Misrepresentation of Obligations

"I do not agree that allowing himself to be referred to as a Member of Parliament, on its own, constitutes using his position as a Member to influence the decisions of others to engage him as a paid speaker.
"There is no information before me to suggest that Mr. Trudeau was performing parliamentary duties and functions when he spoke at these events or that he acted in any way to further his private interests as a paid speaker when performing those duties and functions."
Mary Dawson, federal ethics commissioner

Beyond the puzzlement that many corporations, academic institutions and professional groups may see great benefit to themselves and their members by listening to the social value messages and experience epiphanies of Justin Trudeau and are willing to part with substantial sums of their treasury to engage him to address them as a featured speaker, Ms. Dawson's conclusion is a strange one.

Justin Trudeau, who pulled in extraordinarily tidy profits from addressing private groups as an inspirational speaker in high demand on the speaking circuit, might have considered leaving that phase of his life behind him when he was sworn in to Parliament as a duly elected lawmaker, a representative Member of Parliament for whom that position should be seen as a full-time one. Conflict-of interest-complications do not benefit his political position.

If he is asked as a parliamentarian to speak at public, social or private events, and he considers doing just that, he has already been paid through his generous parliamentary salary. If his argument is, as is Ms. Dawson's, that he is acting as a private individual in accepting speaking engagements and the lofty fees that accompany them, it is difficult to see how he can separate his status as an elected MP from his life as an 'individual'.

As an elected Member of Parliament, where he turns up, whether at charitable events or corporate meetings, he is there as an MP first and foremost. The very unconcern that members of Parliament, whether in the Senate or the House of Commons may have their full-time elected positions augmented by private positions is wrong-headed.

Members of the Senate often busy themselves moonlighting as lobbyists, presenting arguments to the very government they represent on behalf of clients. It is unethical to butter both sides of one's toast, and difficult to handle, much less logically explain as morally justifiable.

It is wrong for Justin Trudeau to embellish his career and double-dip in representing himself as a private citizen for the purpose of speech-giving and remuneration while a member of Parliament and it is wrong for a Senator to sit in a Minister of the Crown's office, arguing a position in favour of a contract to be awarded a corporate interest on whose board of directors he may sit.