- 1 Mr. Speaker, it was suggested through counsel for the Minister that there was a material discrepancy between the material filed on behalf of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner in her June 29, 2001, written submissions and the facts known to the Commissioner.
- 2 This issue revolves around the question of what information the Conflict of Interest Commissioner had in hand on or about March 15, 2001, arising from her discussions with Mr. Selleck. It again highlights the importance of Mr. Selleck providing information to the committee and the difficult position which arose as a result of his failure to do so, Mr. Speaker.
- 3 The Minister alleges that in the written submissions of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, she flatly denies in strident language that she had any specific knowledge of the alleged infraction of the Minister arising from the March 15, 2001 conversation with Mr. Selleck. Yet the transcript of the taped telephone conversation between John Bayly, principal secretary, and the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, which occurred some eleven days later on March 26, 2001, clearly indicates that the Conflict of Interest Commissioner was in fact in possession of this information.
- 4 In assessing this issue, it was duly noted that the Minister had surreptitiously tape-recorded the March 26, 2001, telephone conversation and she had a transcript of this conversation. This was not a fact that was known to the Conflict of Interest Commissioner at the time of her making her submissions.
- 5 The Conflict of Interest Commissioner, in her evidence at the hearing of this matter, indicated that when she reviewed the submissions of the Minister and the allegation of the knowledge that the Conflict of Interest Commissioner had in hand from March 15, 2001, forward, she could not specifically recall these facts. If she had any recollection, it was to the contrary, namely that Mr. Selleck had not provided her with such information.
- 6 She stated in evidence before the committee that she contacted Mr. Selleck by telephone to see if he could apprise her as to what, if any, information he had imparted to her on March 15, 2001. She states that it was a result of these inquiries that her written submissions were drafted as presented to the committee.
- 7 The committee finds that the written submissions of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner provided to the committee June 29, 2001, were at best inconsistent on this point and at worst inaccurate.
- 8 However, the question of whether the submissions were inaccurate is not the crux of this matter, Mr. Speaker. Rather, the question is whether such submissions were intentionally misrepresentative.
- 9 The committee finds that there was no definitive evidence that the misrepresentations by the Conflict of Interest Commissioner were intentional or calculated to mislead the committee. The Conflict of Interest Commissioner did take steps to try and assist her own lack of clear recollection of these facts.
- 10 The committee does wish to state that given the absence of a clear recollection of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner on this important aspect, she would have shown better judgment to word her written submissions in a less strident and definite fashion. Such wording did not, in the view of the committee, advance the position of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, nor did it reflect positively on her office which requires a high degree of professionalism, detachment and objectivity. Her choice of words did not in any way reflect her own uncertain recollection of the circumstances in question.
- 11 Similarly, the Minister ought to have exercised a high degree of caution before alleging inappropriate motives on the part of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner. The fact that the evidence supporting this allegation arose from a surreptitious tape recording speaks poorly of the Minister and reflects adversely on this government as a whole.
Brendan Bell on Part IvWhether Inaccurate Submissions Were Made To The Special Committee By The Conflict Of Interest Commissioner
In the Legislative Assembly on October 23rd, 2001. See this statement in context.
Part IvWhether Inaccurate Submissions Were Made To The Special Committee By The Conflict Of Interest Commissioner
Item 11: Reports Of Standing And Special Committees
October 22nd, 2001
Page 350
Brendan Bell Yellowknife South
See context to find out what was said next.