Procedure and House Affairs committee  One just has to use one's common sense to figure it out. I'm sorry. That's not defined, but normally you can figure out where the gift has come from. That would be a matter you'd have to establish if it were looked into more carefully. I think this is something that has to be dealt with.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  For some reason, I'm not on translation for the English, which I had asked for, but I think I understood the question. If that could be fixed, it would be good. With respect to the $30, I also tend to be nervous about putting that into the code, because it's going to change over time.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes. I mean, I think you've missed the point a bit here, although I'm not sure I agree with the necessity of actually expressing the $30 as a minimum. What I said in my opening remarks, which weren't supposed to be divulged until later, but in any event.... The reporting requirement is $200.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes. Can I just add to that? The point is, I'm not sure that I support putting a rule into the code. I'd just say that it reflects a practice that we followed anyway of, at first blush, assuming that it was probably okay under $30 when people worried about whether they could give somebody a lunch or something.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I'm not clear on what supplementary work you're talking about. I'm sorry.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I never had a huge amount of problem with that. The suggestion that Mr. Dion has made is that they have to get his approval before they.... They're effectively reversing the onus of proof there as to whether a member can be involved. That might create a problem for some members in certain circumstances if, to keep a job, you have to do it quickly or something, but I understand that one must be very careful that there are not conflicts with the time taken by the other outside activities.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  That's a fun question, because actually, early on in my time as commissioner, maybe the first couple of years, I had occasion in one of my reports to try to figure out whether somebody was a “friend” or not. I submitted a general description of what a friend is and it included ideas like having mutual regard beyond mere association.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I'm sorry. I missed your first question. Could you repeat it?

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you very much, Madam Chair. The first thing I want to say is about the opening statement that I gave to the translation people. I've made some changes to that, and I found an error in one of my comments, so I would like it understood that I would like to replace that, and I'll do that this afternoon.

Information & Ethics committee  Thank you very much. It was kind of fun.

Information & Ethics committee  No, I think those definitions are not bad. It's fairly clear. It's not clear, for example, how far into cousins and things “relative” goes, but to a large extent that's a circumstance, anyway, like how close you are to your cousins and whatnot. That's worked out. One little area that's not defined is what a private interest is.

Information & Ethics committee  I'm sorry, but I could hear neither you nor the translator. I didn't get that question.

Information & Ethics committee  Is that what I said? I generally think Canadians are pretty good. There are always ethical errors, and that's what we have the act for. Generally speaking, I don't think we're a horrible country. The government's generally well-meaning and pretty good. That's just a general comment I guess I made.

Information & Ethics committee  Okay. Thank you.

Information & Ethics committee  Oh yes, that would make sense. You'd give the advice on the basis of what they presented to you, and if it changed, you would assume they'd come back and double-check.