Evidence of meeting #5 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was code.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
We could try to develop something like this. It would have to be submitted to the committee and approved by the committee, but of course we would be pleased to do so, because there is too much uncertainty at this point in time as to appropriate behaviour. The—
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
I think it's something we have to—
Go ahead.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
The rules do not focus on the medium, but we could illustrate how the rules would prevent somebody from doing something and would allow somebody to do something else using these media.
Again, it's not black and white. It depends on the facts of each case
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
I think as we evolve in the digital age it's becoming more and more something.... Again, we're talking about influence or about promoting different facts and getting some clear rules on that.
One of the other challenges I have, for lack of a better term, is an evolving conflict of interest, perhaps, and I'll ask for some suggestions. Let's say I'm at a local business over the years—and I do this commonly—and I'll tag a page of a business or a charity. Several years down the road, I decide that I'm looking for a new venture and happen to be employed by that business. Does it later become a conflict of interest, then, that I shared this at some point in terms of how that goes?
Maybe I'll just leave it at that. I'd be interested in your further thoughts on how we can make digital rules and have some flexibility. There are two aspects: a conflict of interest with the business, and there's also the tagging and going back and forth between being a member of Parliament and then at election time being a candidate. I'd be interested in your thoughts, and perhaps we'll be asking for your written thoughts as we get to a draft study on that.
The other question I have is on your recommendation number three, where you talk about the work of members of Parliament and outside income or work. You mentioned that there are a few MPs.... Obviously you're not going to name names, but how many are we talking about who are impacted by this currently, based on your recent filings or discussions? I don't need an exact number, but maybe just a range to give us a better context.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
The last number I saw, Madam Chair, was 12 members after the 2015 election. After the 2019 election, I did not seek a number, so I don't have a number. Of course, although we've received.... I'd like to thank all MPs for doing this, but 99% of the MPs [Technical difficulty—Editor] provided the necessary information for initial compliance to take place—
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
On a point of order, Madam Chair, just after Mr. Dion said “99% of MPs”, the video cut out. I'd just like to make sure that I understood exactly what he said. Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Mr. Dion, if you can please repeat that line, we'll give that time back.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
As of yesterday, 99% of MPs have now sent us the necessary documents to proceed to initial compliance. Close to half of the MPs have now completed the process completely after their election. I'm quite pleased with those results, but I don't have at this moment how many MPs out of the 338 have outside activities under section seven of the code. I don't know that at this moment.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
May I ask, through you, Madam Chair, if we can perhaps get that number to the analysts to consider in our draft report? I think the context of the scale is important in a lot of these things. For sure it's an issue. I think it would be important to Canadians to know the scale of the problem.
I'll maybe ask for a clarification or your views on this.
From a conflict of interest and ethics perspective, when it comes to extra work, is your concern more the time of work, for example? I'm not a lawyer, but if I were, is your issue the time someone would spend working as a lawyer? When you're saying members of Parliament, is the rule today because of the time commitment of a member of Parliament and or is it from an income perspective? I think my point is that there are several people, perhaps on boards of directors, who get an income from doing that by spending very little time.
What's your view on the income versus on the work being the issue at hand, in terms of that recommendation?
Liberal
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Madam Chair, my key concern is to limit occasions on which conflicts of interest might arise. When you have an employer, of course the employer becomes somebody you care about a little bit more than you do about people you don't know. That's my chief concern, and it's the time as well. I find it hard to imagine that somebody could have a full-time job and be an MP at the same time, as has been the case in the past in a very limited number of cases.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I agree that it would be very difficult to be a full-time MP and to have another full-time job on the side. All MPs work full time, so having a full-time job on the side would be very difficult.
I have a really easy question to begin with. Part of your recommendation number six is to be able to have more autonomy. To change forms I can understand, but is there something preventing you from giving generalized guidance to help better explain the code's provisions at this point in time?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Section 26 of the code, Madam Chair, limits me. I can issue general guidance only if [Technical difficulty—Editor] by an MP. I couldn't this morning, for instance, issue a guideline on the use of hashtags on Facebook, for instance, in promoting the interests of a person.
Conservative
Eric Duncan Conservative Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON
On a point of order, Madam Chair, there was a glitch again. If the commissioner could restart his answer, it would be appreciated.
Thank you.
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Section 26 currently restricts my issuing of any general guidelines to situations in which an actual MP has asked an actual question about the precise issue I want to deal with. I cannot speculate that it is an issue that might be of interest. Until such time as somebody asks me a question, I have no authority to issue guidance.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Okay.
Going back to the issue of prohibiting outside activities that are incompatible, from your comments before I'm led to believe that in this case you would not be prohibiting all outside employment, just that which isn't acceptable according to the commissioner's thinking or understanding or whatever. Would just being a director of a holding company that was holding real estate be considered something that would be incompatible, or would that be compatible? I know you gave the example of the veterinarian as well, but I think that's probably less common and that something like having real estate holdings is much more common .
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Madam Chair, I'm pleased that the member used the word “incompatible” because that's what I have in mind. It's not “inappropriate”; it's not “undesirable”; it has to be “incompatible”. The burden would be on the commissioner to determine why it is incompatible. [Technical difficulty—Editor] Facts are also important, but I would not venture an answer today as to what's incompatible and what isn't. I would have to look at each case. Because we have a limited number of these outside activities, it's entirely possible for me to do that.
February 3rd, 2022 / 12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON
Thank you for that answer.
My next question is something along those lines as well. I think it's great that you're also limiting the number of things you have to look at. If the threshold is $30, then anything under that would be a go. Can you give me an example of what would be over $30 but under $200 that would be problematic, in your opinion, and an example of something that wouldn't be?
Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
If a member is currently a member of a House committee reviewing legislation, for instance, on.... I'm picking an example. The member is currently a member of the House committee on agriculture. A bill is coming up. Everybody knows that a bill is coming up to regulate the milk industry, for instance, and if the member gets a painting from a milk producer in her riding that is worth $179, I would recommend to the member that she return the gift considering the imminence of her having to be involved in discussions and decisions—having to vote, basically—on a bill that could affect this person, this donor. That's one example.
When there is a connection, past or future, likely to happen.... Of course, I cannot predict who will be a member of which committee five years from now, but when you actually know that something is likely to happen, then there is a potential conflict that has to be avoided and the gift should not be accepted.