Evidence of meeting #47 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was screen.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Minister. That concludes our first hour. I appreciate the fact that you spent some extra time with us, despite the motion's calling for an hour.
We're going to suspend briefly, and then we have the Ethics Commissioner coming in.
This meeting is suspended.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Welcome back, everyone, to our second hour.
We have witnesses from the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner with us today.
We have the commissioner, Konrad von Finckenstein. With him are Lisa DeMoor, director, advisory and compliance, and Michael Aquilino, legal counsel.
Commissioner, I invite you to give your opening statement to the committee. Go ahead, sir.
Konrad von Finckenstein Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, distinguished members of the committee, I am pleased to be here today.
As you mentioned, I am accompanied by Lisa DeMoor and Michael Aquilino, who work in my office.
The motion that brings me here concerns a potential conflict of interest involving the Minister of Finance and National Revenue, Mr. François‑Philippe Champagne.
He has been facing scrutiny for his role in government decisions and votes in support of Alto and high-speed rail. It has been suggested that he is in conflict of interest because those decisions and votes could benefit someone with whom the minister has a close relationship: a vice-president of Alto.
Mr. Champagne is subject to the Conflict of Interest Act in his role as minister.
Under the act, a public office holder is in conflict of interest if they exercise “an official power, duty or function that provides an opportunity” to further their own interests, further the private interests of their relatives and friends, or improperly further the private interests of anyone else.
There are three important points to consider.
First, the minister has no control or authority over Alto. It is a wholly owned Crown corporation. It falls under the purview of the Minister of Transport and not that of the Minister of Finance and National Revenue.
Second, the minister's official duties do not allow him to advance the personal interests of an employee, particularly one at Alto. Personnel decisions are made by Alto. As I said, it is a Crown corporation that does not fall under Minister Champagne's portfolio. He therefore cannot direct or influence it.
Given that the minister has no means of furthering the private interests of an Alto employee, he is not required to refuse or abstain from discussions, decisions, debates or votes related to Alto.
In short, the minister's involvement in discussion or decisions that may benefit Alto is simply too remote to provide an opportunity to further the private interests of an Alto employee who has close ties to the minister.
Sometimes it is reasonably foreseeable that a public office holder could be involved in discussions or decisions in which they have a potential conflict of interest. In those cases, our office works with them to set up a preventive compliance measure, such as the conflict of interest screen. We then post such a screen on our public registry.
We did not require the minister to put in place a screening filter, as the concerns regarding the Alto employee are quite remote. However, the minister decided on his own to implement a filter, without any request from us. He informed the Prime Minister and sent us a copy. Since this filter was not required by the commissioner's office, we did not publish it in the public registry.
Thank you. I would be happy to answer the committee's questions.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Commissioner.
We're going to start with Mr. Barrett for six minutes.
Go ahead, sir.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON
Commissioner, the finance minister was just here at committee. In his final minutes on the question of the release of the correspondence between you and him, he said, and I quote, “I'll let the Ethics Commissioner decide if he wants to share it.”
The minister has said that it's up to you. We know that normally you would say that it's up to him. We have that Spider-Man cartoon with the two Spider-Mans pointing at each other. The minister says it's up to you. Will you decide, as the minister has said, to share that correspondence?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
No. It's not up to the minister to interpret the act. The act is quite clear that everything given to me is confidential. If the person who gives it to me releases it, I will comment on it, etc.
Until such time as he releases it, I cannot comment on it. I have the copy of the letter. As he quite rightly said, he copied me in the letter to the Prime Minister. It's in my possession. He has publicly commented on it. He has not released it. The function of releasing is up to him, not to me.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON
In your explanation of why the minister wasn't in a conflict, you said in your first point that it was a file for the Minister of Transport and not a file belonging to the finance minister. However, it was in his bill. He introduced it.
The budget implementation act contained all kinds of things, but it also specifically contained the enabling legislation for Alto, the creation of the High-Speed Rail Network Act. Without that enabling legislation, Alto wouldn't proceed.
Does that change the calculation on who has ownership of it—when the transport minister could have put forward his own legislation, but the finance minister decided to do it under his auspices instead?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's an arrangement that cabinet ministers make: who introduces a bill. The fact is that the bill provides for the Crown corporation Alto, and Alto comes under the Minister of Transport. Whether the bill authorizing that is introduced by the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Transport does not change the relationship. The relationship is that it's a Crown corporation reporting to the Minister of Transport. The Minister of Transport is responsible for it and answers with regard to it in Parliament.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON
For the creation of it, we understand your interpretation.
With respect to the minister's voting specifically on clause 191 of Bill C-15.... There was a vote to delete clause 191. It would have removed the High-Speed Rail Network Act from the budget implementation act. The minister voted specifically on that item. The minister said he did so because it was of a “general application”. Are you of the same view?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Yes, absolutely. He was voting on a piece of government legislation and specific parts of that government legislation. That government legislation piece would have created a Crown corporation; if it had been deleted, the Crown corporation would not have been created. That's fine. It still has nothing to do with him. That Crown corporation, once it is created, belongs to the Minister of Transport.
The minister did nothing.... It's like every other member of Parliament who is voting on part of the budget implementation act. That's his duty.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON
The minister himself said that he believed he would be in a conflict of interest were he to participate in debates, discussions, decisions or votes related to Alto. He said that in a letter to the Prime Minister in September.
Now, you've made public comments about your opinion, and you've made public comments in response to his comments on the advice that you've provided him. Are you able to provide us with the time frame in which you first furnished him with the advice that he would not be in a conflict?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
The minister quoted to you from the letter, and he gave you the date, but I can look.
Michael, what was the date?
Michael Aquilino Legal Counsel, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
The last one was from April 7, 2026. That's the—
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON
Mr. Aquilino, what is the date of the first correspondence on the matter? Do you have that?
Lisa DeMoor Director, Advisory and Compliance, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I believe, as the minister confirmed, it was August or September, but we would have to confirm the date. The dates that the minister provided are in line with our understanding.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON
It was in September that the minister said he believed that he would be in a conflict of interest if he were to do all the things he went on to do. That was the minister's belief. You have since provided him with advice contrary to that.
Were you asked if a recent or current executive at Alto could provide work on the budget speech or presentation? Was that something the minister or his office asked you for advice on with respect to whether there would be a conflict of interest?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
As I keep telling you, the advice the minister seeks from us, and we give him, is confidential. He can disclose what we advised him to do, and he has. Therefore, what do you expect me to say? I'm sorry.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
I don't quite understand the gist of your question.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
We'll return to it.
Ms. Lapointe, you have the floor for six minutes.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I would like to welcome all the witnesses and thank them for helping us with all of this.
Commissioner, could you explain the preventive role your office plays when a minister or public official seeks advice before taking action?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
The minister can always consult with us. To do so, he explains the situation to us. He asks us whether there is a conflict of interest or not, what he can do, and what he should not do. Once he has explained the situation, we generally tell him whether there is a conflict of interest or not. If there is a conflict, he asks us if there are measures to protect him. For example, what we're talking about here is the famous filter. We establish a filter to ensure that the minister does not participate in discussions that could create a conflict of interest.
Liberal
Linda Lapointe Liberal Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Thank you.
In your opinion, is it good practice for a public official to proactively consult your office when they want to ensure they are fulfilling all their obligations?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Absolutely.
We encourage this because we want to avoid conflicts of interest. Our role is to make things easier so that members of Parliament can do their jobs without any conflicts of interest. We want to avoid problems, not create them.