Evidence of meeting #84 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was code.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:55 p.m.
Former Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, As an Individual
In this case, there's a problem.
I don't think the legislative drafters foresaw this situation back in 2006.
5:55 p.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
I wouldn't have anticipated it, either.
When you say that the commissioner could recommend sanctions, what do you have in mind?
5:55 p.m.
Former Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, As an Individual
For example, it could be a one- or two-week suspension, or a fine. I'm not thinking of imprisonment, obviously. It's important to know that the Criminal Code applies in the most serious situations, so I'm talking more about a fine or a suspension. It could also be mandatory training, as is done for harassment and impaired driving.
5:55 p.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Suspension is certainly being considered, as is training. The fine often gives me the impression that ethics can be bought. People think they're going to pay the fine and that's it, so I don't think it's as good.
Thank you very much.
6 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Villemure. That's good, you took less time than allowed.
Thank you, both.
We're going to go to Mr. Green now for six minutes.
Go ahead, Mr. Green.
6 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you very much.
Commissioner von Finckenstein, in your opening remarks you talked about the discrepancy for gifts as it related to the two bodies, one at $50 and one at $200. You mentioned that you'd make an adjustment on the gifts. Is that correct?
6 p.m.
Interim Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Well, if we can adopt the appropriate amount.... It seems to me that it makes no sense that you have a different demand for donors and donees. Therefore, we can—
6 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I would agree.
In your opinion, is the lower of the thresholds probably more reasonable?
6 p.m.
Interim Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Can somebody be bought or influenced for $40 or $200? I doubt it. How far do you have to go before you think it becomes meaningful? Being prudent in setting it at this level...it certainly will not influence anybody.
6 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
You acknowledged the protection of a democratic institution as it relates to the trust and the decisions that are made—having a conflict, having the appearance of a conflict, being influenced, the conversations we've had and I know that you would be privy to around foreign interference—as being germane, yet the order of magnitude in which the scenario was provided to you: $3,400 for champagne and wine I think, and one of them might have been a $700 bottle of wine....
I know you don't want to do hypotheticals, but let's have an ethical exercise right now. If I were to receive, in my office, from an unregistered company consultant, an $800 bottle of champagne, could I accept that under the current regime?
6 p.m.
Interim Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
No. You have to report it.
6 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
If I were flown first class to the U.K. and put up in a hotel, and an $800 bottle of champagne was presented to me there, could I accept it?
6 p.m.
Interim Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
You're pointing out that there could be an improvement to our code and the way it is worded, etc. With the way it is worded right now, as Mario so eloquently pointed out, sponsored travel is allowed and is just reported to us, and we publish it later on. I mean, this is—
6 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you, sir. I'll reclaim my time, if I may, and go through to Mr. Dion now.
Mr. Dion, in your time in office, you've certainly been very candid, and I think extremely professional and impartial in carrying out the legislation, as it's written, to the best of your ability.
Did you ever, in any of your work, cover the phenomenon of dark money? This is the idea that actors behind the scenes can use proxies to engage in activities that they themselves might not legally be able to engage in. Are you familiar with the term “dark money”, sir?
6 p.m.
Former Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, As an Individual
No. Frankly, I am not. I have a sense of what it could be, but I have not come across that situation.
October 16th, 2023 / 6 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Dark money would potentially look like a company that might be registered, and therefore not allowed to provide gifts to MPs, contracting a third party. In essence, it's doing indirectly what it can't do directly, providing a third party with the funding mechanisms to fly a group of MPs across the Atlantic to London for an upscale conference that includes $3,400 in champagne and $1,000 steak dinners.
If it were the case, sir, that a company or an entity were funding something indirectly through consultants, how would you frame that? Would that be a violation of the conflict of interest code, or could it perhaps be considered a criminal act?
6 p.m.
Former Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, As an Individual
It's complex and hypothetical; therefore, I will resist the temptation.
6 p.m.
Interim Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Certain assumptions would have to be proven. You say “indirectly”. What proof do you have? If you can prove that, etc., and you do, then you're starting to wander into criminal fields. Without the exact situation, the exact facts, I don't think either Mario or I can give you a satisfactory answer.
6 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
That's fair. I'll accept that.
Let me ask the question from perhaps a different perspective. For a company that is unregistered to be on the lobbyist registry—and therefore in this nebulous, dark space of unregulated gifts, travel and luxuries—would the onus be on them to prove that they could actually afford to send a group of MPs on a transatlantic trip, or are we now reporting to the public that really the lobbyist registry doesn't matter and the gift registry doesn't matter, because all we have to do, potentially, is hire a third party that is unregistered?
6:05 p.m.
Former Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, As an Individual
The sponsored travel is fine, by definition, under the code—
6:05 p.m.
NDP
6:05 p.m.
Former Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, As an Individual
—therefore, it doesn't matter who the donor is, because it's perfectly okay to be sponsored and to go on a trip. Anything that's incidental to the trip is also perfectly acceptable under the code.
6:05 p.m.
NDP
Matthew Green NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Okay, so, basically, if you fly to the Caribbean or London to get the gifts, it's okay.
6:05 p.m.
Former Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, As an Individual
It doesn't matter who gives the gift. The MPs are authorized to accept sponsored travel, period, from any entity.