Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks for coming again today.
I have similar issues as my colleague Ms. Turmel concerning recommendation seven. You used the words “a prohibition against members furthering the private interest of a relative or friend”. She referred to friends as “I have 105,000 friends in the riding”. You can go that broad with it.
Certainly I represent everybody in my riding, and I think it's my job to represent those interests. So when you're saying that I have an obligation to recuse myself from participating in “discussion, decision, debate or vote where he or she may be in a position to further a private interest”, a “private interest” could be a job, could be ownership in a company, could be all these things. I consider that my job, to do the best I can do for those constituents and friends. In saying such a broad...and not just broad, but to use such strong language as a “prohibition” is concerning, to say the least.
I know you're trying to get to the bottom of this, but you're going a little too far in saying what you're saying. Just clarify, please.