Evidence of meeting #86 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was friend.
A video is available from Parliament.
11:25 a.m.
As an Individual
It has to do with whether they get an administrative monetary penalty.
11:25 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Right, but that monetary penalty, as you said, was an encouragement to file.
11:25 a.m.
As an Individual
Sometimes people will accept a gift and then come in and say, “Gosh, I wonder if we should have accepted this gift.” I'll say no or I'll say yes, and they'll return it.
11:25 a.m.
As an Individual
That's the end of it, if they've returned it within 30 days. If they haven't told me about it for a year.... I think I did a case like that once and found that they'd contravened the act.
11:25 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Under this scenario, if the Prime Minister returns from this trip and says, “This doesn't seem right”.... Is it correct to say that a meeting was held a few days after returning, or a number of days afterward? When did the meeting...?
11:25 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
We'll take that to the side. If, upon returning back to Canada from the Caribbean, the Prime Minister said, “That didn't feel right, going on a trip with the family and friends with somebody who lobbies my office or whose foundation lobbies my office, so I'm going to pay for it. I'm going to figure out the cost as if I had just decided to go on a trip to the Caribbean”, what would your involvement be at that point?
His office could have notified you and said, “This trip happened over the holidays. The Prime Minister took it, but then paid for it, reimbursed it.” What would—
11:25 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Of course, that's the ideal: ask for permission, not forgiveness. Isn't that right?
11:25 a.m.
As an Individual
Yes, but the fact of the matter in this case is that I didn't know about any of this stuff for a long time.
11:25 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Therefore, the highest bar would be, “Hey, I'm thinking of taking this trip, Ethics Commissioner, but it's a trip being offered to me by somebody who also lobbies my office. Is it okay?”, and you would have said no.
11:25 a.m.
As an Individual
I think I've heard in the Prime Minister's statements that he's now going to check with the office all the time when he's taking a trip.
11:30 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
If that higher bar is not reached, then another bar down is when a trip is accepted inappropriately, or a gift of some kind, a painting, whatever, a watch, and the person says, “Now that I think about it, that's inappropriate”, and they are going to pay that person back for the gift, you don't have anything to do with it at that point—or do you? You might get notified, but you're not going to follow that up.
11:30 a.m.
As an Individual
Hypotheticals are very difficult to deal with because every time you have an issue that you have to deal with, you have to look at it afresh in the general context. There's no one case that's going to be an exact, perfect model for a decision on a next case.
11:30 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
There are some learnings that we need to take from this, as you've said, because it's an interesting case.
11:30 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
We've never had a prime minister found in violation of the act before.
Can I also circle back to this point about the Prime Minister's statement that in being in a meeting with the Aga Khan, he was not there in his official capacity but in the capacity of relationship building or as a friend? Did I hear you correctly?
11:30 a.m.
As an Individual
Those tests are reasonably seen to have been given. The tests are objective, as opposed to subjective. I'm not sure this is answering the specific question you're asking, but each section is drafted a little differently, so you have to look at the exact—
11:30 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I'm just trying to clarify what is not even a philosophical point but maybe a legal point, which is that if the Prime Minister, or anybody, has received a gift when there is this sort of association, he can say, “I'm in the meeting, but they're just a friend. I'm not there in my official capacity as a member of Parliament, or Prime Minister, or cabinet minister.” That was the argument I understood he made and that you reiterated this morning. Did I hear you wrong?