the Sub-amendment (c)(b) by deleting the word “plutôt”.

“(3) A complaint must be made to the Commissioner not later than 180 days after the date on which the complainant knew, or in the Commissioner’s opinion ought to have known, that the reprisal was taken.”

After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

(a) replacing line 21 on page 8 with the following:

“(3) Subject to subsection (3.1) the complaint must be made to the”

(b) adding after line 34 on page 8 the following:

“(3.1) The complaint may be made after the periods referred to in subsection (3) if the Board feels it is appropriate considering the circumstances of the complaint.”

The question was put on the amendment of Paul Szabo and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 2.

“an amount that, in”

The question was put on the amendment of Guy Lauzon and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 7.

“(f) pay to the complainant a maximum of $10,000 for pain and suffering.”

After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

Clause 20, as amended, carried.

“20.1 (1) After having consulted with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and taken its security and confidentiality needs into account, the Public Service Labour Relations Board shall establish procedures for the processing and hearing of complaints relating to reprisals involving that organization.

(2) A complaint relating to a reprisal involving the Royal Canadian Mounted Police shall not be heard or determined by any person other than a full-time member of the Public Service Labour Relations Board.”

On Clause 21,

“that he or she made a protected disclosure — after February 10, 2004 and”

By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

At 5:31 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.