OFFICE OF THE ETHICS COMMISSIONER

Hon. Marguerite Trussler, Q.C.
Ethics Commissioner
Of?cer of the Legislature

November 21, 2019

 

Rachel Notley

Leader of Her Majesty?s Loyal Opposition
5th Federal Building

9820 - 107 Street

Edmonton, AB T5K 1E7

Dear Member Notley,

Thank you for your letter dated November 20, 2019. Your request for an investigation
reads as follows:

Dear Commissioner Trussler?

lam writing to seek your intervention with respect to the application of Part 2
of the Con?icts of interest Act as it pertains to the proceedings in the
Legislature on Bill 22, Reform of Agencies Boards and Commissions and
Government Enterprises Act, 2019.

As you know, Members of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta have a clear
obligation under section 2(1) of the Conflicts of Interest Act to ensure that they
take no part in ?a decision [that] might further a private interest of the Member,
a person directly associated with the Member or the Member?s minor or adult
child.? The de?nition of private interest under the Act is broad, and informed
by the general requirement that Members of the Legislative Assembly conduct
themselves with integrity and impartiality in the course of their duties.

On November 18, 2019, the Minister of Treasury Board and Finance
introduced Bill 22, Reform of Agencies, Boards and Commissions and
Government Enterprises Act, 2019 in first reading. At best, this bill interferes
with numerous investigations around the conduct of United Conservative
Party operatives by demoting the Elections Commissioner and eliminating the
independence of his investigatory functions. It is actually more likely it will
result in his tiring, and in the delay, suspension or cancellation of his ongoing
investigations. Moreover, the treatment of this independent of?cer will impose
a profound chilling effect on the work of all those assigned to enforce election
laws now or in the future as it relates to the governing party (UCP).

 

1250, 9925 - i09 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T5K 218 Telephone: (780) 422-2273 Fax: (780)422-2261
Email: Websites: and 

The implications of this bill clearly provide a material bene?t to the United
Conservative Party as it is their leadership contest which is being investigated.
As a result, it is my belief that several different classes of MLAs should be
required to reouse themselves from proceedings and votes on Bill 22 pursuant
to Part 2 of the Conflicts of interest Act.

1. Peter Singh - Under Investigation

It is a matter of public record that Peter Singh, the member for Calgary-East,
is the subject of a complaint and that the Elections Commissioner and the
RCMP have both been engaged in investigating his conduct during his
nomination contest. As a result, it is absolutely clear that he is directly
impacted by the delay suspension or cancellation of the investigation and
should therefore not be allowed to vote.

2. Jason Kenney Leader of the UCP

Jason Kenney, Leader of the United Conservative Party, is also directly
impacted by the proposed bill. The investigations to date by the Elections
Commissioner have called into question the legality of the conduct of at least
one leadership contestant and those involved in his campaign. It has also
considered the degree to which leadership voting rules were followed and
leadership funding rules were followed. This calls into question the integrity of
the UCP leadership selection process. Ultimately it could lead to questions
around the integrity of the leadership selection outcome. It could also lead to
fines that will be levied against or paid by the UCP. The reputation of the UCP
is also implicated by these proceedings. Overall, the delay suspension or
cancellation of the Commissioner?s investigation provides a benefit to that
organization. As leader of that organization, Jason Kenney is materially
affected by the passage of Bill 22. As such he should be directed to forgo
participating in any discussion, votes and other matters impacting Bill 22.

3. Premier Jason Kenney, Minister Leela Aheer, Minister Prasad Panda,
Minister Josephine Pon, Minister Doug Schweitzer, MLA Joseph Schow and
MLA Jordan Walker? Witnesses

The MLAs listed above have all been interviewed in the course of the RCMP
investigation into UCP leadership vote irregularities. While the RCMP
investigation is being conducted by law enforcement officials separate from
the Commissioner, it was Commissionerinvestigators who referred matters to
the RCMP. It is not clear that their own work on these matters had ceased or
that further referrals might not be forthcoming. As such, as witnesses in the
RCMP investigation, these MLAs are materially affected by the delay
suspension or cancellation of the Commissioner's investigation.

4. All UCP MLAs Bene?ciaries of UCP Resources

Each UCP MLA earns a salary as a result of their election. In the last election,
the UCP spent $4.5 million in addition to the individual costs of individual MLA
campaigns. This money was spent specifically for the purpose of ensuring the
election of these MLAs. Their election was also directly related to the
reputation of the UCP. Continued investigation by the Elections Commissioner
stands to hurt both the reputational standing and financial status of the UCP.
This, in turn, will negatively affect the ability of UCP members to get re-elected
and continue earning the associated salary. This is a classic example of a
material interest in the conduct of Bill 22 on the part of these MLAs. As such,
it is reasonable to conclude that all UCP MLAs should be barred from voting
on Bill 22.

As you are no doubt aware, the Government has made it clear they wish to
have Bill 22 voted on all stages by Thursday of this week. As such your urgent
attention to this matter is required in order to have these concerns addressed
in a meaningful way.

Thank you for your attention and I look forward to your advice. I am available
to meet at your convenience.

Sincerely,

Rachel Notley
Leader
Her Majesty?s Loyal Official Opposition

Subsequent correspondence from Member Notley:

I apologize for this subsequent request to my letter of today. Upon re?ection,
and recognizing the great consequences, complexity of our Caucus? request,
it occurs to me that a request from your of?ce to the government to delay
proceeding with Bill 22, pending your deliberations, might possibly be a
pragmatic solution to the urgency of our request.

As such, I?m writing to request that you consider publicly requesting that the
government delay passage of Bill for a short time of your choosing.

As of the writing of this letter, the Of?ce of the Ethics Commissioner also received ten
other requests from members of the public asking this Of?ce to either investigate the
matter or stop the proceedings pertaining to Bill 22, or generally raising concerns with
Bill 22.

The relevant provisions of the Con?icts of Interest Act reads:
Decisions furthering private interests

2(1) A Member breaches this Act if the Member takes part in a decision in the course of
carrying out the Member?s office or powers knowing that the decision might further a
private interest of the Member, a person directly associated with the Member or the
Member?s minor or adult child.

(2) Where a matter for decision in which a Member has reasonable grounds to believe
that the Member, the Member's minor or adult child or a person directly associated with
the Member has a private interest is before a meeting of the Executive Council or a
committee of the Executive Council or the Legislative Assembly or a committee
appointed by resolution of the Legislative Assembly,

the Member must, if present at the meeting, declare that interest and must withdraw
from the meeting without voting on or participating in the consideration of the matter.

(3) A Member who fails to comply with subsection (2) breaches this Act.

In?uence

3 A Member breaches this Act if the Member uses the Member?s office or powers to
in?uence or to seek to in?uence a decision to be made by or on behalf of the Crown to
further a private interest of the Member, a person directly associated with the Member
or the Member's minor child or to improperly further another person ?3 private interest.

No speci?c allegations have been made that any MLA voted on Bill 22 and thereby
contravened the above sections of the Con?icts of lnterestAct. As a result I do not have
suf?cient particulars to investigate at this time.

However, under the circumstances, I feel that an advisory opinion would be useful.

Those individuals who are in the process of being investigated by the Elections
Commissioner or the RCMP would be in breach of s. 2 (1) of the Con?icts of Interest
Act if they were to discuss the portions of Bill 22 pertaining to the Of?ce of the Elections
Commissioner or vote on the bill.

For those individuals who have close associates (as opposed to direct associates), eg.
people they work closely with. or who work for them, in the process of being
investigated. it is likely that they would be improperly furthering another person's private
interests under 5.3 of the Con?icts of Interest Act if they were to discuss any aspects of
Bill 22 or vote on the bill.

With respect to those being questioned by the RCMP or the Elections Commissioner, it
would depend on the individual circumstances and I would need further information
about the particulars of each of those individuals' circumstances with respect to the
investigation to form an opinion.

The fourth group of people that you mention is all United Conservative Party Members
of the Legislative Assembly. Their situation is not straightforward. I cannot give an
opinion with respect to this group given the very short timelines that have been given.
However, every Member has an obligation, each time the Member debates and votes
on a bill before the Legislative Assembly. to be completely satis?ed that the Member is
not contravening 5.2 or 5.3 of the Act before engaging in debate or voting.

I do not have the power to request the government to delay proceedings with Bill 22. It
is not within my limited jurisdiction to do so. It would be improper for me to interfere with
the political process.

Sincerely,

Hon. Marguerite Trussler, Q.C.
Ethics Commissioner

CC.

Hon. Nathan Cooper, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly

Hon. Jason Kenney, Premier of Alberta

Hon. Leela Aheer, Minister of Culture. Multiculturalism and Status of Women
Hon. Prasad Panda, Minister of Infrastructure

Hon. Josephine Pon, Minister of Seniors and Housing

Hon. Doug Schweitzer, Minister of Justice and Solicitor General

Peter Singh. MLA Calgary- East

Joseph Schow, MLA Cardston- Siksika

Jordan Walker, MLA Shemood Park