Information & Ethics Committee on Jan. 30th, 2024

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

As you know, words really matter in discussions about conflicts of interest and ethical breaches. The fact that the Prime Minister or someone from his office said that his trip was pre-cleared gives Canadians a false sense of security. If the person says they consulted the Ethics Commissioner and got advice, that's not the same thing at all.

We're here because someone in the PMO said your office pre-cleared this trip. I'd like you to tell us again, in French, that this is not how your office operates.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Mr. Berthold, the answer will have to be very brief.

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

It is clear that that was a statement by the Prime Minister's spokesperson.

What we do is give advice. The PMO consulted us about this trip, and we gave advice. The Prime Minister took the trip. Nothing was reported on our website. There doesn't necessarily have to be a report if it is a gift from a friend, as the deputy minister said.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you, Mr. Berthold.

Mr. Bains, you have five minutes, sir. Go ahead.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Commissioner and Ms. Robinson-Dalpé, for coming out today.

Just to close the matter on the Prime Minister's trip, I think you said you give advice. He was preadvised. We understand that. The advice you give is “tantamount to a ruling”, and members always follow the advice you give. You mentioned that. If it had not been acceptable, it would have been reported in 30 days. It's been 30 days, and nothing has been reported on your website, and you've indicated that.

Do you believe this matter is closed?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

As far as I am concerned, there is nothing further. As I said, if there had been something that needed to be disclosed, it would have been disclosed.

We were advised and we gave advice. The Prime Minister obviously took the advice and followed it. What he or his spokesman says publicly is not under my control, and I have no comment about it. I explained to you how the process works and how it has worked.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

The response came from your office. You said, “We give advice”, and that's your office—

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

Yes.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

—and you're responsible for your office, just as the Prime Minister is responsible for his office.

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

That's right.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Ultimately, this matter is basically closed.

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

As far as I am concerned, it is.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Okay.

I want to go back to another question.

I know that you said that there is no limit on the commercial value of a gift. How do you factor the commercial value of a gift into your interpretation of the act to determine whether the acceptance of a gift or other advantage was permissible under section 11? If you're looking at commercial—

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

You're quite right that there is no value stated in the act, and it doesn't come into play.

What I discussed with Mr. Villemure was a really exceptional circumstance. Would you do something if you couldn't use it? There has to be a limit. There has to be a societal limit, an ethical limit of how far you can go.

I said, “Well, there isn't one”, but if it was an absolutely extraordinary gift—like a million-dollar car or something like this—what I can always say is that this is so unusual that I have trouble accepting that really good friends give each other million-dollar gifts. Let's have an investigation. Let's have some more information in here, with sworn statements, etc.

It may be that it was was gift, and we will say, “Yes, it was a gift. Never mind”, or maybe it said that it was characterized as a gift, but there was more to it. However, that is an exception and has never happened, and hopefully it never will.

However, just in order to answer forthrightly Mr. Villemure's question, I would say that in such a case I think I would probably look into it further.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Okay.

I want to go back into something Mr. Green brought up about sponsored travel. Again, we're talking about ethics here.

Does it matter? Do you look into who is sponsoring the travel and what their background is? Would you go so far as to—

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

I don't look at it at all, because it's expressly accepted under the code.

Now, if you're worried about public trust and confidence, etc., maybe you want to change it and you want to put some restrictions or some limitations on it. That's up to you to decide. You impose the codes upon yourselves. I have nothing to do with it.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

It's a code that we impose upon ourselves. Ultimately who we want to relate ourselves to, who the sponsor is and what they are involved in reflects upon who we are travelling with or what the think tank is or what policies they try to push forward or whichever lobby group they are. That's ultimately on us, right?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

If you impose such a restriction on yourselves, then you have to be very careful to specify what exactly is acceptable and what is not. In terms of monetary limit or political leanings or whether it's foreign or domestic or whatever, what are the criteria according to which this sponsored travel would have to be judged?

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Just for my final question, has the Leader of the Opposition ever reached out to you for any advice before travelling?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

Again, if he has, it's up to him to disclose and not for me to say whether he has or hasn't.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

Those are all the questions I have.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Bains.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Mr. Villemure, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I really appreciated your earlier reference to a reasonable person. I think we can agree that a reasonable person would be interested in a Ferrari.

Mr. von Finckenstein, the advice you give complies with the code, right?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

Yes.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

In general, is it within your purview to say that a proposed act complies with the code but may be unethical? Would you go so far as to say something like that?