Sure.
I'm glad you raised the “almost impossible to be in a conflict of interest” act, because that is another one that has some secrecy problems. One of the problems is that the Ethics Commissioner is using these conflict-of-interest screens. They're actually illegal under the act. There is a positive duty, under section 25 of the Conflict of Interest Act, to disclose every time you remove yourself from a decision-making process. Even if you say, “Oh, we're creating this screen such that your staff person will always remove you from processes and you won't necessarily even know it, and therefore you don't have to disclose it”, you can't override the positive requirement to disclose every time you are removed. The screens have been put in place by the commissioner because, in fact, the minister does not have to remove herself from any decisions that will affect her husband's clients, because the act does not apply to 99.9% of the decisions of any minister. That's why it should be called the “almost the impossible to be in a conflict of interest” act.
The Ethics Commissioner has been doing this for years. It's an illegal act by her under the Conflict of Interest Act, overriding a positive duty to disclose every time you recuse yourself, and that practice should be stopped. The ministers are violating the act by using these screens and not disclosing every time they recuse themselves. It's also hiding the fact that they will not be recusing themselves at all from anything, and haven't in the past when these same situations have arisen.