Former Sask Party MLA Gary Grewal defends conduct, disagrees with commissioners report

Grewal defends conduct, criticizes report WATCH: Former Sask Party MLA is defending himself after a decision by the conflict of interest commissioner. Wayne Mantyka reports.

Former Saskatchewan Party MLA Gary Grewal is defending his conduct and disagreeing with a recent report from the Conflict of Interest Commissioner (COIC) – which found he broke rules that prohibit MLAs from being involved with government contracts.

Grewal sent an extended statement to CTV News on Wednesday – outlining his involvement in both the Sunrise Motel and the Thriftlodge calling the COIC’s decision “unfair.”

“I continue to firmly maintain my position that a social worker arranging a room for a vulnerable citizen at a motel does not constitute a ‘government contract’ and believe the Commissioner’s ruling completely misinterprets the nature of these transactions, which are essentially vouchers issued to individuals in need of temporary shelter,” the statement read.

Grewal is listed as the owner of the Sunrise Motel which received $220,474 while hosting social service clients from 2022-2023.

His involvement in the Thriftlodge was in the form of lending $100,000 to the establishment. The Thriftlodge received $139,478 from April 2023 to September 2024.

The COIC found that Grewal failed to divest himself from the Thriftlodge as a lender. He says he received no prior direction from the COIC to call in the loan and reiterated that he held no ownership stake in the motel.

Premier Scott Moe said earlier in the week that he accepted the commissioner’s findings.

The Saskatchewan NDP are calling for tighter conflict of interest rules for MLAs.

“We make a good income. We should be focused on working for the people of Saskatchewan not on these side hustles,” NDP candidate Meara Conway told reporters Wednesday.

The report outlines penalties that MLAs can face if found to be in conflict of interest – they include fines and reprimands.

Grewal has retired from politics. The NDP have vowed to pursue the policy changes in the legislature following the election.

Grewal’s full statement can be read below:

“I continue to firmly maintain my position that a social worker arranging a room for a vulnerable citizen at a motel does not constitute a “government contract” and believe the Commissioner’s ruling completely misinterprets the nature of these transactions, which are essentially vouchers issued to individuals in need of temporary shelter.

Notwithstanding my sincere belief, once the Commissioner shared his opinion on December 15, 2023, as a result of my own request for his opinion, I directed the Sunrise Motel to no longer accept new guests effective March 15, 2024 which is within the permitted 90 day timeline. If I am to be criticized for not wanting to evict then existing social service guests with no other place to go, which I advised the Commissioner of without objection (the last guest stayed until March 25, 2024), I have no qualms about that decision.

However, I consulted the Conflict of Interest Commissioner regarding my role as a bare creditor of the Thriftlodge Motel and clarified that I simply lent funds to the owner of Thriftlodge 13 years ago and have been receiving interest only payments since that time. I hold no shares, nor do I own any part of the Thriftlodge. Even if I wanted to, I have no authority or influence over its management, pricing, or policies. The Commissioner was specifically aware of this and at no point did he ever suggest to myself or my legal counsel that I needed to call the loan, forgive the loan, or take any other action.

In his opinion he states, “while I accept that taking such steps would be difficult (if not impossible) given Mr. Grewal is not involved in the operations of Thriftlodge Motel, it was thus incumbent on Mr. Grewal to divest himself in that motel.

Had he provided the opinion he now has, I would have explored the options within that same 90-day time frame. He, himself stated it was near impossible for me to do anything differently. Given that there was no communication from the Commissioner advising me of the conflict, no direction from the Commissioner that that I needed to act, and I was not seeking re-election, I had no reason to call the loan or take any other action.

I think it is very unfair for the Commissioner to state, as he did in his ruling, that I should have somehow surmised that he considered the same reasoning applied when he could have simply provided such an opinion to myself or my legal counsel, as he did with the Sunrise Motel.”

He did not offer any opinion, verbal or otherwise, suggesting my 13-year-old loan to a community member with terms and interest payments that were wholly unchanged throughout would constitute a breach of my duties as an MLA until Monday of this week, and I think that is very unfair to me.”