
Français		Home		Contact Us		Help		Search		canada.gc.ca		Canada International

Home > Media Room

Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada

Canadian Offices Abroad

Services for Canadian Travellers

Services for Business

Canada in the World

About the Department

SPEECHES

2007 - 2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 - 2000 - 1999 - 1998 - 1997 - 1996

Print friendly version - Printing Tips

<html> <head> <meta name="Generator" content="Corel WordPerfect 8"> <title>MR. KILGOUR - ADDRESS TO THE TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM - OTTAWA, ONTARIO</title> </head> <body text="#000000" link="#0000ff" vlink="#551a8b" alink="#ff0000" bgcolor="#c0c0c0"> CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY NOTES FOR AN ADDRESS BY THE HONOURABLE DAVID KILGOUR, SECRETARY OF STATE (ASIA-PACIFIC), TO TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL'S SYMPOSIUM, TOWARD EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OECD ANTI-BRIBERY CONVENTION, ON "THE RESPONSIBILITY TO ACT AGAINST CORRUPTION" OTTAWA, Ontario May 12, 2003 It should go without saying--especially in this room--that Transparency International (TI), although only 10 years old, is already one of the most respected NGOs on the planet. For years, you and I have referred to its reports and have seen the esteem that they've earned internationally for their candour, knowledge, and courage. That today's symposium is being held in this building honours the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade [DFAIT]. I hope it also symbolizes the enhanced cooperation we're all working toward between TI Canada, TI International and all branches of the Canadian government. Let me say at the outset that I personally fully share the view of TI Canada's President, Professor Wesley Cragg, that combatting corruption internationally is in our national and export interest. As he said earlier, all the international studies indicated that Canada is one of the least corrupt countries on earth. We should take advantage of our comparative advantage here. Countries want us present in their economies because we raise their business standards. Let's show sustained leadership on this. I have a couple of thoughts on possible steps for improving the effectiveness of the accounting, auditing and internal control provisions of the OECD [Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development] convention. First, most of the prosecutions in the U.S. over the past twenty years involving bribery of foreign officials have been based on breaches of very specific accounting provisions of U.S. law. Why? Because it's easier to prove (with evidence available in the U.S.) than actual payment of the bribe. In Canada, our law simply requires that a company must maintain adequate accounting records. In a recent OECD review of Canada's implementation of the OECD convention, the four large accounting firms (and the CICA [Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants]), supported by TI, made several recommendations. One of these was that the federal government should consider amending the CBCA [Canada Business Corporations Act] to include more specific requirements for books and records, such as the prohibition of "off the books" accounts, false documentation, etc., and also address the question of whether existing sanctions are adequate. Parliament's Role On the subject of Parliament's role, you could hardly find a more qualified contributor than John Williams, MP for St. Albert and Chair of our House of Commons Public Accounts Committee. I have no doubt that he will downplay the remarkable leadership he has shown in combatting corruption. He is becoming increasingly well known throughout the world for the success of the Global Organization of Parliamentarians Against Corruption (GOPAC), the product of his efforts. It was an honour to take part in the first meeting of GOPAC last fall, and a real source of pride to know that a Canadian parliamentarian was at the root of that meeting. We've been asked today to address the question, "What is Parliament's role in fighting corruption?" In basic terms, our own Parliament has three functions: representation (serving as a voice for Canadians), legislation (making laws and shaping public policy), and oversight (holding governments accountable for their actions). I'd like to focus on some extra-parliamentary responsibilities that we MPs have in the fight against corruption. Reversing the Crisis of Confidence First and foremost, the burden lies with parliamentarians in all political parties to reverse the current drop in public confidence in politicians and public institutions across Canada. As TI's Chair, Peter Eigen, noted when announcing last year's Corruption Perceptions Index, "There is a worldwide corruption crisis." Many of you would probably agree. Corruption is behind numerous societal ills in many countries. It breeds mistrust among the public. It chips away at the rule of law. It scares away foreign direct investment along with domestic savings, a problem the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) has recently addressed. In some parts of the world, it encourages trafficking in drugs and internal rebellion. Its companions are inevitably violence, coercion, and political and social unrest. Perhaps worst of all, corruption sometimes lays the foundations for societies that value privilege and power over basic human needs--ones, for that matter, that honour money, power and graft at the expense of public integrity, openness and truth. In the same TI report, Canada scored nine on a possible ten, and we Canadians were proud to be the only G8 country in the top ten ranking. Yet, according to a survey done in Canada at about the same time, fully 69 percent of Canadians said our federal and provincial political systems are corrupt. This certainly signals a problem! Headlines describing the fall of private sector giants like Enron and Arthur Andersen have highlighted the fact that corruption isn't restricted to governments alone. If corruption is a mortal enemy of democracy, then trust is one of its best shields. If elected Canadians face an increasingly sceptical public and more hesitant investors, we reduce our ability to help Canadians to realize their full potential. The time to turn this around is now, and the responsibility to lead the charge must lie with parliamentarians. Why Us? Why us? Because corruption cannot be fought effectively without the political will to do so. As lawmakers, we must be beyond reproach. We can't demand standards of others that we're not prepared to live up to ourselves. Without "clean hands," what right do we have to question the actions of others? And what credibility do we have to pursue issues our electors care about? If we want to be effective in dealing with some of our most pressing issues--sustainable development, poverty, human rights, and peace--we need to first ensure that rats are not quietly filling the basements of our provincial and national parliaments. Political financing, for example, is one of the most important, albeit often ignored, issues throughout the world. When it is not tackled head-on, the credibility of all parliamentarians suffers. The notion of "the best democracy money can buy" and the idea that money gives one access to government and the power to influence it are far too widespread--and I would never suggest that Canada is safe from such allegations. Each of our key roles--our raisons d'être--are undermined when the public doesn't have faith in how we got into office. We're hardly representative of voters generally if we're only acting on behalf of those with the most money. How meaningful is a law when passed by those who break others? And what credibility do we have in overseeing government if our own houses aren't in order? Campaign Financing It was for these reasons that the government introduced a campaign finance reform bill earlier this year. Although some specifics have been controversial, it was long overdue. For the past three elections, I've imposed a limit in my own campaigns ($300 per person or business in the first two and most recently, in 2000, a $500 limit) during an election, and no fundraising between elections. This has been helpful in keeping the trust of residents of Edmonton Southeast. As MPs, we also need to demonstrate respect for all who work to enhance transparency and accountability. The opposition, for example, plays one of the most valuable roles here, particularly the Public Accounts Committee. Civil, dignified discourses and an openness to sharing information in most situations are achievable goals. NGOs also play enormously valuable roles. In 1999, I'm told that TI helped DFAIT moblize the key players needed to push through the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act in just six days! By acknowledging the importance of this issue and demonstrating genuine respect for the work they do, we're improving the system in a significant way. Resisting Complacency A second area of MP responsibility lies in resisting what I'll call the "caretakers of the status quo." Parliamentarians can only be as effective as the tools they have with which to do their jobs. Question Period, reports submitted to Parliament by government agencies, Public Accounts committees, and more are all tools of transparency and accountability. It's not enough for us to have created these tools, however; we have a responsibility to use them effectively. One observer describes it well: "The accomplice to the crime of corruption is frequently our own indifference." Reports to Parliament, for example, aren't ends in themselves. They should be actively scrutinized and responded to by the executive branch when called for. We all have seemingly endless streams of e-mails and papers coming across our desks, but we have to consider what kind of message we're sending to the MPs and other officials who write these reports about how seriously we value their work if, year after year, they receive no feedback. Some reports, including the Auditor General's, receive a great deal of attention and elicit significant responses--often because of committee structures. Others are not so well noted. I understand that for the past three years, DFAIT has reported annually to Parliament under the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, but, to my knowledge, Parliament has never formally responded. What message does that send? As parliamentarians, we can organize hearings to follow up on reports, thereby drawing public attention. Such hearings give key stakeholders an opportunity to get involved or continue playing a role. They make it possible to bring up issues that emphasize concerns or remarks that show general satisfaction. Using reports to Parliament to move forward is beneficial not only in terms of improving the work already accomplished, but also in terms of encouraging those who draft the reports. Focus on Prevention A third key responsibility of parliamentarians is to prevent corruption before it occurs. As the philosopher-author Eric Hoffer writes: It has often been said that power corrupts. But it is perhaps equally important to realize that weakness, too, corrupts. Power corrupts the few, while weakness corrupts the many. Hatred, malice, rudeness, intolerance, and suspicion are the faults of weakness... The opposite of weakness is strength, and it is found in the rule of law, good governance, equitable judicial systems, and healthy and educated citizens. When we fight to eradicate poverty, promote education for all and build strong social infrastructures both at home and around the world, we are also combatting corruption. Free, independent, and responsible media are among the best preventative measures around. Many of us use the "front page test" when making a decision. This means asking yourself, "How would I feel if I woke up tomorrow and saw my actions written about on the cover of a newspaper?". There's certainly value in having a healthy fear that there are journalists out there working busily to find the truth! Finally, while it's important to focus on the criminal side of the fight against corruption, including the OECD Convention, the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, the Income Tax Act, UN Conventions, and many others, it's often too easy to look solely to such instruments to measure success. Parliamentarians are sometimes especially guilty of wanting quick answers--to point to criminal charges and convictions to show our constituents exactly how effective we're being. In the past 30 years, in the United States, there have only been about 30 prosecutions under the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Since Canada introduced the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, we've had only one case in which charges have been laid. Does that mean these are irrelevant or that we've failed our roles? Absolutely not! I like to think that much of the work done in promoting corporate social responsibility with both businesses and consumers, for example, plays a big part in maintaining integrity. Communicate, Communicate, Communicate! It's not enough to engage in the fight against corruption. We have to share it! What all of this comes down to is communicating in an open and frank manner. Good communication starts by creating laws, guidelines, and measures that are as easy to understand and as accessible as possible. The late John Wayne described a very common attitude when he said, "...corruption masquerade(s) as ambiguity. I don't like ambiguity. I don't trust ambiguity." Technology has also now given us the tools to reach out. As parliamentarians, we have the opportunity to embrace technology as a tool of transparency, accessibility and responsiveness. We can push for Canadian leadership in e-government, for example, by posting our positions, activities, and news on-line, and using any or all of the available information communication technology to demonstrate our openness. Communication also means a lot of networking. We now have a more formalized structure to provide peer support, to share best practices with the international community and the private sector, and to help publicize stories of those sacrificing their careers and sometimes even putting their lives at risk to fight corruption. GOPAC is a prime example, as are the Third Global Forum on Fighting Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity and the 11th International Anti-Corruption Conference, to which many of us are going in two weeks. As representatives from the NGO community, the RCMP, Auditor General and public service integrity offices, CCRA, CIDA and DFAIT, we'll not only be communicating with other nations, but advancing a holistic approach to combatting corruption. Today's symposium, of course, also symbolizes the communication that is needed to ensure that Canada remains one of the most highly regarded countries in this global fight. You are playing a central role in one of the most important issues of our time. I congratulate you on your work, and don't let the "caretakers of the status quo" slow you down. Thank you. </body> </html>

2007 - 2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 - 2000 - 1999 - 1998 - 1997 - 1996

Print friendly version - Printing Tips



Last Updated: 2006-10-30	Top of Page	Important Notices