Evidence of meeting #109 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 question.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:55 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
You as MPs have the power to make the rules for yourselves, including on your code of conduct and when elections are held and so on—
12:55 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's not a conflict of interest. It's something you are charged with doing. One expects you'll do it in the public interest, not in your personal interest, but that's—
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
That's enough time.
No, Mr. Kurek. I'm sorry. I'm over time. I think the commissioner answered the question.
Go ahead, Mr. Bains, for four minutes.
Oh, I had Mr. Bains.
Ms. Khalid, go ahead, please, for four minutes.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Thank you, Chair.
To clarify, I know my colleague asked this question about nefariousness and conspiracy theories—going down that rabbit hole—but October 20, 2025, is the day of Diwali, which many hundreds of thousands of Hindu Canadians celebrate, so I think it's good for us to be—
I'm sorry, Mr. Brock. Are you interrupting my time here?
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Oh, okay. I'm glad you are.
Thank you so much. I wanted to clarify that and put that on the record.
Mr. Aquilino, can we talk about sanctions?
What kinds of sanctions do you feel would be fair, equitable and enforceable? Do you think the current sanctions are enough, as they stand right now?
12:55 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I will point out that Mr. Aquilino is here in order to help Mr. Dion recall the facts regarding the “Trudeau II Report”. He is not here as a witness to speak.
12:55 p.m.
Former Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, As an Individual
I've expressed the view in the past that maybe the issue of penalties should be looked at. There is an absence of direct penalties in relation to the act that should be looked at.
In terms of the credibility of the system, it would help if there was a possible sanction recommended by the commissioner but imposed potentially by the House or another upper authority. That's been my view throughout.
I don't know what my successor thinks of that, but that is my view.
12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Thank you.
Mr. von Finckenstein, are you considering reviewing those sanctions at all?
12:55 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I have been in the job now for literally one month. Obviously, there's a temporary period of seven months. It's a bit early. Clearly, when the chairman congratulated me on my appointment and asked if I had any views about improvements to the act, I wrote to him saying that, yes, undoubtedly there will be some. I will express them at that point in time.
Right now, as you know, the main penalty for breaching the act is that you basically certify that your reputation is not what you were holding it up to be and that you do not understand your job and acted in conflict. That's a pretty bad penalty for an elected official.
12:55 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Should it be supplemented along the lines of what Mario suggested? It's something I would like to study in a bit more detail before making any statement.
March 21st, 2024 / 12:55 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Thank you.
I have one more question for you.
I know that members opposite have been directing you and making demands and saying that you haven't done your job effectively on this specific case and many others.
Can you talk to us about the importance of independence in the work you do and the work the RCMP does? Just as you wouldn't be directed by political officials, would you then go and direct the RCMP as to how they conduct their investigations?
12:55 p.m.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I'm sorry. As you know, I am not a public servant. I report to the Speaker of the House, and that's to insulate me from political interference.
The act is quite clear. Decisions are to be made on their merits are made public. They're made public immediately. For instance, the same day that the “Trudeau II Report” came out, it was also published. There was no opportunity to hide anything. The whole scheme is to be as public, open and fair as possible.
Can it be improved? Sure, everything can be improved, but there's no glaring omission or fault right now that I'm aware of.
As for the RCMP, you should ask them, not me, whether they feel they need more independence or not.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Commissioner.
Thank you, Ms. Khalid.
Certainly we appreciate the independence of the office as it reports to Parliament.
Commissioner, I want to thank you on behalf of the committee for being here today. Again, I congratulate you on your appointment. As the committee chair, I have the utmost confidence in your ability to do your job independently and effectively. I look forward to continuing to work with you.
Mr. Dion, again, thank you for your service to our nation. Your retirement.... You seem to come back every once in a while at the request of the committee. I appreciate your taking the time to do that when you could be someplace else. Thank you, Mr. Dion.
Mr. Aquilino, thank you for your time today.
I'm now going to give Mr. Villemure the floor about a question he wishes to put to the committee.
Mr. Villemure, I remind you that, since our report is being done in camera, you may not speak to its contents. You have the floor.
1 p.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
We've concluded our study on social media and our report is being drafted. However, as with many things, sometimes, the context changes. Last week, we learned that the Department of Industry had launched a national security review of TikTok. When the people from TikTok appeared before us, perhaps they knew or didn't know, we don't know; however, one thing is certain: the picture that was painted was far from anything like a national security review. Indeed, TikTok was recently described as digital fentanyl or a technological weapon in the 21st century. We're hearing all sorts of things.
The fact that a Canadian minister has called for a national security review leads me to question the validity of our report. It's possible, therefore, to add a warning to our report, or cancel it altogether. I'm putting the question to the group here, because I believe that, if we don't take clear steps in this regard, our report will be a joke.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Villemure.
I'll warn the committee now that we don't have much time to deal with this today, based on the services that are available to us.
I will say that I am in agreement with Mr. Villemure that we put the report on the shelf for now, pending the results of the national security review. If we need to reopen the report at that time, we can do that and have witnesses reappear if need be, because there may be things that we might add to the report.
My concern, frankly, is that we're going to make recommendations that are contrary to what the national security review provides for. With the results of the national security review, it's going to look foolish on our part to make these recommendations if they are, in fact, contradictory to what the national security review proposes. I don't think there's any harm in holding on to dealing with this report until such time as this review comes forward.
The other thing I would say is that there was no indication at all during the time of our study that this national security review was going on until it was made public last week.
Go ahead, Ms. Khalid.
1 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Mr. Chair, do we know what the timeline looks like for the NSIRA to come back?
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
No, but I am going to take it upon myself on behalf of the committee to find out.
1 p.m.
Liberal
Iqra Khalid Liberal Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON
Can we then table this question as to whether we're going to be shelving this report until we figure out what the timelines look like? To me, it makes more sense if we are able to bring in TikTok maybe one more time and bring in whatever relevant witnesses to address these concerns and include that information in the report, rather than shelving it for an indefinite period of time.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
I will tell you my plan for the committee, just so that the committee knows.
When we come back from the two-week constituency period, we were going to start the report—I think it's the second day of the report—in camera. I can schedule committee business at that time to provide an update to the committee, and then we can carry on with this discussion later, if that's okay with the committee, until I find out information about the timelines of the national security review.
Would that be acceptable to the committee?
