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.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Let's start at the beginning. My job there is to expose conflicts of interest. If I find them and I expose them, then the person has to answer to the public, to the Prime Minister or to the Speaker of the House, as the case may be.
Basically, my job is done in exposing it. I can't fine. I can't—
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Yes, that's true, but you're not exposing them.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Wait just a second. They have to be in office. When they are no longer in office, what good does it serve to expose them?
September 16th, 2024 / 3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
So is it your excuse that a conflict of interest is okay and you don't have to look at abuse of taxpayer dollars as long as that person is no longer in office?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Abuse of taxpayer dollars is the Auditor General's job, not mine. My job is conflict of interest, pure and simple, and there is no conflict if you're no longer in office. You do not have a conflict anymore.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Therefore if I commit a conflict of interest while in office and I don't get caught, it's no longer a conflict of interest?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Of course it was a conflict of interest. If I wanted to, I could do it when you are out of office. I'd start an investigation and I would say, “While you were in office, you had a conflict of interest.” End of story.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you very much, Commissioner.
I'll now yield the floor to MP Van Bynen.
Liberal
Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
You appeared over the summer at the public accounts committee on the topic of the AG's report on SDTC. I'd like to ask you some questions about some of your testimony.
For clarity, you found that Ms. Verschuren was in breach of the act, given that she failed to recuse herself while participating in decisions in which a conflict of interest existed. Is that correct? That is the crux of the issue, is it not?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Yes. The act calls for recusing. It does not have a provision for abstaining at all.
However, in a couple of cases, she declared her conflict, and then there was what they call—what do you call it?—the non-controversial motion at the beginning, the content agenda. She voted on those. She had already declared that she couldn't. She should have abstained. She should have actually left the room. The moment she said “conflict of interest”, she should have left the room and not participated. That's what the act demands. She didn't. She abstained.
She first said, “I haven't,” and then she actually voted in some cases. In other cases, she didn't. What she should have done was leave the room.
With the emergency, it was the same thing. She was told on wrongful legal advice, “There is no conflict here,” so she voted.
Liberal
Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Thank you.
By failing to recuse herself, she also breached the SDTC's own conflict of interest policy. Is that correct?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Correct.
Liberal
Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Okay. Is there any record of her ever leaving the room on any of those votes?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Liberal
Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
I had heard in an earlier conversation that individuals had claimed to have left the room, but it wasn't reflected in the minutes.
Is there an obligation on whoever was the chair or the secretary for that meeting to reflect who was in the room and who wasn't in the room?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
Michael, why don't you answer that?
Legal Counsel, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
The minutes reflected that in certain cases, individuals had left the room and in certain cases they had not.
One of the objectives of our examination was to determine whether or not they had in fact left the room. In certain cases there was a discrepancy between the minutes and what we had heard from witnesses, but in most cases the minutes were consistent with what had happened.
Liberal
Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Okay, good.
I'm sure there are people in this room here who believe that you, Commissioner, as an appointee of the Prime Minister, failed in your job by not sufficiently keeping an eye on Ms. Verschuren throughout her appointment. How do you respond to that?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
First of all, she was a public office holder; she was not a reporting public office holder. She has to comply with the act, but it is not as it is for a reporting public office holder, who, when appointed, has to fill out a long, detailed questionnaire, and then we go through it with them and see whether there are conflicts that they have to understand. Then there's an ongoing dialogue between that person and us, and each year, at the end of the year, we review everything and make sure that things are good.
A public office holder like Madam Verschuren has only an obligation to comply with our act and to comply with the internal regulations, in this case SDTC regulations, but there's no ongoing dialogue. She comes to us if she wants to. Otherwise, we don't monitor. We have nothing to do with her. The act is there, and it's up to her to comply with it.
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
That's it. That's correct.
Liberal
Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
—that's the driving issue.
Okay, thank you.
Those are all my questions, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
Bloc
Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good morning to the witnesses and to the commissioner. Thank you for being here.
I think the work we do on this committee, regardless of our partisan affiliation, is important. I take it seriously, and all parliamentarians here seem to take it seriously. What saddens and infuriates me is hearing from witnesses who do not take our work seriously. I'm not talking about you, if that makes you feel better.
I read your report and I heard your testimony. I would now like to quote verbatim two things that Ms. Verschuren said here in this committee, where witnesses are supposed to tell the truth:
In all the cases when I declared a perceived conflict, I removed myself from the board meeting and came back in after the decision had been made and recommendations had been made to the board. This would happen with all board members.
She went on to say:
When the recommendations were made on behalf of the board to proceed with those projects, the board members…In my case, I would leave the room and wait until I was called back, but the recommendation would have been made. I wouldn't know the result…
You see what I'm getting at.
When I look back at the testimony that was given here by this person, and I read your report and hear your testimony, I conclude that someone lied to the committee.
Was it you or Ms. Verschuren?
Commissioner, Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
We only have two sources of evidence: Ms. Verschuren's testimony and the minutes of each meeting. Mr. Aquilino has reviewed every report that we have received. As he said, in a few cases, someone recused themselves, but in the majority of situations, that was not the case. I don't know if Ms. Verschuren's memory failed her, but from what she told us and from what we found in the minutes of the meetings, it is clear that she was in the room at the time decisions were made, particularly those concerning COVID-19 relief. She did not recuse herself.
Mr. Aquilino, do you want to add anything?