“The privacy issue before you is not one of lawfulness, but one of principle” Ms. Stoddart said during a committee appearance last Wednesday.
“Bill C-27 invokes two equally important democratic principles: accountability and privacy. The question then is how should these two values interplay to minimize adverse impacts and maximize democratic capital for Canadians?”
The bill aims to provide more “transparency and accountability” when it comes to First Nations governments’ salaries and expenses. After holding six meetings and hearing from 14 organizations, the House Aboriginal Affairs Committee will hear from department officials who drafted Bill C-27 on Nov. 5 before moving to clause-by-clause study.
It’s expected the committee will report the bill back to the House early as the week of Nov. 19, after MPs return from a week off in their ridings.
In determining the bill’s content and privacy issues, Ms. Stoddart told the committee there are four questions that need to be asked: “ ‘Is the measure demonstrably necessary to meet a specific need?’ ‘Is it likely to be effective in meeting that need?’ ‘Is the loss of privacy proportional to the need?’ and ‘Is there a less privacy invasive way of achieving the same end?’ ”
Opposition MPs on the committee asked Ms. Stoddart how she felt about what the privacy implications for allowing non-band members to see the salaries of elected officials and financial statements for band-owned enterprises were, but Ms. Stoddart said she is not an expert on these issues and simply wanted to bring the possible privacy concerns to the committee’s attention.
“In considering this bill, I note there is a distinct trend in Canada toward publicly disclosing salaries of elected officials along with other senior officials paid for from the public purse. When money comes from taxpayers, the expectation for transparency increases as the level of responsibility or salary associated with the position increases,” she said. “Bill C-27 would put in place a uniform standard for publicly disclosing remuneration of elected officials among other public reporting requirements in more than 600 First Nations. Its impact on the privacy of these officials therefore requires careful analysis and consideration.”
In answering some of her questions, Ms. Stoddart noted that at first glance the bill is a continuing a trend across the country to disclose salaries of elected officials. However, she said in relation to the second question, “There may be instances where the proposed measure may not be particularly effective in achieving the objectives for which it was designed … [but I’m] not the right person to answer the question.”
For the final question, she noted there could possibly be other ways to achieve the same objective, for example, disclosing pay ranges as they do in the federal public service rather than the exact salary of a specific person could be an alternative, or possibly, the Ontario government’s method of disclosing specific salaries of provincial employees who earn more than $100,000.
First Nations are already required to submit and publicly release salary information, but the bill adds detailed expense reports and First Nations’ audited consolidated financial statements to the list of disclosures.
First Nations would also have to disclose financial information from band-owned businesses that don’t receive funding from the federal government. The figures would be posted on the Aboriginal Affairs Department website as the information is received. Under the bill, First Nations are required to provide the information upon request to its members within 120 days and maintain the information on their own website for 10 years.
If First Nations governments fail to meet the act’s requirements, members and “any person, including the minister” are able to go to court to obtain the information.
The bill allows the Aboriginal Affairs minister to withhold or terminate funds to First Nations.
NDP MP Jean Crowder (Nanaimo-Cowichan, B.C.), her party’s aboriginal affairs critic, said she would have liked to have heard from a few other organizations such as the Canadian Bar Association and the Institute for Chartered Accountants, but said that committee hearings have been going well so far.
“We did get a very good briefing note from the Bar Association which we’ve been able to use anyway and we’ve been able to use some of the accountability measures that the other accountants proposed. We have been able to fill in some of those pieces. I think we heard a good enough cross section of testimony to now consider the bill,” Ms. Crowder told The Hill Times, noting that her party will be bringing forward several amendments.
“They’ve [the government] signaled they’re certainly interested in the amendments from Dakota Whitecap. Whether they’ll actually pass all of them, I don’t know. We’ve certainly drafted all of those amendments, for sure, but there are a couple of others we’re working on as well,” Ms. Crowder said.
Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul’s, Ont.) said that she will wait to hear what the departmental officials have to say this week before bringing forward amendments.
“We’ll examine the government amendments and we’ll see if they meet the needs of First Nations in terms of their total discomfort with this, and then we’ll have to see,” she said. “With this government, the arithmetic is clear, this will pass. At least we’re grateful we’ve been able to push the government to make the kinds of amendments that meet the needs of some of the chiefs and we’ll have to see what happens.”
In his remarks to the committee last month, Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan (Vancouver Island North, B.C.) said that the bill does not have “radical measures” in it, but rather is “the minimum that citizens should expect in a democracy.” He said, “First Nations residents have the same expectations in this regard as other citizens, other Canadians.”
There will be increased public trust as a result of Bill C-27, Mr. Duncan said.
“This will translate into increased business opportunity. This bill will help to assure potential investors that they can safely enter into joint financial agreements and business undertakings with first nations. This will contribute to social and economic improvements in the lives and livelihoods of first nations members,” he said. “Bill C-27 is a landmark bill that is long overdue. It will bring many benefits to first nations communities and encourage self-sufficiency.”
But there is some opposition among First Nations. British Columbia Regional Chief Jody Wilson-Raybould, of the Assembly of First Nations, said the bill is “heavy-handed and unnecessary,” which gives the impression that First Nations governments are corrupt or not transparent nor accountable when it’s not the case.
“Our collective task is to ensure that all systems of government in Canada are accountable and are meeting certain standards, while understanding that there is more than one way to skin the proverbial accountability cat and, with respect to our nations, to ensure appropriate political, legal, and financial accountability as part of nation-building or rebuilding,” she told the committee. “The bigger question before you today is really not about accountability at all; rather, it’s about who should be responsible for determining the rules that apply to our governments and our governing bodies. The simple answer is that our nation should be.”
Original Article
Source: hill times
Author: Bea Vongdouangchanh
No comments:
Post a Comment