Madam Chair, we are now on page 105.
NDP-71 is consistent with further recommendations about broadening the scope of determining when someone is in a conflict of interest. I would bring to your attention the way proposed section 29 is written. It very specifically says, “while exercising the powers or performing the duties and functions of a commissioner”.
That's a pretty specific, narrow activity. You could be appointed as a commissioner, and you haven't done any work yet, and you decide to enter into a contract with one of the people who have applied, and it may or may not be reviewed. You could be holding a contract with one of those parties, but you don't do the work while you are sitting in your office and doing your work.
I am deeply troubled by that very narrow description. We know why the NEB was struck down. It was because of activities between members of the NEB, governments, and officials who had interests in various proponents. Supposedly it was just friendly, it was at another activity, and so forth. I don't know why the government wants to do this so narrowly. I think it's just going to open a Pandora's box for concerns being raised.
I would strongly recommend taking out “while exercising the powers or performing the duties and functions of a commissioner” to make clear that, if you are appointed as a commissioner, you simply will have clean hands.