Section 118 – Subsection 113(1) – Founded – Engaging in political activity in an electoral district association

Authority:

This investigation was conducted under section 118 of the Public Service Employment Act, S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12, 13.

Issue:

The purpose of this investigation was to determine if the employee failed to comply with subsection 113(1) of the Public Service Employment Act (the Act) by engaging in political activity that impaired, or could have been perceived as impairing, their ability to perform their duties in a politically impartial manner.

Conclusion:

The investigation concluded that the employee failed to comply with subsection 113(1) of the Act given their involvement in an electoral district association which could be perceived as impairing their ability to perform their duties in a politically impartial manner.

Facts:

The employee held a senior position in an electoral district association. The employee’s involvement in this activity met the definition of “political activity” as per the Act. In determining whether the employee’s involvement in this political activity impaired, or could be perceived as impairing, their ability to perform their duties in a politically impartial manner, the Commission examined: the level and visibility of their public service position; the nature of their public service duties; and the nature and visibility of their political activity.

There was one level of separation between the employee’s position and their deputy minister. The employee provided input on Treasury Board Submissions and Memoranda to Cabinet. They had direct supervision of a number of employees, and had staffing and financial authorities. The employee’s involvement in political activity was visible through social media and newspaper articles given their involvement in past and more recent campaign-related activities. Before getting involved in the electoral district association, the employee had not completed the political activities self-assessment tool or consulted with other resources, such as the Designated Political Activities Representative, to assist in making an informed decision about engaging in political activity. They had not disclosed their involvement in the association to their department. The employee stated that they did not see their role in the association as something that would, in fact or in appearance, have an impact on their ability to perform their work duties in a politically impartial manner.

Several of the factors examined demonstrated that the employee’s involvement in the association could, at a minimum, be perceived as impairing their ability to perform their duties in a politically impartial manner. For example, the employee had access to sensitive information given their involvement in Memoranda to Cabinet and Treasury Board Submissions, and it might be perceived that the employee could use this information to their party’s advantage. With respect to the employee having staffing authority and financial authority, it could be perceived that they would give preferential treatment to, or disadvantage, people or businesses who support or oppose their political views.

Therefore, the evidence demonstrated that the employee failed to comply with subsection 113(1) of the Act when they engaged in political activity through their involvement in an electoral district association, and that their involvement could have been perceived as impairing their ability to perform their duties in a politically impartial manner.

Corrective action:

Following the conclusion of engaging in improper political activity, the Commission ordered that:

Investigation File No.: 20-21-04

Page details

Date modified: