“Many staff have [signed it]. …In some cases, they were just starting out or changing offices or changing positions within the research bureau where they had no choice but to sign it, so a significant majority of our membership have signed it for various reasons,” said Anthony Salloum, an NDP House lobby staffer for NDP Whip Nycole Turmel (Hull-Aylmer, Que.) and head of the NDP staffers’ union (Communications, Energy and Paperworkers local 232), which he said has an estimated 675 members, including about 500 in MPs’ Hill and constituency offices and about 125 to 175 in the OLO.
“Some folks who have signed it have now come forward and said they wished they had paid closer attention to it. In hindsight, they probably would not have signed it. That raises a whole new issue: what happens if the confidentiality agreement is changed? What happens to those that have signed it?”
Media reports brought the new staff confidentiality agreement to public attention in mid-December, after a disgruntled staffer using the pseudonym Nanker Phelge (who forewent a raise to avoid signing the agreement and told The Hill Times that other Hill staffers had refused to sign it as well) contacted media with a copy of the gag order.
Mr. Salloum said he’s also heard concerns from NDP staffers from across Canada, and “several dozen” have refused to sign the lifetime confidentiality agreement.
“I got tremendous feedback from our membership, folks emailed me and called me literally from Victoria to St. John’s…. It’s dozens and dozens and dozens of staff, for sure. That’s folks who have said they’re not signing and they’re foregoing their raises pending what the Board of Internal Economy comes back with,” Mr. Salloum told The Hill Times.
The secretive, all-party Commons Board of Internal Economy (BOIE), which acts as the governing body of the House of Commons and is responsible for approving and setting House budgets, including MPs’ office budgets, approved a new, mandatory “conflict of interest, loyalty and confidentiality agreement” at an in-camera March 2013 meeting. It came into effect April 1, 2013.
The agreement states staff will “avoid any activity, business venture or interest that might reflect unfavourably” on their MP and the House of Commons, and that information related to the “activities and work of my employer” can’t be revealed “except as may be required by law.”
“This agreement survives the termination of employment,” reads the agreement, which states that either an MP or the House of Commons can pursue “any other legal or administrative recourse available” if the agreement is breached.
Media reports on the new mandatory confidentiality agreement sparked anger and opposition in December, and led Ms. Turmel, a designated spokesperson for the BOIE, to voice concern. Chief Government Whip John Duncan (Vancouver Island North, B.C.), the BOIE’s only other designated spokesperson, subsequently made the political talk show rounds and said the BOIE will review the agreement when Parliament returns.
“I think it should be brought back to the very board that made this decision last March. We’ll have a look at it. I’ll do that collaboratively with the NDP,” Mr. Duncan told CTV’s Power Play in December. Mr. Duncan said “a lot of employees” of Conservative MPs have already signed the agreement.
Asked if a BOIE meeting has already been scheduled to discuss the agreement when Parliament returns, House Speaker Andrew Scheer’s (Regina—Qu’Appelle, Sask.) director of communications, Heather Bradley, said the BOIE meets approximately every two weeks. Parliament is set to return on Jan. 27.
Liberal Whip Judy Foote (Random-Burin-St. George’s, Nfld.), her party’s representative on the BOIE, has told media her office has also received complaints from staff over the agreement.
Mr. Salloum said the NDP staffers’ union sought a legal opinion on the confidentiality agreement, and heard back from its lawyer on Dec. 31. Mr. Salloum said the NDP union executive wants some additional answers and plans to share the legal opinion with membership some time this week and discuss a path forward.
Previously, confidentiality agreements were implemented on an ad hoc basis by individual MPs and were not required by the House administration.
Membership of the seven-person BOIE, chaired by Mr. Scheer, reflects the standings of “recognized” parties in the House of Commons—that is, those with at least 12 sitting MPs. The idea is that MPs on the BOIE represent and report back to their respective party caucuses on its decisions. For Independent MPs or MPs in parties not officially recognized in the House, that point of contact with the BOIE comes from the Speaker’s Office.
Any MP, House officer, or research bureau staffers on the Hill who have been hired, or accepted a promotion or raise since April 1, 2013 were required to sign the confidentiality agreement as part of the employment forms required by the House administration in order to process or change someone’s employment status. While MPs’ staff are employed by their respective Member of Parliament, it’s the House administration that cuts their cheques.
Independent MP Brent Rathgeber (Edmonton-St. Albert, Alta.) said he wasn’t aware of the mandatory confidentiality agreement until being contacted by media in December, and now having studied it, he said it’s “most inappropriate.”
“It is, I think, by any objective standard, overly broad,” said Mr. Rathgeber, who said he personally has a “narrow and specific” confidentiality agreement he requires employees to sign with respect to constituent casework files.
“I think everyone appreciates that some matters that go on in MP offices have to be held in confidence, but the one that they [the BOIE] ended up drafting was overkill. It was too broad a response and I think there’s been some realization of that so I’m confident that they will prepare something that’s more reasonable,” said Mr. Rathgeber.
Mr. Rathgeber met with his staff on Dec. 13 to discuss the agreement, and said while he’s personally against it, he learned one of his staffers already signed it when her status switched from part-time student to full-time employee last September.
“I found out, to my surprise quite frankly, that one of my four staffers…had actually already signed it,” said Mr. Rathgeber.
“The Ottawa staffer who signed it, signed it somewhat perfunctorily with a whole bunch of other documents that she had to sign with respect to [benefits]…. She just accepted that it was one of the standard forms that she was required to sign, similar to signing for where you want your direct deposit [for pay]…. I’m talking about a young staffer here, this person, she’s right out of university. This confidentiality agreement potentially could follow her for the next 40 years of her working life through who knows how many different vocations,” he said.
Mr. Rathgeber said he’s now made his opposition to the agreement clear to his staff, but said the rest of his staff won’t be faced with the question of having to sign the agreement until April, when their annual raise is set to take effect. New employment forms would have to be signed for the House administration to process the changes. While he’s against the gag order, Mr. Rathgeber said it’s out of his hands.
While the staffer who has signed the agreement isn’t in a panic about it, Mr. Rathgeber said she, like him, is “hoping there’s a resolution and that there’s a narrowing of the confidentiality agreement to something that is reasonable.” Mr. Rathgeber’s staff declined to speak to The Hill Times about the agreement.
“The minister, Duncan, was vague, but I think what he said was hopeful, in terms of that they are going to take a look at it. So when Parliament convenes in a couple of weeks I’m going to be on top of this now, and if there’s an opportunity to write a brief or some sort of written submission to the Board of Internal Economy, I’m going to do that,” said Mr. Rathgeber.
“I’m going to give the Board the benefit of the doubt. I’m not sure they fully understood what a broad net they were casting when they drafted this,” said Mr. Rathgeber.
The text of the confidentiality agreement that is now mandatory for all MP staff is word-for-word identical to a confidentiality agreement that was previously available to MPs as a template on Parliament’s internal web service, IntraParl. It remains unclear who exactly drafted the text of the agreement or when. Green Party leader Elizabeth May’s (Saanich-Gulf Islands, B.C.) chief of staff, Debra Eindiguer, told The Hill Times in December that her office has used this exact agreement since May 2011.
Last week, The Hill Times was told both Mr. Duncan and Ms. Turmel were unavailable for interviews, and their offices did not respond to emailed questions by deadline. The Hill Times also contacted the Speaker’s Office enquiring about the origins of the controversial agreement, but no answer was received by deadline.
The Commons Board of Internal Economy meetings are always held behind closed doors, and though meeting minutes are now posted online, they are not detailed. The only possible reference to the BOIE’s decision to make this particular agreement mandatory is a line from the March 4, 2013 meeting minutes, stating it “approved the proposed modernization of employment and salary policies for employees of Members, House officers and national caucus research offices.”
MPs passed on the opportunity to open up the Board of Internal Economy last fall when a majority of members of the Procedure and House Affairs Committee opted to maintain the status quo, following a review of the BOIE that was sparked by the Senate expense scandal.
“It’s [the agreement] worse than unnecessary, it’s detrimental. I think employees have to be able to disclose administrative things that go on in their office, like with respect to expense accounts, or with respect to inappropriate behaviour,” said Mr. Rathgeber.
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com/
Author:
No comments:
Post a Comment