Information & Ethics Committee on Dec. 8th, 2025

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Thank you.

Commissioner, the last time you were here, you explained that one of your three main objectives is to examine alleged conflicts of interest involving elected or appointed federal officials and report your findings. That means you investigate when someone, somewhere, raises a red flag.

When the ethics commissioner of Quebec came to meet with us, she explained to the committee that she had the power to investigate and that she could start an investigation on her own initiative. That power is obviously based on reasonable grounds to believe that a breach has occurred.

Would you like to have that power and exercise it without there even being a complaint or an allegation?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

I already have that power.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

How many times have you used it?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

I have rarely used it because generally, if there are any doubts, someone will write to me and ask me to investigate. I have that power, but I believe I've used it only once since I was appointed, that is, in the past two years.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Based on what I told you about Bill C‑15, could you exercise that power to dig into this matter a little more?

How do you go about exercising your power to investigate on your own initiative?

I get the impression that you often wait for someone to raise a red flag. If that isn't the case, can you explain to us when and in what situation you have launched an investigation yourself?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

Ms. Robinson‑Dalpé, could you please read the provision?

[Lyne Robinson-Dalpé]

The provision in subsection 45(1) of the Conflict of Interest Act states, “If the Commissioner has reason to believe that a public office holder or former public office holder has contravened this Act, the Commissioner may examine the matter on his or her own initiative.”

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Now—

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

As you know, I'm a former judge. When I see a situation reported in the newspaper, for example, I wonder whether it should be looked into, whether it raises suspicions, whether it's really in the public interest to know certain things.

There's no final test. It's really by looking at all the indications and the whole context that I can figure out whether the situation is likely to evolve and whether to continue with the examination.

[Luc Thériault, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Since you want the government to include the concept of apparent conflicts of interest in the Conflict of Interest Act, I imagine you'll be more sensitive to that power and to the possibility of further analyzing situations so that public confidence isn't undermined by apparent conflicts of interest.

For example, when parliamentarians raise questions, I imagine you have what it takes to avoid waiting for an official complaint to be filed before checking the facts and asking for accountability from the Prime Minister, for example, or from the person or department in question.

Have you ever done that, or is it part of your job to demand accountability when an issue is raised?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

If Parliament adopts the provisions I'm proposing regarding the appearance of a conflict of interest, that also includes the definition that my colleague read out. If that makes it easier to enforce the law and to investigate, then good. It's really important that there be no appearance of conflict of interest.

That said, do I really have to suspect something illegal?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Commissioner, time is up. Please answer in five seconds.

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

We'll come back to it later.

We'll go to Mr. Hardy, Commissioner.

Mr. Hardy, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

A bit earlier today, Mr. Maloney said that he had attended two committee meetings and that we surely had better things to do. He talked about the weaponization of ethics.

I'd like to come back to what Mr. Aquilino said when he was talking to us about the Conflict of Interest Act. He referred to a reasonably well-informed person.

When people come to see us, they're reasonable and well informed. They aren't under the impression that we have better things to do and that it's a waste of time. They believe that we have to ask questions.

The situation we're dealing with is very unusual; it's surely a historical first. Examples of this situation often come up in Parliament: carbon capture, transmission lines, artificial intelligence, data centres, nuclear energy and pipelines. There's even talk about the Canadian Space Agency, which is apparently 50% owned by Brookfield. In light of all that, as well-informed people, we find that there's an apparent conflict of interest.

Do you share that opinion, Mr. von Finckenstein? That's what you're suggesting, and you're saying that the act should be amended.

If the act were amended, do you think there would currently be an apparent conflict of interest?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

It's a bit difficult to answer that, because you're mixing up a lot of things.

If the Conflict of Interest Act were amended, and I had the power to launch investigations in response to an apparent conflict of interest, I would do so on an individual basis, not collectively.

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

Would you do so in this case?

Say the act were amended, that your recommendations were taken into account, that the committee agreed—

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

If you amend the act, I'll have an obligation to do so.

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

There would be grounds to do so, then.

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

You're saying—

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

However, I agree with your recommendation.

Let's take the example of a well-informed and reasonable person—the committee and the public, in this case—who calls on us because they're wondering why the government isn't investigating this, since it seems to them that there would be a conflict of interest. The person doesn't say that there's a conflict of interest; they say that there seems to be the appearance of a conflict of interest.

In that case, do you intervene?

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

No, I'm the one who has to make the decision, not the person who's calling on me.

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

I'm asking you if you would do it.

[Konrad von Finckenstein]

Say someone is explaining a situation to me. I will then examine it myself. After considering the facts and circumstances, I'll make a decision. If I find that, yes, there's an apparent conflict of interest, that's when I'll launch an investigation.

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

Commissioner, we agree. The issue is being raised in Parliament. What I'm telling you are publicly known facts. I'm not making anything up. Brookfield owns 50% of the Canadian Space Agency. I'm not making that up; these are facts.

We're talking about facts and public knowledge, then. Do you intend to intervene if there appears to be a conflict of interest under the act? Will you intervene?