Mr. Speaker, one thing I have learned about this profession is that in debate, depending on whether one has the last word, one can say some pretty bizarre things.
The analogy of one person being a political adviser to two opponents is certainly preposterous. First, it would tell me more about the two parties than it would about the consultant. Second, if
the consultant had integrity he would accept only one engagement. That is the difference.
I said earlier that professional rules of conduct are very strict. If a member within a profession is in a conflict situation and does not disclose it and it becomes known to some other party who is also a member of the profession, the rules of conduct require that the member bring it to the attention of the discipline and standards committee of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants for investigation. If it was not reported and there was a conflict of interest, both parties would be equally culpable for the damages. This is not to be taken lightly.
The integrity of the profession is its bread and butter. If it has no integrity then the opining on financial statements and providing professional advice to people on matters ranging from taxation to investment to accounting to good business practices and insurance measures, all goes out the door. Integrity is the most important commodity the accounting profession provides. That is being protected by the profession.
I can say that participation in the committee will only enhance the integrity of the profession.