Evidence of meeting #133 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was board.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Konrad von Finckenstein  Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Michael Aquilino  Legal Counsel, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Annette Verschuren, o.c.  As an Individual

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

You're not.

Now, going back to the study at hand, you said, Commissioner, “What is the point? What is the point of investigating someone like Ms. Verschuren, who is no longer in her position?” Here you have a sitting minister who potentially violated the Conflict of Interest Act with not one, not two, but nine smoking guns, and two months later you haven't bothered to do anything further. Is that what you're telling this committee?

4:25 p.m.

Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Konrad von Finckenstein

First of all, as you know, before I investigate, I have to have reasonable grounds to investigate. What you have here is a bunch of emails—

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

[Inaudible—Editor]

4:25 p.m.

Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

You have nine emails that name a Randy, one that just coincidentally—

4:25 p.m.

Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

Konrad von Finckenstein

I'm fully aware of—

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

—happens to connect him to being in Vancouver, and you say you don't have any grounds? I'm shocked at the lack of interest, the lack of curiosity, on a—

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Mr. Cooper—

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

—sitting minister who may have contravened the Conflict of Interest Act. Why don't you do your job?

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Mr. Cooper, I'll ask you to let the witness respond.

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

I have a point of order.

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

At the same time, this is so far from what we're supposed to be studying, Mr. Cooper. Have you read the motion?

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

He said, “What's the point?” He said that with respect to Ms. Verschuren. Now I'm talking about a minister who's in his office, and he's not interested in investigating the minister.

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Well, this is—

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

He's not interested in investigating Ms. Verschuren. He's not interested in investigating the minister. What is he interested in investigating?

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Yes—

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

Is he interested in actually enforcing the Conflict of Interest Act?

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Mr. Cooper, I understand you're not a regular member of this committee. I'd appreciate it if maybe the vice-chair, Mr. Perkins, could brief you on how we do things around this committee, but we don't interrupt each other. We don't interrupt the chair, for one thing, and we talk when we have the floor. I haven't given you the floor.

There's a point of order that's been raised, a very valid one on relevance, and I think your questions are just not relevant. It's not that I don't—

4:25 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB

I know Mr. Turnbull wants to run interference to protect Randy Boissonnault. It appears you do as well, Chair.

Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON

That's one interpretation.

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

Mr. Cooper, well, that is just....

Mr. Cooper, it doesn't matter how you explain it or what topics you want to discuss. Committees are sovereign. If you want to continue on that topic, that's fine by me, but the committee would have to vote on a motion that says that's what we want to talk about.

If you want to do a study about the line of questions you're asking the commissioner, we can, but we just need to adopt a motion in that direction. This is not what we're supposed to be studying today. It's as easy as that.

Madame Jones, go ahead on your point of order.

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Of course, my point of order is on relevance, which has had to be raised for probably the third time since we started the committee, and with some of the same speakers.

I just want to note for the record that there is always opportunity to approach the commissioner on other issues outside of the committee forum. Today we're discussing a very different matter. The commissioner is here to answer questions on that matter. It is of vital importance to the committee, and I would really appreciate it if members could stick to the study and the topic that we're debating.

The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound

I agree, and so I ask you, Mr. Cooper, as you still have two minutes and 56 seconds, to stay on the topic. If you haven't seen the notice of motion or if your fellow members haven't shared it with you, please have a look at it. We came here during the summer on a Standing Order 106(4) for that very special meeting.

Mr. Cooper—

4:30 p.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

On that point of order, Chair—