Article content continued

“I don’t know if the authors of the act intended this, but there’s a tension there, the commissioner giving advice and later needing to determine whether that advice was good enough,” he said.

Advocacy group Democracy Watch has suggested Dawson is in a conflict of interest herself, and should step back from any further investigations. Her term has been extended several times by the Liberal government, making it impossible for her to investigate him or his cabinet without bias, the group argues.

The Opposition Conservatives say it doesn’t matter what role Dawson could or should have played.

“She didn’t recommend against a blind trust, just said it was his choice and he chose,” said Tory finance critic Pierre Poilievre. “He knows that ministers are banned from owning stocks. How could he then think it was appropriate for him to hold those stocks in a numbered company?”

When Morneau was elected in 2015, he should have immediately sold his shares or put them in a blind trust, even if Dawson said it wasn’t necessary.

Only that, the Tories say, would have been in keeping with the prime minister’s own edict — spelled out in mandate letters to his ministers — that cabinet members go beyond simply acting within the law when it comes to ensuring public trust.

As for Dawson herself, the answer seems to be that her hands are somewhat tied.

“The commissioner has not been given a mandate to do detailed audits as to whether public office holders and members of Parliament are complying with every provision of the act and the code. This would be a huge undertaking,” spokeswoman Jocelyne Brisebois said in an email.

The way the law is written, it depends on MPs being honest, Brisebois said.

“Be assured that the commissioner would look into any apparent failure to recuse by any of the more than 2,000 public office holders that comes to her attention.”