Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ladies and gentlemen members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to meet with with you today. Like I said when I had the privilege to appear before you on December 14, as an officer of the House of Commons, when members call me, I always give them priority.
So I am happy that the committee members are undertaking a study on the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons. The code is an important set of rules regulating certain aspects of members' activities. It benefits from being reviewed from time to time. This process will help determine whether rules are working and to address shortcomings identified by members or by other individuals who, like me, have some experience in the enforcement of rules.
The last review was completed in 2015, well before I was appointed to my current position in January 2018. I consider myself fortunate to have this opportunity to, in some way, contribute to the ongoing evolution of this important framework supporting our democratic institutions.
The committee has received from the office a list of six possible suggestions regarding the code and a selection of possible technical amendments that the committee may wish to consider. These recommendations were developed over the period of the last four years, since I became commissioner, with the participation of advisers and lawyers in the office who work with the code on a daily basis.
These suggested amendments are aimed at bringing greater accountability and transparency for members of the public.
Our first recommendation or proposed suggestion, if you wish, is to set a baseline minimum amount for gifts and potential influence, that being $30, all inclusive, in a 12-month period from a single source.
Our second recommendation suggests that we strengthen and align the rules of conduct against furthering private interests of friends and family members, bringing them into alignment with the Members By-law.
Our third recommendation would be to prohibit outside activities that are incompatible with a member's parliamentary duties and functions.
The fourth possibility of amendment concerns the building of coherence within the code for sponsored travel, which is considered a gift and must therefore be subject to the same acceptability test as any other gift.
The fifth recommendation would be to enhance the understanding of the code with mandatory training for new members.
Finally, the sixth recommendation would be to increase the commissioner's autonomy to amend forms and provide generalized guidance to help better explain the provisions of the code.
As I said, these proposals were developed over time through observation and reflection. I believe they would modernize and improve the rules related to gifts and conflicts of interest as they relate to friends and family members, and would better define the boundaries of permissible outside activities for members. They would also require members to spend some time learning the rules set out in the code, as experience has shown that ignorance of the rules is often at the root of contraventions.
Finally, if the House deems it useful, one of my suggestions is to provide the commissioner with additional authority and autonomy to address specific situations requiring general guidance.
It's the committee's role to assess the relevance of these suggestions, and I will of course respect the decisions of the committee. I would also be pleased to offer my views throughout this review, if you so wish, on any matter that the committee may wish to refer to me.
It is my role to help the committee manage the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons. So I will make myself especially available while the committee is conducting its review.
I would be pleased to know your opinion, to note your questions and to provide you with explanations. I am ultimately a resource for the committee. I hope I will be able to help you decide what must be addressed in this review.
Thank you.