OTTAWA—Opposition politicians and legal experts are expressing concern over a Conservative MP’s private members bill that would require parliamentary watchdogs and their employees to disclose previous political activities — legislation one critic likens to a “witch hunt” in the public service.

Bill C-520 would require every applicant for a job with an agent of Parliament — such as the auditor general, or the chief electoral officer — to disclose if they’ve held a “partisan position” in the previous decade. The legislation would be retroactive, requiring any current employees to publicly disclose past political activity.

The bill, proposed by Mark Adler (York Centre), would also allow MPs and senators to ask Parliamentary watchdogs to investigate an employee’s conduct, should the politician suspect they’re performing their duties in a “partisan manner.”

While private member’s bills rarely become law, Bill C-520 has the blessing of the Prime Minister’s Office. In an email to the Star, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s director of communications said the bill reflects the Conservatives’ “principles of transparency and accountability.”

“Agents of Parliament and their employees are given the important mandate to perform non-partisan duties in Parliament,” Jason MacDonald wrote. “The public has a right to know whether or not the agents, or those who work in these offices, have engaged in political activities.”

Under the Public Service Employment Act, many of the employees in question have the right to participate in political activities “so long as it does not impair, or is not perceived as impairing, the employees ability to perform his or her duties in a politically impartial manner.”

Although Adler’s Toronto office did not return the Star’s requests for an interview, he told the House of Commons in November the bill is not aimed at any office or employees in particular, and that he believes the current agents of Parliament are “above the fray” of the partisanship that characterizes Ottawa politics.

Nevertheless, Adler said, he doubts his Conservative colleagues would trust a report from an office staffed by former New Democrats.

“Would the opposition trust a report issued out of an office staffed by former professional Conservative partisans? I do not believe so and it is understandable that they would not,” Adler said on Nov. 20, according to parliamentary transcripts. “The same goes for us on this side of the House. We would be suspicious of a report prepared by NDP partisans.”

Mathieu Ravignat, the New Democrat’s Treasury Board critic, said he believes the tools provided to politicians in the legislation could be used to curtail agents of Parliament’s powers.

“Who exactly is the government trying to shut up with this?” Ravignat said in an interview Tuesday.

“We need these commissioners to be fully independent. These commissioners have been doing a good job. Perhaps the government hasn’t liked what they’ve had to say, but this isn’t the proper approach if we want to make sure that our officers have the independence . . . to do the work that they need to do.”

Errol Mendes, a University of Ottawa law professor who has been a vocal critic of the Conservative government, said the bill was an “invitation to witch hunt” public sector employees.

Mendes said the entire public sector, not only agents of Parliament and their employees, should be concerned about Bill C-520.

“It’s assuming that if you’ve had any type of political affiliation in the past, you can never be neutral in the present or the future,” Mendes said.

“I think it’s really undermining the public service, if this is what they want to do.”

For Osgoode Law Professor Jamie Cameron, the fact that the bill does not define what constitutes employees behaving in a “partisan manner” is a red flag.

“The alleged inappropriate behavior is not defined by the statute,” Cameron said.

“Somebody could be the subject of one of these examinations . . . on the basis that they have done something that is ‘partisan,’ but there is no definition anywhere in the legislation that explains what the partisan activity is that will attract consequences. That’s a serious problem.”

The University of Ottawa’s dean of law, however, said the lack of explicit penalties means the legislation amounts to little more than window dressing.

“It only demands that you disclose paid jobs that you would have done in the past, and it does not prevent you applying or being an agent of any way,” said Nathalie Des Rosiers.

“I don’t think it does very much . . . . It’s hard to know exactly, outside of embarrassment, what the point of this legislation is.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Questions by Conservatives about the neutrality of public servants and agents of Parliament have come up in the past, notably last April when the former parliamentary secretary to Treasury Board President Tony Clement implied former Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page conspired with the opposition.

In a response to NDP MP Peggy Nash, Andrew Saxon accused Page of engaging in “partisan tricks” with NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair in his pursuit of data on government spending cuts.

Page, a former bureaucrat in the Privy Council Office who currently serves as research chair at the University of Ottawa, was appointed by the Conservatives.

Read more about: