Senator Cardozo questions Ms. Harriet Solloway—Committee of the Whole

By: The Hon. Andrew Cardozo

Share this post:

War memorial, Ottawa

[The Senate resolved into a Committee of the Whole to receive Ms. Harriet Solloway respecting her appointment as Public Sector Integrity Commissioner]

Senator Cardozo: Congratulations, Ms. Solloway, on your nomination. I want to congratulate you for putting your name forward. These days, it’s not always a good idea or advisable to take on high-profile positions, so it’s all the more important that people of your experience do that.

I am going to start with a jurisdictional question. In your opinion, what is the dividing line between the investigations you would conduct and those of the Canadian Human Rights Commission? I’m thinking of cases where there are general issues, some of which are linked to systemic racism or sexism.

Harriet Solloway, nominee for the position of Public Sector Integrity Commissioner: Thank you, senator. Once again, I would say that the parameters of each role should be and are defined in existing legislation. All measures adopted by the Canadian Human Rights Commission or the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada should be and are defined in the legislation. If there is an overlap, at that point it is a question of practices.

Since I’m not yet sufficiently familiar with how things work on the ground, I think it would be premature for me to comment.

My touchstone is always to go back to the letter of the law, the text and the intent, and then, where there are ambiguities, to seek clarification from the appropriate authorities.

Senator Cardozo: Thank you. Can you comment on how, on the one hand, you will protect whistle-blowers — which is what we want you to do — but what if the whistle-blower has contravened Canadian law, either in matters of secrecy or otherwise, where the person is clearly doing something that appears to be illegal?

Ms. Solloway: Again, my touchstone is always the law. I’ll always be guided by the law. I’ll always be guided by due process. I think that all those involved in the process, whether it be a whistle-blower or the person who may be accused of having done something wrong or any other witnesses or people who may be collaterally interested in the set of circumstances — the important thing is that everyone understands that there will be due process, that the law will be followed and that their rights will be respected, whilst at the same time respecting the application of the law to everyone. That is the best way forward.

The specific role of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner is not a law enforcement role, as I understand it. There are different roles defined for different institutions, and the responsibilities would be split accordingly.

Senator Cardozo: Thank you. Are you aware of whether your commission can initiate investigations? I’m thinking of the example that Senator Pate mentioned. Are there any areas where there is an obvious issue, where you’re hearing a lot, but nobody comes to you with an actual complaint?

Ms. Solloway: Thank you for the question. My knowledge is limited to what I have read, and it’s currently my understanding — and I stand to be corrected — that the commission does not do that. I don’t know whether any consideration is being given to that, but it’s my understanding — perhaps incorrectly so — that at this point in time that is not something that is done.

Senator Cardozo: If you could give us your general thoughts about what parts of your past experience make you a good candidate for this position? I understand you’ve done investigations of various kinds. Would that be the key area of where you’ve had experience that relates to this position?

Ms. Solloway: That is certainly one of them. Two of my strengths are that I’ve managed teams in a civil service environment and I also understand the complex dynamics in the civil service, so I think that those two things would serve me well here.

My legal background would also be very useful, as well as my background in labour relations, which I haven’t really highlighted, even though it was many years ago. I have a very broad background with many different aspects that could be pertinent to this job, and when I look at the law, the act and some of the reports that were done, I felt very comfortable applying for this job. I would not apply for a job that I didn’t think I could do handily, so I think it’s really the combination of my experience.

Share this post: