OTTAWA — As the Senate draws fire over the spending habits of one of its members, the resignation of a politician in the House of Commons has prompted ethical questions of a different sort.
The resignation of Manitoba Conservative MP Merv Tweed, who stepped down Monday to run a major railway company, has raised eyebrows because Tweed chaired two Commons committees whose work was of interest to the company.
Ethics watchdog Democracy Watch cried foul over Tweed’s career switch to become president of Omnitrax Canada. Tweed hasn’t broken any written rules for the House of Commons, but his role as chair of the agriculture committee and previously of the transport committee has caused some to question the move. Omnitrax — the parent company of Omnitrax Canada — owns a deep water port on Hudson Bay in northern Manitoba and transports grain and bulk commodities across Canada and the United States.
NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus said Tweed’s job switch, without any “cooling off” period, is questionable because he is a member of the governing party.
“Merv Tweed can simply make a phone call, to his friends to his colleagues, to the political establishment and he’ll be heard.”
Angus said he is “sure” Tweed would have consulted with ethics commissioner Mary Dawson, to learn what ethical guidelines he must follow for interactions with the government once he takes over at Omnitrax.
It isn’t known whether Tweed consulted the ethics commissioner or the commissioner of lobbying before accepting his new job; he was unavailable for comment despite repeated calls. The ethics commissioner’s communications officer, Jocelyne Brisebois, would not say if Tweed had been in contact with Dawson because communications between MPs and the office are confidential.
Leo Duguay, a lobbyist for Omnitrax, logged a communication report with Canada’s commissioner of lobbying after he contacted Tweed in November last year when Tweed was chair of the agriculture committee. Mike Ogborn, an advisory board member of Omnitrax, said the company contacted Tweed to provide updates on a public-private rehabilitation of a railway.
“I wouldn’t call it lobbying,” he said. “I would call it reporting to him about the status of the infrastructure improvements to the Hudson Bay Railway.”
Since 2009, Omnitrax has recorded 18 communications to the lobbying commissioner. Those reports indicate that Tweed and fellow Manitoba MP Vic Toews were the only MPs that Omnitrax lobbied. Other lobbying efforts were directed at deputy ministers and policy advisers in various government departments.
Ogborn said Omnitrax first approached Tweed to assess his interest in the job offer approximately two months ago. He was still chair of the agriculture committee at the time.
Cabinet ministers are not permitted to accept employment with companies they dealt with as head of a ministry for two years after leaving public office, as outlined in the Conflict of Interest Act. For parliamentary secretaries, a one-year cooling-off period is required. But for backbench MPs, the rules are less stringent. The Lobbying Act prevents former MPs from lobbying the government for five years after they leave the Hill, but only if their lobbying takes up more than 20 per cent of their activities. This applies whether or not they have been a member of a committee.
There are no rules in the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of Parliament that govern what employment a backbench MP can take when he or she resigns.
Tweed is not the first MP to take a job where government connections may provide a leg up in lobbying. Jake Epp, minister of energy, mines and resources until Jan. 3, 1993, took a job as senior vice-president of TransCanada Pipelines on Sept. 1, 1993, the day after he stepped down as an MP. The five-year cooling off period for MPs was not a part of the Lobbying Act at the time.
Democracy Watch spokesman Duff Conacher suggested that cooling-off periods for accepting employment should apply to all MPs based on the decision-making powers they enjoyed on Parliament Hill.
“If you are a backbench MP on no committees, then you shouldn’t really have a cooling off period, maybe six months,” he said. “And then if you are on a committee, a year; chair of a committee, two years; and senior government official, three years.”
He said that type of a sliding scale would avoid problems of MPs being influenced by job offers because they would be aware that if they left office, they wouldn’t immediately be able to accept employment from companies they dealt with when working on the Hill.
Nelson Wiseman, an associate professor of political science at the University of Toronto, said that tightening the rules will solve the problem only until more loopholes are discovered. The answer to the ethical question of Tweed lobbying his government connections lies with the elected MPs who interact with him, Wiseman said.
“The onus there isn’t on him, it’s with his Conservative buddies,” he said, adding: “I don’t think this guy should have any access (to government) whatsoever.”
Wiseman said his real concern with Tweed is that he isn’t fulfilling his duty as an elected representative.
“I would understand if he had a chronic health problem (and resigned),” he said. “To do this tells me that you are looking out for yourself more than you are looking out for your constituents.”
David McGrane, who teaches political science at the University of Saskatchewan, said it might be a good measure to enforce cooling off periods, but that could cause problems for some MPs who are looking for work.
“Some MPs don’t have a variety of skills that they can fall back on and you wouldn’t want to create a situation where you’d be creating a disincentive for people in the private sector to go into public life.”
But the Conservative government needs to take some action on tightening ethics rules, he said.
“They came in as the party that was going to clean up Ottawa and now they seem much more part of the problem than the solution to it.”
© COPYRIGHT – POSTMEDIA NEWS
(Link to article on o.canada.com)
Fiona Buchanan 