This whole ridiculous controversy is being framed incorrectly.
The label ‘conflict of interest’ gets thrown around much too freely these days.
Properly understood, a conflict of interest requiring disclosure and consent arises where a person in a position of trust has ... https://twitter.com/dfisman/status/1354873830578204676

an interest which conflicts with their duty.
An expert witness before a tribunal (as one understands Dr. Fisman was before the labour board) owes their duty of candour and objectivity to the *tribunal* and *not* to the litigant tendering their evidence (here the teachers union).

Sure, expert witnesses get paid, but they’re sworn to fulfill their duty to the tribunal despite that. Any expert who becomes an advocate for the client is instantly discredited. As is any expert who tailors their opinions to suit different clients.

So here, Dr. Fisman was duty-bound to give candid and objective opinions on school safety both to the labour board and to the province’s “table of experts”. Has anyone shown that he didn’t?
He wasn’t in a conflict between interest and duty at all.

The conflict of interest disclosure form was used by him, to be sure, but actually out of an over-abundance of caution. The point is he did nothing wrong and had no real conflict.
@DFisman @fordnation #onpoli