There is an ambiguity.  That ambiguity creates opportunity to follow the letter of the law while getting around the intent of an ethics objective.  AKA - a loophole.  And this existence of a 'loophole' is why the ethics commissioner flagged the 'loophole' in 2013 - as noted by CTV.   The whole point of the ethics screen is to avoid situations where a minister has significant say/decision/influence over government decisions that could impact the value of his or her holdings.