Information & Ethics Committee on Sept. 18th, 2023

[Lyne Robinson-Dalpé, Director, Advisory and Compliance, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner]

As you probably know—or you may not know—every quarter, we publish a report. It's a status report of the activities that we've engaged in in the last quarter, over the course of the year. On the engagement side, we have been very proactive with reporting public office holders—and members as well—offering information sessions and providing them with guidance, not just individually—as individual members or individual reporting public office holders—but also as groups. It's not only for the individuals who are subject to the rules, but also their staff.

We continually have an ongoing discussion with them, and we engage with these people to sensitize them to the rules and make sure that they abide by the rules.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bains.

Mr. Villemure, you're next. You have two and a half minutes.

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

Believe me, Commissioner, I'm pleased to hear you say that we must strive to be thorough, inspire trust and set aside our personal views for the common good.

They contacted you in April, and you accepted the position. I assume that, before doing so, you looked into what the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner does. You surely also took the time to review the act and see how it works.

First, do you have any suggestions to help us improve the act or how the office works?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

I feel it would be useful to review the act, hold hearings and get the opinion of other members and the public, among others. Are we still getting the most out of the act? Could it be improved or reformed, among other things? As I said, delegation is clearly an issue.

As your colleague mentioned, we live in the age of social media. Does that have an impact on the act? Should we make amendments and give greater powers to the commissioner, for example?

The Conflict of Interest Act also applies to ministers and secretaries of state, as does the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons. Is the act aligned with the code? Could we introduce amendments for more effective integration? Those are big questions that I can't answer right now.

However, I feel that this committee could and should look at them.

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

Of course, you wouldn't undertake changes of that kind in a six-month mandate, but you're an attentive observer of the public scene.

You said you were retired, but still active. Do you currently have other mandates?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

No. I'm a member of a few non-profit organizations, but I have no mandates.

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

Thank you very much, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Villemure.

Mr. Green, you have two and a half minutes, please.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

In my opening round of questions, I spoke a bit about what your mandate is going to be. Certainly before today we've had members of your commission before us on various matters. Obviously, when budget time comes up, there will be conversations around the adequate funding to do the job.

Do you feel, in your first couple of weeks, given your past senior-level managerial experience, that there are enough resources being put into your office to adequately do the work?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

It's a bit early for me to say, but I'm being informed by my staff that essentially we have the necessary resources to do the job.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Now that we have identified that you have the resources, given the act and the scope of the work, when you're working through that, how are you going to go about measuring the progress within the department year after year, or I guess in the short time you have? What would progress look like for you and how do you plan on measuring it?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

There are certain measurements already in place. We have targets for how long it should take to deal with requests, the five-day turnaround, etc. That's obviously one way of measuring.

The other one is essentially.... As you know, and of course your colleagues have mentioned, there's a perceived lack of trust right now, presumably because of the six-month hiatus. I hope we can restore that so they feel that the system is functioning and that issues that have cropped up are being dealt with in a timely manner.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Three new people were brought into the House of Commons today through by-elections. I'm a firm believer that some....

Oh, were there five?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Yes, there were five.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I stopped counting after a while.

Five new people came in. I'm a firm believer in education at the front end. Do you think more can be done for MP orientation to ensure there is a comprehensive understanding of the code, so ignorance can't be an excuse down the line?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

Lyne here is the expert. I'll let her answer, but let me first say that it's not only what we offer, but what people attend. Part of the problem is getting people to spend enough time to be informed. We do what we can to inform them.

Lyne, you are the expert on this.

[Lyne Robinson-Dalpé]

As most of you are probably aware, the members' code was modified last June to include a mandatory training session for all new MPs. Therefore, within 120 days following the publication of their name in the Canada Gazette, a member has to have training with our office. We have actually communicated with the five new members, informed them of this obligation and scheduled training for them.

Yes, it was a recommendation made by previous commissioners. The procedure and House affairs committee has granted that. Therefore it is now part of the obligations for new members.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Commissioner, you're going to be the recipient of a longer microphone here. For the interpreters, you're speaking just a little—

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

I will speak right into the mike.

Interpreters, I hope you hear me clearly.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

There, I think that might be a little better.

Before the next round, where Mr. Gourde will go first, I'd like to ask a question.

Commissioner, I know you've been busy over the course of the last several weeks. One thing that consistently comes up is the Conflict of Interest Act itself. As you know, it came into effect in 2007. There was the statutory review in 2013, and then my understanding is that there was prorogation. The act was tabled in the House in 2014.

It's been nine years since the act was reviewed. Have you come to any conclusion or thought about whether the Conflict of Interest Act itself needs to be reviewed?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

It's a bit premature to ask me that. I can answer only generally.

Any legislation, after such a long period of time, as you mentioned, deserves to be reviewed, because things change. Especially in this age of social media we have to see whether some of the procedures or some of the ways we looked at it, which were based on a paper world, still make sense or can be improved in this day and age.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Commissioner.

We will now start the next round.

Mr. Gourde, you have five minutes.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. von Finckenstein, first of all, congratulations on your appointment.

Earlier, you talked about the need for very experienced people. However, your interim term is six months long and a commissioner's term is usually seven years. Seven years is quite a long time, and to have experienced people, you need people of a certain age. Could the seven-year term limit the number of candidates?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

First, if someone accepts an appointment, they are free to resign. They aren't required to stay for seven years.

Second, term limits are a good thing. You really have time to change and reform the organization, to leave your footprint, your ideas, and so on. If your mandate lasts only four years, that may not be enough, particularly if you want to amend the act or the code, since that requires a lot of time, consultations, and so on.

That means seven years is an asset. However, as you say—

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Thank you, Commissioner.

I'll go back to the interim. You know, investigations sometimes last six, eight or nine months. When an investigation lands on your desk and it was started by a predecessor or by the team—who are already working very well—you have to make the decision and sign the report.

If you stay in your interim position for six months and leave while an investigation is under way, will the next commissioner have to start the whole investigation over again and redo what's already been done?

In two or three weeks, will you be signing reports that are already being drafted, or will you need to start the process all over again to ensure that it meets your own requirements?