Please support democracy

Without your support, Democracy Watch can't win key changes to stop governments and big businesses from abusing their power and hurting you and your family. Please click here to support democracy now

Democracy Watch calls on Ethics Commissioner to launch inquiry into former Conservative Cabinet minister Chuck Strahl’s work as Chair of SIRC since 2012, and with Enbridge and others since 2011 – believes situation violates several rules in federal ethics law

Enbridge lobbied Strahl’s departments in 2010-2011 – Law prohibits him from working with former stakeholders on former issues he addressed, from advising anyone using secret information, and requires him to prevent conflicts of interest

If you want to help win stronger government ethics rules and enforcement, please send your letter calling for key changes now by clicking here


January 17, 2014

OTTAWA – Today, Democracy Watch released the letter it has sent to federal Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson requesting that she launch an inquiry into former Conservative Cabinet minister Chuck Strahl’s activities as the Chair of the Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC) since June 2012, and his work with Enbridge and other clients since he left Cabinet in May 2011.

As the complaint letter details, the federal Conflict of Interest Act (the “Act”) requires public office holders to arrange their private affairs to “prevent” conflicts of interest.  Democracy Watch’s opinion is that Mr. Strahl’s work with Enbridge while being Chair of SIRC while CSIS is investigating opponents of Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway pipeline causes conflicts of interest, it does not prevent them.

The Act also prohibits former Cabinet ministers, for two years after they leave the government, from working for or making representations to any entity across Canada (federal, provincial, territorial or municipal) with which they had significant official dealings during their last year in office.

Enbridge directly lobbied Mr. Strahl on April 29, 2010, and was registered to lobby the two departments he headed during his last year in office.  Democracy Watch’s opinion is that, as a result, Mr. Strahl was prohibited from working with Enbridge until May 18, 2013 (two years after he left office).  Mr. Strahl has confirmed that he has done work for Enbridge since 2011.

The Act also prohibits former Cabinet ministers, staff and appointees from ever giving advice using secret information they learned on the job, and from ever acting for any entity that is involved with any federal government proceeding or negotiation about which they advised the government.

Democracy Watch’s opinion is that given Enbridge was lobbying Mr. Strahl’s departments, and continues to lobby the government, including on the pipeline issue, and given that Mr. Strahl was a Cabinet minister from B.C., Mr. Strahl likely advised the federal government in some way on the pipeline negotiations, and Mr. Strahl must be using secret information he learned as a Cabinet minister, or is learning as Chair of SIRC, when giving advice to Enbridge.

In other words, Democracy Watch’s opinion is that Mr. Strahl is prohibited by the Act from acting as an advisor to Enbridge or any other entity that has an interest in federal government decision-making processes that Mr. Strahl advised the government about or about which Mr. Strahl likely knows confidential information.

“Enbridge’s past lobbying of Chuck Strahl and ongoing lobbying of the federal government, and his past and ongoing work for Enbridge while he is the chair of SIRC, adds up to a situation that Democracy Watch believes violates several rules in the federal conflict of interest law,” said Duff Conacher, Board member of Democracy Watch.

The big question is whether the Ethics Commissioner will take any action given that her spokesperson has already publicly stated that the Commissioner has “no grounds to believe” that Mr. Strahl’s activities and roles violate the Act, and given the Ethics Commissioner’s very weak enforcement attitude, approach and record since she was appointed in July 2007 (See details below and in the letter).

“There is enough clear evidence for Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson to launch an inquiry into Mr. Strahl’s activities, so will she act like a watchdog and investigate or will she continue her weak lapdog enforcement record by failing, as she has more than 80 times in the past six years, to investigate and rule publicly about possible violations of the federal ethics law?” asked Conacher.

Democracy Watch also called on the House Ethics Committee to ensure it strongly recommends more than 30 key changes in its soon-to-be-released report reviewing the federal Conflict of Interest Act, including the most important change of closing loopholes and adding a new rule to make it clear that federal Cabinet ministers, staff and appointees are prohibited from taking part in any discussion or decision-making process when they have an appearance of a conflict of interest (this is the standard that all federal government employees are required to comply with under their ethics code and conflict of interest policy).

 – 30 –


Duff Conacher, Board member of Democracy Watch
Tel: 613-241-5179
Cell: 416-546-3443
Email: [email protected]


Federal Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson’s weak enforcement record

Federal Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson has had a very weak enforcement record since 2007, including letting dozens of Conservatives off the hook for very questionable actions, and making more than 80 secret rulings.  Commissioner Dawson has also already covered up four times for Nigel Wright and could, as she has many times in the past, abandon her investigation into Chuck Strahl secretly without issuing a public ruling (if she even investigates).

Conflict of Interest Act missing key rules and accountability measures

The Conservatives broke a 2006 election promise (one of their many broken accountability promises) to include key ethics rules in the new Conflict of Interest Act prohibiting dishonesty and being in even an appearance of a conflict of interest, as Prime Minister Harper instead put those rules in his Accountability Guide for ministers and other senior officials so he could ignore the rules (as he has since – see the rules in Annex A, Part 1 of the Guide).

Because of section 66 added to the new Act by the Conservatives in 2006, the Ethics Commissioner’s rulings cannot be challenged in court if she has factual or legal errors in her rulings.  There are no mandatory penalties for violating the ethics rules in the Act.  As well, if Prime Minister Harper approves it, Commissioner Dawson’s term in office can be renewed for another seven years in 2014 so she has an incentive to please him.

The House of Commons Access, Privacy and Ethics Committee reviewed the Conflict of Interest Act in 2013, and in its February 2013 submission to the Committee, Democracy Watch strongly recommended 30 key changes to the Act (as well as 14 key changes to related laws) to finally make corruption in federal politics effectively illegal.  The House Committee’s report is expected to be made public in February 2014 after Parliament opens.

Democracy Watch’s Government Ethics Campaign