SCCO Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Sub-Committee of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts on Combating Corruption

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Wednesday, May 22, 2002

¹

1535

The Chair (Mr. John Williams (St. Albert, Canadian Alliance))

Mr. Bob Miller (Director, Parliamentary Centre)

¹

1540

¹

1545

The Chair

Mr. Luc Fortin (Deputy Principal Clerk, Parliamentary Associations, International and Inter-Parliamentary Affairs, House of Commons)

The Chair

¹

1550

The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy (Hillsborough, Lib.))

Mr. Williams

¹

1555

The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy)

Mr. Mayfield

Mr. John Williams

Mr. Philip Mayfield

Mr. Bob Miller

º

1600

Mr. Philip Mayfield

Mr. Bob Miller

Mr. Philip Mayfield

Mr. Bob Miller

º

1605

Mr. Philip Mayfield

The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy)

Ms. Meredith

Mr. John Williams

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. John Williams

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. John Williams

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. John Williams

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. John Williams

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. John Williams

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. John Williams

º

1610

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Bob Miller

Ms. Val Meredith

The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy)

Mr. Odina Desrochers (Lotbinière—L'Érable, BQ)

Mr. Luc Fortin

Mr. Odina Desrochers

Mr. Luc Fortin

Mr. Odina Desrochers

Mr. John Williams

º

1615

Mr. Odina Desrochers

The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy)

Mr. Bryden

Mr. John Williams

Mr. John Bryden

Mr. John Williams

Mr. Bob Miller

º

1620

Mr. John Bryden

The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy)

Mr. Philip Mayfield

Mr. John Williams

Mr. Philip Mayfield

Mr. John Williams

Mr. Philip Mayfield

Mr. John Williams

º

1625

Mr. John Bryden

Mr. Brian O'Neal

Mr. John Bryden

The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy)

Mr. Philip Mayfield

The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy)

Mr. John Williams

Mr. Odina Desrochers

The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy)

º

1630

The Chair

Mr. Philip Mayfield

The Chair

Mr. Philip Mayfield

The Chair

Ms. Val Meredith

The Chair

Mr. Philip Mayfield

The Chair

Mr. Philip Mayfield

The Chair

º

1635

Mr. Shawn Murphy

The Chair

Mr. Shawn Murphy

The Chair

Mr. Shawn Murphy

Ms. Val Meredith

The Chair

Ms. Val Meredith

The Chair

Mr. Philip Mayfield

The Chair

Mr. Philip Mayfield

The Clerk of the Committee

The Chair

º

1640

Mr. Philip Mayfield

Mr. Shawn Murphy

The Chair

---

CANADA

Sub-Committee of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts on Combating Corruption

---

NUMBER 002

l

1st SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Wednesday, May 22, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¹  (1535)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mr. John Williams (St. Albert, Canadian Alliance)): Good afternoon, everyone.

    I call to order the Sub-Committee of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts on Combating Corruption. The orders of the day are pursuant to Standing Order 108(1) and (2) of the order of the committee dated Tuesday, May 8, 2001, a study relating to combating corruption.

    First we're going to talk about the inaugural meeting of GOPAC on the creation of a Canadian or North American chapter; the engagement of Canadian parliamentarians; chapter development around the world; and progress on arrangements for the inaugural meeting.

    On other matters, we have received an invitation to visit Nicaragua.

    Our witnesses today include, as an individual, myself, John Williams, member of Parliament. When it's time, I will ask Mr. Murphy to take the chair and I will then move to the other side of the table. From the House of Commons we have Mr. Luc Fortin, deputy principal clerk, Parliamentary Associations, International and Inter-Parliamentary Affairs; and from the Parliamentary Centre, Bob Miller, director.

    I was going to start with Mr. Fortin, but perhaps it's more appropriate that we talk to Mr. Miller first, to kind of give the context, and then we'll have Mr. Fortin give us the details on the conference.

    Mr. Miller, do you want to give us an overview of the GOPAC inaugural meeting, where it's coming from, and how it has developed since the last time we spoke to this committee?

    Mr. Bob Miller (Director, Parliamentary Centre): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

    Thank you to all the members of this subcommittee, which is a very important initiative of this Parliament. It sends a signal to sister parliaments throughout the world that this is an issue that you as parliamentarians take seriously. Believe me, based on my travels throughout the world and so on, that's an extremely important message at this time.

    I'll be brief. There are two key things I would highlight in describing the origins of this idea. The first is the emergence over the last 10 or 15 years of international parliamentary networking. By that I don't mean the traditional kinds of parliamentary associations, but rather parliamentarians coming together to tackle common issues. This arises from a whole series of causes, but it's an important phenomenon.

    I've just come back from a parliamentary network on the World Bank, and its objective is to hold the World Bank and the IFIs accountable for their policies. Similarly, GOPAC is going to be an organization to strengthen parliaments and hold governments accountable for issues related to corruption.

    The second thing I would highlight or emphasize is the fact that corruption is a cross-border issue. That may be fairly obvious, but when we first started working on this four or five years ago, we tended to approach it as a national problem, a problem that has to be dealt with country by country. But very quickly the parliamentarians said to us, forget it; if you don't deal with corruption on a cross-border basis involving both developed and developing countries and both the countries where money originates and where it gets deposited, no progress will be made in dealing with the issue.

    So those are the two items, interparliamentary networking and corruption as a cross-border issue, that were the origins of this idea.

    The inspiration for GOPAC came from the formation of a network in Africa four years ago. At a conference in Kampala, Uganda, in 1998, parliamentarians from 10 African countries said, it's ridiculous for us to come together in conferences like this and go back to our individual parliaments and do nothing about these problems. So on the spot they decided they would create an interparliamentary network that would work together and share information and that would try to provide political and moral support to each other when they were in fights with national governments, and this they've done.

    The most notable accomplishment to date of APNAC--and it illustrates what we hope will come of GOPAC as well--is in the case of Kenya, a country where there is systemic corruption. Three years ago the founders of the African network succeeded in establishing a parliamentary subcommittee on corruption. It held hearings throughout the country, and it issued a report in which names were named. There was so much trouble over that, the names were removed when it was tabled in Parliament. Among the names was a nephew of the President of the country. But by then the media had that information, and the impact had been felt in the country.

    At the present time, the APNAC chapter in Kenya is consulted widely in the establishment of new anti-corruption legislation. Obviously, this didn't happen overnight. These things change very slowly. But this is a concrete example of the kind of political influence we hope will come of parliamentary networking.

    The final introductory point I would make is to talk about how important this particular moment is for Canada and for the international community on this issue. As you know, Canada is hosting the G-8 summit this year. A focus of that summit is Africa and, specifically, a new plan for African development. The fundamental idea in the plan is that there will be commitments for resources for Africa in exchange for commitments on governance reform, that issues such as corruption will be addressed seriously for the first time in return for new commitments on financial resources, whether they be ODA, investment, or whatever. Therefore, it becomes absolutely critical to find practical ways to deliver on that kind of pledge.

¹  (1540)  

    So those are some of the background considerations.

    On GOPAC itself, I would highlight significant developments since we last met. The House of Commons and the Senate have now committed themselves, as you know, to hosting an international conference for the launch of this organization in October. Again, this is a tremendously important signal, from one of the senior and most respected parliaments in the world to the international parliamentary community, that Canada and its parliamentarians take this issue seriously. So both the resources provided by that decision and the message sent out are extremely important to the success of GOPAC.

    At the conference, the organization itself will be formed and launched. It will consist of an international board of directors representing a series of regional networks throughout the world. On the African model, the hope is that networks will arise in Latin America, Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and other parts of the world, and GOPAC will serve as a network of networks to bring together these regional networks, share information, and perhaps launch national campaigns.

    At this conference I attended last week, I spoke with the chairman of the African chapter about the initial work of GOPAC. On Transparency International, which was founded about 10 years ago, he said one of the reasons for its success was that it committed itself to a campaign to come up with a code of conduct for the OECD countries on the paying of bribes by national companies. There is now such a code, and it's been adopted by most of the OECD countries, including Canada.

    He suggested that GOPAC could do a similar kind of thing and mentioned, as an example, the disclosure of financial assets by political leaders. This is one of the major problems throughout the world. Any attempt to develop serious anti-corruption campaigns is undermined by the fact that the political leadership in many of these countries lacks credibility. People believe that the corruption starts at the top and works its way down. So the suggestion is that GOPAC launch a world-wide campaign on an issue like disclosure of assets by political leaders.

    In addition to arriving at the broad objectives or the strategic plan of GOPAC and launching the organization, the hope is that the conference in October will facilitate the establishment of many of the regional networks we've talked about and the habit of those regional networks working together.

    The bottom line in all this is that the mission of GOPAC, like the regional networks, is to strengthen parliaments in their fight against corruption. Recent action by the public accounts committee of Canada has again contributed to the credibility of Canada in leading this kind of work.

    So again, let me thank you very much for the invitation to be here and for your support of this initiative.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

¹  (1545)  

    The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Miller.

    We'll now turn to Mr. Fortin from the House of Commons to talk about the logistics of the conference.

    Mr. Luc Fortin (Deputy Principal Clerk, Parliamentary Associations, International and Inter-Parliamentary Affairs, House of Commons): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I would like to mention first that the international and inter-parliamentary directorate is responsible for the arrangements of the GOPAC conference, as well as for the preparation of many international events that are held on the Hill.

    In terms of logistics, hotel and room reservations are already completed. Invitations will be sent to 70 countries before the end of next week. Each invitation will include a package that will be sent out by diplomatic bag. Arrangements have already been made with DFAIT on this.

    Canadian embassies in those 70 countries will be notified of the date and given information related to the GOPAC conference scheduled for October. Each embassy will be able to provide basic information on the conference.

    Documents that will be included in each package are being translated right now into English, French, and Spanish.

[Translation]

    Furthermore, the International and Inter-Parliamentary Affairs Directorate is currently attending to other logistical arrangements, including provisions for simultaneous translation and land transportation.

[English]

    Other logistical arrangements required for the conference will be finalized over the next month and a half.

    So I can report that we are well prepared, in terms of logistics, and initial arrangements have been made according to the schedule that was agreed upon at the beginning.

    Thank you.

    The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Fortin.

    Since I am down here as a witness myself, I will ask Mr. Murphy to take the chair and I will move to the other end of the room.

¹  (1550)  

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy (Hillsborough, Lib.)): We'll continue the meeting. I want to welcome to the committee Mr. John Williams. Mr. Williams, it's a pleasure to see you here. I take it you know everyone on the committee.

    Mr. John Williams: I think I do, Mr. Murphy. I thank you, and let me again say to this committee and to the Parliament of Canada that I appreciate very much the support that the organizers of this organization and conference have received from the Parliament of Canada and the Government of Canada. CIDA have also, it has to be mentioned, so far given $150,000 towards the conference, which will be held here in Ottawa, in the House of Commons, October 13 to 16, 2002.

    In order to host this organizational meeting, I think it's important that we have a North American chapter of the organization. Mr. Miller made reference to the African chapter, which was the genesis of much of what has come to be known as GOPAC. Through my work in South America, we have a chapter currently being formed--which I think will be formed--in Sao Paulo on September 7, 2002.

    We have decided that since it's an anti-corruption initiative and agenda, parliamentarians should keep their fingers as far away from the cash as possible. Therefore, there will be an NGO responsible for the management and a secretariat for each chapter.

    Parlatino, headquartered in Sao Paulo, which is basically a parliamentary association of Latin America, have agreed to act as a secretariat for the Latin American chapter under the presidency of Beatriz Paredes, who is also the president of the Congress of Mexico. She is from the PRI Party, which is a party that was in power for 70 years in Mexico and had significant allegations of corruption against them. Now that they are in a much more active democracy, they realize they have to clean up their ways and want to become actively engaged in the fight against corruption. So South America looks like it's going to come together September 7.

    Central America has also indicated very much that they want to have their own chapter. This is something that we'll come up with later on when we talk about the other matters under number 2.

    Here in North America, I'd like to see a chapter for North America to act as a host in conjunction with the Parliament of Canada. I think it's appropriate that North America be organized prior to October 13.

    As we all know, there is a meeting in St. John's, Newfoundland, on August 25 of the Canadian Council of Public Accounts Committees. That's the federal Parliament and of course all the parliaments of all the legislatures of Canada. We are trying to see if we can get U.S. representation at that meeting as well. We realize that for the Americans, St. John's, Newfoundland, is not exactly the centre of the world. Perhaps they've never been to the edge before, so this might be the opportunity for them to go there. At that meeting we have set aside one full day to discuss a constitution, to adopt a constitution, to hold elections, to put together a North American chapter of GOPAC that would work in conjunction with the Parliament of Canada, and to be the host for the international conference.

    I'm also asking at this meeting that representatives of each part--and we have representation here from three parties out of the five, and I can talk to the others--talk to your respective caucuses before we recess for the summer to explain to them the importance of Parliament as an institution of accountability, and to explain to them that if we want our aid money to be effective, then the more that we can reduce corruption the better off we are.

    The Prime Minister's NEPAD initiative in Africa, as Mr. Miller has mentioned, is about more aid for better governance. Therefore, we as parliamentarians have a very real role, in my opinion, to play in elevating the competence of a parliament, because it's well known that if a parliament is ineffective or subservient to its executive, corruption flourishes. When corruption flourishes, prosperity goes down through the floor, and that is why you have such a desperate situation in many parts of the world because corruption is out of control.

    So I'd like each representative from each party to speak to your respective caucuses before we recess for the summer, to explain to them what we are doing here and to ask them to participate.

¹  (1555)  

    Since it's going to be a fee-based organization, much like a parliamentary association, we have recommended that the fee be $15 Canadian, which I don't think is going to break the bank of a member of Parliament. If anybody, even though they can't attend the founding meeting in St. John's, Newfoundland, were to pay the annual dues prior to that time--with cheques payable to the Parliamentary Centre, which will be the secretariat at least for the meantime for the North American chapter; don't make them payable to me, please--they would be counted as an inaugural founding member of the organization.

    I think that for parliamentarians in Canada to say you're in on the ground floor, that you recognize we have a role to play, is commendable. That's why I would like to see as many of the 301 parliamentarians as possible sign up before August 25, so that when we do meet--and a number of us here will be in St. John's, Newfoundland--we can say we do truly enjoy the support of the Parliament of Canada.

    So that is the focus, a study to put together a North American chapter and to continue the development of other chapters. As Mr. Bob Miller from the Parliamentary Centre mentioned, the Parliamentary Centre is to be the international secretariat of the global organization, headquartered right here in Canada. It's in part of the parliamentary precinct; their offices are down the street. I think it's quite an accomplishment for Canada that we are doing this. I know we enjoy the support of the Minister of Foreign Affairs. The Minister for CIDA, the Minister of Finance, and these others whom I've talked to are very much supportive of this initiative.

    I think I'll stop there, Mr. Chair, and leave other matters to other discussion. If there are any questions, we'll be glad to entertain them.

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy): Thank you very much, Mr. Williams.

    Since we don't have a large gathering, it's probably better if we just go down the table and open it up for questions, starting with Mr. Mayfield and then going to Ms. Meredith.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield (Cariboo—Chilcotin, Canadian Alliance): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to first of all say how much I appreciate the presentation these three gentlemen have provided to us.

    I want to ask a couple of questions about the North American chapter you're founding. That is more than a Canadian chapter. Could you talk about some of the membership you're anticipating from perhaps the United States, Mexico, or other countries in North America?

    Mr. John Williams: The membership is open, in essence, to three categories of people: parliamentarians, former parliamentarians--because we feel they can have much to offer--and provincial parliamentarians as well. It isn't strictly restricted to national governments. Therefore, with the CCPAC in Newfoundland, all the provincial members would be eligible to join the organization as well.

    In the United States, of course, it would include the Congress of the United States and members of state legislatures as well. I have here Mr. David Beaton, who is working with me as a parliamentary intern for the summer. He is a law student at the University of Alberta. His focus is to work on the development of the North American chapter and to find people from the United States who can participate in the organization.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: We had the opportunity to discuss the idea behind GOPAC with people such as members of the U.S. Accounting Office, the World Bank, and others in Washington--was it a couple of years ago we were there? It seemed to me at the time there was a good deal of interest in supporting this type of thing. Has that interest matured and flowered to any extent?

    Mr. Bob Miller: I think the answer is yes. At the conference I've just attended there were about 120 parliamentarians from 50 countries, I think it was. There was a strong level of interest in GOPAC, a desire to establish a working relationship between GOPAC and other parliamentary networks so we don't duplicate what existing organizations are doing.

    I think the biggest practical problem with the North American chapter is getting the active engagement of U.S. politicians. At the conference in Switzerland there were no sitting U.S. congressmen or senators, although the objectives are ones that are commonly supported. It becomes more and more difficult to get their active involvement in these kinds of initiatives, but if they aren't involved, it has an impact on the effectiveness and the seriousness of the organization. I think a key objective in the case of the North American chapter will be finding ways to bring them in, perhaps through one-on-one linkages between Canadian parliamentarians and counterparts they have in the United States. Certainly this can be addressed partly by former members, but the relevance, the impact, especially when it comes to new legislation, is enhanced tremendously if you have people who are currently serving in parliament wherever.

    Generally speaking, the interest is growing. At the opening of the conference, the president of the World Bank, James Wolfensohn, spoke, and he devoted more time to the issue of corruption than to any other.

    We held a conference about four weeks ago in Addis Ababa in connection with the Prime Minister's trip to Africa, on the issue of parliamentary oversight. The message that came back from the African parliamentarians was that corruption is the number one issue on their agenda.

    Parliamentary oversight means more than anti-corruption, but right now, at this point in the history of Africa, this is the issue that is really killing countries. I think that's increasingly recognized, but I think what Mr. Williams has done is to take it to the next step and try to find a practical mechanism for doing something about it and moving just beyond the talk.

º  (1600)  

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: I appreciate that, and I'm heartened to hear that there's a chapter being formed in South America. I think that's really a fantastic job of those responsible for pushing it to that point, and I'm hopeful that Africa may also come along.

    It seems to me that in the early stages of this conversation there was discussion with some of the Southeast Asian countries. Have those discussions gone any further? Is there interest coming from that part of the world?

    Mr. Bob Miller: Again I would say yes. In fact, one of the key figures in that will be coming to Canada on the weekend. There is a lunch, which will be hosted by the Speakers of the House and Senate on Monday, at which Senator Pimentel of the Philippines will be the speaker. He chairs a commission on anti-corruption in the Philippines senate, which was very actively involved in the impeachment of the former president of that country, Joseph Estrada. He and parliamentarians, primarily from Cambodia, Thailand, and Indonesia, are in active conversation about establishing a network in Southeast Asia.

    Language poses a practical problem in that part of the world. There isn't a common language, although more and more parliamentarians speak English as a kind of common language.

    The short answer to your question is yes. There's a growing recognition and also within the region there is now a parliamentary network. They are also showing interest in partnering with this movement and doing activities jointly.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: I notice that CIDA is putting $150,000 into this. When we were in Washington I had the impression that there were others who were interested in supporting this financially. Has that financial support been forthcoming at all? Have any of the world organizations we met with there become involved?

    Mr. Bob Miller: The principal support so far is coming from the World Bank. The World Bank was heavily criticized for years for ignoring this issue. A study in the mid-1990s found that one of the main contributing factors to the under-performance of World Bank loans was corruption. The new president of the World Bank, James Wolfensohn, who's been there now for a number of years, brought this right to the top of his agenda.

    We've been working for several years with an arm of the World Bank called the World Bank Institute on training programs for parliamentarians and parliamentary staff around the world. They will contribute to this.

    Two foreign aid programs are likely to contribute and are strong supporters--the British and the Dutch. Both have given anti-corruption a very high profile and priority in their aid programs.

    My own sense is that resources are not going to be the problem. In fact, I think what we have to avoid is throwing too much money at these kinds of things. Often that isn't the solution at all and may just compound the problem. We really need to mobilize people and find simple, consistent ways to address the problem.

    But, yes, we will have representatives from various international organizations, donor organizations, at the conference in October as observers. Part of the purpose of this is to set up meetings between the regional networks and possible donors to support activities in the various parts of the world.

º  (1605)  

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: I think this is a wonderful initiative, and I thank you.

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy): Thank you, Mr. Mayfield.

    Ms. Meredith, would you follow?

    Ms. Val Meredith (South Surrey—White Rock—Langley, Canadian Alliance): Well, actually, Philip asked my question.

    Funding isn't an issue. You feel you would have adequate funds to sponsor the conference and the operating costs of the NGO that's going to be responsible for this.

    Mr. John Williams: If I may just make a point, it's not going to be an NGO. This is an association of parliamentarians, not a non-government organization.

    Ms. Val Meredith: My understanding from what you said earlier, though, was that in order to avoid corruption, you were going to keep it as far away from parliamentarians, or from the politics, as possible.

    Mr. John Williams: An NGO in every region will act as a secretariat, handling the money on behalf of the parliamentarians, doing the secretarial work, providing office space and whatever else is required. We do not want to build a whole new empire of rents and staff and bureaucracy and so on. This is not what it's about.

    The idea is to engage parliamentarians, to enhance the role of parliament, to provide peer support for parliamentarians who, in some parts of the world, take a very serious risk by speaking out against corruption. We want to provide peer support for them and hopefully put peer pressure on those who have succumbed to the temptations.

    Ms. Val Meredith: If the money is being handled by non-governmental organizations, but it is really a parliamentary association, to whom do the collectors of the money answer to? To whom do they report and to whom are they accountable for their operations?

    Mr. John Williams: Each organization will have its own constitution, its own board of directors, and in essence will be run as a non-profit organization. The funds will be managed and the financial statements will be prepared by the NGO that acts as the secretariat.

    Ms. Val Meredith: But to whom will it be answerable? To whom is it accountable for how the money is spent?

    Mr. John Williams: It would be answerable to its board of directors and to the membership at large because it is a self-contained organization. So if a chapter in one part of the world receives funding from an IFI to sponsor a conference, then the NGO and the organization would receive the funds, put on the conference, and provide the accounting for that.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Let me assume the role of devil's advocate. The Auditor General expressed a concern that governments were establishing these independent, third-party organizations that became removed from her ability to audit their books and processes. How is this going to be any different from those organizations with which she indicated having a problem?

    Mr. John Williams: Well, first of all, this is not government, again; it's parliamentarians. I can assure you the intent is to make it as open, transparent, and public as absolutely possible. Nothing will be hidden; if we're going to be an anti-corruption organization with an anti-corruption agenda, it cannot happen that way.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Will reports be tabled in the House of Commons?

    Mr. John Williams: There is no reason why they can't be.

    Ms. Val Meredith: The question is, will they be? Is this something where the organization will be reporting back to the parliaments supporting the representatives?

    Mr. John Williams: It's an organization of parliamentarians, not an organization of parliaments. It's a subtle difference. But note the difference.

    I would certainly encourage the organization, its regional chapters, and GOPAC--the umbrella one--to feel willing and wanting, rather than obliged, to table reports, not just in this parliament but also in parliaments around the world.

º  (1610)  

    Ms. Val Meredith: Thank you.

    Mr. Bob Miller: If I may just add a question on financial accountability, for the time being, the finances of this organization will take the form of grants to the Parliamentary Centre of Canada. For example, the $150,000 is a grant. We are accountable to CIDA for how that money is spent. We prepared a proposal for CIDA saying the money would accomplish the following things. If it doesn't, at the end of the day we will be held accountable to CIDA for that.

    Similarly, whether it's CIDA, the World Bank, or other organizations subsequently, any grant that comes to us will follow a proposal they've agreed to, and a contract we have signed, in which we commit ourselves to achieving certain results and observing certain standards of financial administration, and so on--as we have to do with all our work.

    So there is a double accountability: policy accountability to parliaments, which is an excellent idea; and financial accountability to our organization, which will provide support services for GOPAC.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Thank you.

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy): Thank you, Ms. Meredith.

    Monsieur Desrochers, s'il vous plait.

[Translation]

    Mr. Odina Desrochers (Lotbinière—L'Érable, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. Fortin, you indicated that you had sent out invitations to 70 countries. Will countries from each of the five continents be attending?

    Mr. Luc Fortin: I'm not sure whether Mr. Miller has the list of the continents involved, but I believe it includes countries representing North America, South America, Europe, Asia and Africa.

    Mr. Odina Desrochers: As far as promotional material is concerned, do you have a brochure? You asked us to spread the word to our parliamentary colleagues. There are two caucus meetings remaining and rumour has it that the House will be rising on June 7.

    Mr. Luc Fortin: A brochure is available providing details of the conference as well as information about GOPAC as such. Certainly we could send you the same material that was included in the package sent out to each country.

    Mr. Odina Desrochers: Mr. Williams, as far as establishing a North American chapter of this organization is concerned, do you have some idea of how this process will unfold? Have any negotiations been initiated with the Americans and the Mexicans?

[English]

    Mr. John Williams: At this point in time, Mexico has taken the lead in developing the Latin American chapter. Latin America has slightly different boundaries than South America.

    We're trying to develop as many contacts as we can with the United States, to see if we can get its participation at the CCPAC conference on August 25 in St. John's, Newfoundland.

    The constitution has been drafted. It's been circulated to all provincial public accounts committees. We'll make it available to you as well, so that by the time we get to Newfoundland all the participants will have read the constitution. Hopefully, any problems they may have will have been ironed out, so that we don't spend any lengthy amount of time debating and adopting the constitution and setting the objectives of the chapter.

º  (1615)  

[Translation]

    Mr. Odina Desrochers: Fine then. Thank you very much.

[English]

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy): Thank you, Mr. Desrochers.

    Mr. Bryden.

    Mr. John Bryden (Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot, Lib.): I have something to add from where Val left off. One huge danger I perceive in what we're trying to do here is if you have a chapter set up in some part of the world, and corruption prevails in that chapter, it's going to do enormous damage to the intention of your initiative. I've done an awful lot of work on the accountability of NGOs, and I'm not necessarily convinced that CIDA, which has improved its act enormously in the last five years, is necessarily what we ought to be relying on--not only for ourselves. This is not to suggest that the Parliamentary Centre is not very well run, but you have to set the standards of transparency that are our standards of transparency that apply in this forum and that we're all satisfied will do everything possible to prevent abuse. Then you try to persuade the other chapters to adopt the same standards of transparency.

    So I think Val was right on there, except I would take it a step further. I would really hesitate to go forward with this unless I was convinced that first you have the level of transparency here that we need and also that you have some reasonable timeline for ensuring that these overseas chapters are going to be properly transparent and accountable.

    Mr. John Williams: The most important part is to ensure that the NGO selected is credible. If they are credible and have a reputation, as Mr. Miller pointed out, the Parliamentary Centre is engaged in other programs and has other relationships with CIDA. I would doubt that it would forfeit its reputation on these other programs with CIDA because of this particular one. The key is the credible NGO.

    Mr. John Bryden: I'm sorry, I'm going to disagree, Mr. Chairman, because I've dealt with credible NGOs, some of which have been financed by CIDA. I remember one I dealt with. I was able to discover that it was engaged in transferring funds to the Middle East, possibly for the purchase of arms. So the credibility is not sufficient unless you have the instruments of transparency. I would be very, very cautious there, Mr. Chairman. I've had a lot of experience and a lot of organizations appear credible, but on an examination you get into trouble. When you transfer this type of operation abroad, you run into a lot of that.

    I've said enough of that. I see you will give it serious attention.

    Mr. John Williams: Your point is very well taken, Mr. Bryden. The good thing is we're not anticipating large amounts of cash, because the NGO is running it on behalf of the organization. As I say, there is no bureaucracy and superstructure here. The fundamental, major costs will be for meetings and conferences on a regional basis. These are largely self-stand-alone initiatives that have to be accounted for individually. As Mr. Miller pointed out, the conference on October 13 to 16 is being funded partially by CIDA on the basis of an application made to fund the conference. We have to report back on the conference, though. That is going to be the primary or major part of the expenditure of the organization.

    Mr. Bob Miller: Can I just add something to what Mr. Bryden said. I think you've put your finger on an extremely important issue. Frankly, if it isn't handled properly, it's an issue that could very quickly destroy the movement.

    This was such an important issue at the beginning of Transparency International that they adopted a rule at the beginning, which they've since changed, that they would not allow any active politician to be a member of Transparency International. The reason for that is there's not only an issue of financial accountability, but there's a question of policy accountability. In many parts of the world, corruption is a tremendous political football. It's used as the primary weapon in political battles. It's used to discredit your opponents and so on. So one real concern is that you get groups of politicians, perhaps party-based or otherwise, who try to take over a chapter in order to use it in precisely that way and use the prestige of the organization and movement and so on.

    There's no question that the success of this will depend on GOPAC practising what it preaches. It's never easy to do that. But I think these comments have been very helpful. I would just say that if there are ways, for example, that we can begin here in Canada with, say, reporting to this committee or whatever, a practice that then begins to be a standard for the way this works internationally, I think again that would be a contribution.

º  (1620)  

    Mr. John Bryden: If I may offer my view, one should take good freedom of information legislation as a guide, so that the documents you generate, even receipts for a convention hall or whatever else, all have to be readily available to whoever wants to ask for them. That is the level of transparency you have to ensure.

    It's going to be a little difficult. While we can implement something like that because we understand it theoretically and have a culture that's used to it, you might have a little difficulty in South America or elsewhere. That's where of course key leadership comes in. I would suggest to you that one of the very first contributions GOPAC has to make is to set up this type of thing as a model for these other countries that have no experience.

    I'd like to make another point, if I could, Mr. Chairman. The other thing that concerns me with your proposal is whether you can indeed get American involvement. If you have the Mexicans in the Latin chapter, then all you have left is Canada and the United States for North America. We all know there's a certain amount of parochialism among American politicians, and sometimes it's hard to engage them.

    Can I make a suggestion? If you haven't already thought of it, you should make approaches--immediately, in my view--to the White House. I would go through the ambassador here. Do that first, and if that doesn't return something fairly promptly, and it may not.... But it may, because considering the situation in the Middle East, the White House is very conscious of the need to address corruption before you even get to first base in solving foreign policy matters.

    If that fails, then the other thing to do is to look very carefully at two former Presidents, Mr. Clinton and Mr. Carter. Mr. Carter's visit to Cuba would indicate that he is probably a fellow traveller in what we are trying to do here.

    That's all I have, Mr. Chairman.

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy): Thank you very much, Mr. Bryden.

    Do you have anything further, Mr. Mayfield? We'll start again.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: I just have a question concerning the accountability that has been raised by my two colleagues.

    Who's going to audit the books? The Auditor General is accountable to Parliament. I don't know if it would be appropriate to even ask that person or her office to do that. Who is going to be the external auditor who looks at this stuff? Has that been talked about? It should be a high-profile person or agency that does that. We should consider whether a government or private member's bill should give the Auditor General the opportunity to be the one, because certainly that office has the integrity and the visibility that would add to the visibility we want.

    Mr. John Williams: It was certainly intended, Mr. Mayfield, that there would be a high-profile professional accountant. The Auditor General is precluded, I would expect, because she has a specific mandate. She doesn't have the mandate to meander off into other areas where she may want to go but has not--

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: But she does look at CIDA's books, does she not?

    Mr. Brian O'Neal (Committee Researcher): Yes, she does.

    Mr. John Williams: Perhaps the researchers have a notion as to why she looks at... She does the departments of government.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: It is a department of government, and this department is putting at least some money into this, so there is a small precedent for being involved in this. Whether that could be expanded or whether the legislation could be amended slightly to allow this might be considered, or perhaps your idea of having a high-profile independent accountant do this would be satisfactory.

    Mr. John Williams: If the organization enjoys widespread support within Parliament, Mr. Mayfield, perhaps a private member's bill authorizing the Auditor General to be the auditor of the organization would be quite acceptable.

º  (1625)  

    Mr. John Bryden: I have a suggestion. The researchers might tell us something better, but I think we might be able to do something like that by resolution in the public accounts committee. Doesn't the committee have the power? Is that not a route we can use?

    Mr. Brian O'Neal: Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, I think probably the cautious way of proceeding is to consult informally first with the Auditor General's office to see what they feel would be the best approach to follow. I don't know if they would be interested in this. They may even have some other solutions to recommend, but we could certainly speak to them on your behalf if you like and see what they have to say.

    Mr. John Bryden: That's a very good idea.

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy): Do you have anything further, Mr. Mayfield, before we move on?

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: I think that's all.

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy): Mr. Desrochers, Mr. Bryden, do you have anything further?

    I just have one question before I ask Mr. Williams to resume the chair. I want to follow up on something Mr. Desrochers raised. I guess one of the purposes will be shortly to raise this issue on the agenda of parliamentarians and also before the public. We talked about a brochure, but I think--perhaps it's a comment or perhaps it's a question--that some kind of briefing would be useful, and it doesn't have to be a 100-page briefing note, on the nature of the problem, the extent of the problem, the cost of the problem on an international basis, what geographical areas of the world we're dealing with. We all have general ideas, or perhaps we don't have ideas. I would like to see, if we were going to go to caucus, some kind of briefing paper to set out matters--“Here's the backgrounder. Here's the tremendous issue all across the world. It has to be dealt with on an international basis because obviously some of these countries are not capable, at this point in their political histories, of dealing with it now. And it's an international initiative that is being started.” To present that sort of document to all 301 members of Parliament and all the senators and former parliamentarians would be helpful.

    Mr. John Williams: I'm sure that could be arranged, Mr. Chair, and we would ensure that all parties would be part of that brief.

    Mr. Odina Desrochers: In both languages.

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Shawn Murphy): If there are no other questions, I'll return the chair to Mr. Williams.

º  (1630)  

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Murphy. I appreciate that very much.

    The other item of business is, as you can see, an invitation to visit Nicaragua. We inadvertently left the actual invitation. We meant to bring it, and the clerk forgot to bring it along.

    When I was down in Mexico City as part of the FIPA delegation--as you know, the FIPA is the Interparliamentary Forum of the Americas, which was held in Mexico City in March--in conjunction with Senator Romero of the Mexican Parliament I hosted a breakfast for about 12 parliamentarians from across South America who were also at the FIPA conference.

    All were very excited about starting a Latin American chapter, and I talked to the delegate from Nicaragua afterwards who really wanted to get GOPAC going in Central America. Since that time, he has sent me an e-mail saying he has about 20 parliamentarians down there who would like a Canadian parliamentary delegation from the Canadian parliament to go down to Nicaragua.

    If that were to happen, he would ensure that other countries in Central America would also be at that meeting. They want us, as parliamentarians, to talk about how to develop a democratic system where corruption is controlled or brought under control.

    First of all, we'll open it up to discussion. We can't make a decision here; this committee has no authority to authorize travel requests. All we can do is make a recommendation to the main committee, the public accounts committee, that the travel request go forward, if that is our intention, and then it would follow the normal channels.

    Is there debate?

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: Mr. Chairman, I don't have any points to make at this moment, but I do have one or two questions.

    Mexico is involved in organizing a chapter. Would this be a part of that, or is it something in addition to it? I'm not clear what the purpose of this meeting in Nicaragua would be.

    The Chair: He said he wants the Canadian delegation of parliamentarians to go to Nicaragua, where he would bring other countries of Central America together, to provide information based on our experience of living and working in a truly democratic society where there is accountability and where the institutions of government work. As you know, in Central America, with their wars and all the other strife they've had down there, they are sadly lacking in the fundamental knowledge of how a parliament should work. In some countries there is barely a civil service, far less a truly functioning parliament. If we're ever to improve the performance of an executive, it's only through accountability, and parliament is the institution that has evolved and been designed to hold executives accountable.

    The initial types of things GOPAC is going to be doing are helping parliamentarians raise the effectiveness of parliaments and letting them know that they shouldn't be subservient to or intimidated by their executives. They have a real role to play.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: Would we be able to do this effectively considering language differences?

    The Chair: Spanish is the language down there. We would be able to converse through translation.

    Ms. Val Meredith: I may have misunderstood what Philip was asking. Is there going to be a conflict between what Mexico is trying to accomplish and us stepping into the mix without them taking the lead? Will they see it as interference on our part? Is that what you meant?

    The Chair: There are two issues at play here. One is the formation of a Latin American chapter under the leadership of Mexico and headquartered in San Paulo with the Parlatino as the secretariat. That's one issue.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: May I intervene?

    The Chair: Yes.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: I just need some clarification. A Central American chapter is being organized, and there's a South American chapter.

    The Chair: I was just going to get to that.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: I'm sorry. Is Mexico also involved in the South American one?

    The Chair: Mexico has taken the lead for what we call Latin America, which is Mexico south.

    Since that time, we've had this request by Central America that they have their own chapter. Central Americans see themselves as being somewhat apart from the bulk of South America. Whether they would be a full chapter on their own or would work under the aegis of the Latin American chapter is still somewhat open for debate.

    But what we're talking about here is a parliamentary delegation going down and talking to parliamentarians. This is within the ambit of GOPAC and the idea of developing and strengthening the parliament. But it's one parliamentary delegation going to speak to another outside of the role of GOPAC and individual chapters. This is a parliamentary delegation responding to the request of parliamentarians elsewhere who are saying, please, come and help us understand how to do our job properly.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: What would your recommendation be, sir?

    The Chair: The reasons I brought this up are, one, we have received the invitation and, two, we have to go to the full committee.

    If they say they have a full program of activities that we would participate in, I think that we as parliamentarians have an obligation to do that. We can sit here in our little corner of the developed world and pretend the world is fine, but we know the world is not fine. Why is it not fine? Because parliamentarians and parliaments are not as effective as they should be. I think we have an obligation to help fellow parliamentarians improve their own societies.

    What we're doing here is starting the process, because we don't have the authority to make these decisions. We can only recommend to the main committee. If we were to recommend this to the main committee, then the investigative process would start there. My thoughts are that we should prepare to recommend this to the main committee, and we should ask our clerk, perhaps with the assistance of our researchers, to communicate with these people in Central America and ask them if a program could be put together. That would be an effective use of our time and the resources allocated.

º  (1635)  

    Mr. Shawn Murphy: And the delegation you're talking about wouldn't be a large delegation?

    The Chair: No, it's primarily the members of this committee.

    Mr. Shawn Murphy: And some staff.

    The Chair: And staffers, clerks, translators, and so on.

    Mr. Shawn Murphy: If you want my view, it doesn't seem like a large item. You say Nicaragua is bringing other countries. That would be one of the issues that is important if they're not. It certainly is a situation we should proceed with, subject to seeing how arrangements are working out.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Is this what you envision GOPAC to be all about?

    The Chair: No.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Is this how you envision it unfolding, where you're going into developing countries and sharing experiences?

    The Chair: This particular one is a parliamentary delegation that has been invited to meet with parliamentarians in another part of the world.

    GOPAC is to marshal the resources of the developed world to assist parliaments in the underdeveloped world to understand their role, to improve their effectiveness, to provide peer support to those who want to do this.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Is this invitation to Nicaragua not basically that?

    The Chair: Let me finish my previous point. Mr. Miller pointed out that the IFIs are very supportive of this initiative. I've talked to the Department of Justice here. They are very supportive of the idea of helping. The INTOSAI, which is the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions, the global body of auditors general, has a very well-developed program to enhance the effectiveness of auditors general around the world.

    GOPAC is to try to marshal resources from whatever source, be it a government department like the Department of Justice, an IFI, or INTOSAI, to provide the technical assistance to elevate the performance of the parliament and parliamentarians. That's GOPAC. This is only a parliamentary delegation to visit another parliament.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Thank you.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: Mr. Chairman, I think I would be prepared to support your recommendation that we ask our clerk to correspond with the representatives of Central America and determine the nature of the program. When he has the information available, we can consider that carefully with the full public accounts committee and make a decision about the advisability of doing this at that time. I feel a little short of information to say we should head off down there.

    The Chair: I fully agree. I'm not suggesting that we do make that decision; I'm asking whether we should move the agenda forward by having the clerk communicate.

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: I would recommend that.

    The Clerk of the Committee: I'll do it right away.

    The Chair: Are there any other points?

    We really don't have a quorum, so I can't accept a motion, but I will carry a report from this committee to the steering committee of the public accounts committee. There is a steering committee tomorrow afternoon, but I'm not going to introduce it at that time.

º  (1640)  

    Mr. Philip Mayfield: Are you in favour of that, Shawn?

    Mr. Shawn Murphy: Yes, definitely. I agree with it. There's a little shortage of information as to what the organization is at the other end. That would have to be firmed up a bit, but in principle, I think we should proceed.

    The Chair: The last time the public accounts committee travelled, you may recall, Mr. Mayfield, was when the committee went down to Washington. The committee decided they were looking at the financial structures of countries around the world, which we were investigating at that time. It was in essence the precursor to GOPAC and laid some bases of information for GOPAC. We had the clerk arrange meetings with IMF, with the World Bank, with Congress. I can't remember all the people we met, but that was all set up ahead of time, and then we made the decision to go. It is expected to be the same way this time.

    I will carry this report to the steering committee of the full public accounts committee. From there, assuming the clerk has all the information, if it is passed, it will then come to the full committee. If it passes there, of course, it goes to the liaison committee, to the House leaders, and to the floor of the House. So there are many checks and balances along the way.

    Is there any other business?

    The meeting is adjourned.