I will read to you in full the words he spoke.
In response to the question posed to him, the commissioner replied that there was no risk of a conflict of interest. I think that answers your question. He says that not only is there is no conflict of interest, but also that there is no risk of a conflict of interest. That is why he says that, in this case, a filter was not required.
The question that was asked was much broader, but the commissioner is obviously sticking to the law. The commissioner is the arbiter of the Conflict of Interest Act, and that is the answer he provided following the consultations I had with him.