Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 19th, 2025

[Michael Sabia]

No, that would never be done by an external organization.

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

Never?

[Michael Sabia]

Never. However, from time to time, I have received guidance from a board of directors. I'm answering you based on my experience, which is limited; in my own experience, no external organization has ever been used.

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

Your experience is not limited, after all. You have good experience in the field.

How many hours do you spend per week analyzing and ensuring that there's no conflict, knowing that they have 103 companies, one of which is Brookfield, and it has trillions of dollars all over the place? Given your role, can you give us an idea of how long it takes to ensure that the Prime Minister doesn't make any missteps?

[Michael Sabia]

Are you asking for me, personally, or for the entire team?

[Gabriel Hardy, Conservative, Montmorency—Charlevoix, QC]

I'll let you answer for both.

[Michael Sabia]

We have an entire team at the Privy Council Office and, as I said, we have teams across the Canadian government. So, overall, I can't give you any figures. However, we have a team at the Privy Council Office that is essentially dedicated to this task; most people on the team don't do it full time, but they almost do.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Sabia.

Ms. Church, go ahead, please. You have five minutes.

[Leslie Church, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Sabia, to pick up on the line of thinking of my colleague opposite, I think members have been focused on this question of reporting responsibility.

What I think is very interesting about what you've brought forward to the committee today is the notion that this is actually less about individuals and more about a process. Were you to fall out of favour with the Prime Minister and he were to replace the clerk, there would be a new clerk on whose shoulders this responsibility would fall.

Actually, it's the process that sustains the foundation of this conflict of interest regime across government. Is that a fair representation?

[Michael Sabia]

That is a completely fair depiction of how this works.

It shouldn't be, to function well, based on an individual. In fact, my responsibility is to ensure there is a process rooted in the breadth of the public service that's in place. When I think about my role as an administrator of this screen, my interpretation of that is to create a rigorous process and make sure it functions well, so that this is not rooted in the office of the clerk: It is rooted in the breadth of the public service.

On the breadth of the public service, we in the public service provide non-partisan and, I'm happy to say, fearless advice, from time to time, to the political leadership of the government, and that's as it should be, because that's our job. The reason it's important that this be rooted across the elements of the public service is to ensure that fearless advice, that non-partisan advice, that rises to the level, in some instances, of the Prime Minister. That's how you get this screen to function properly.

It's not based on my judgment as an individual. It's based on a process's judgment. It's much deeper than what any individual can bring to it.

[Leslie Church, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

To that effect, maybe, at the beginning of this meeting today, you tabled a 10-page document, the “Assessment Tool on the Application of the Prime Minister's Conflict of Interest Screen”, which, as I think you mentioned, is distributed across the public service.

Within this, it sets out an analytical framework for how to investigate, for how to decide on the different matters that may be coming forward in the Prime Minister's Office. I would almost hand it to you to say, is there anything in the document here that you would point us to, maybe to address some of the concerns you've heard about what constitutes a “general application” or a “broad class”?

[Michael Sabia]

Honestly, I think this document speaks for itself with respect to the care with which these issues of a conflict of interest screen are being managed. As you'll notice, this is pretty highly detailed. It provides a sequence of decisions that individuals need to take. This is not just, “Oh, gee, gosh, you've got something going on there in real estate?” It's not that.

It's a structured list of, “Ask yourself this question first, and if yes, do this, and if no, do the other.” I think a fair-minded person reading this document would read it and go, “This is a serious effort to structure a comprehensive process across the public service that assures this screen functions well and, I think, functions efficiently.”

The reason I wanted to table the document—and, Ms. Church, thank you for raising it—is that I think it speaks to that, and I think your committee should have the benefit of seeing how it is that we are actually going about this work, because the almost paint-by-numbers approach here—do A, do B, do C, do D—speaks to how serious and careful we are being in the operation of this screen. We, as public servants, understand this question about the importance of the confidence of Canadians, and especially—if you can just give me a minute on this—now in the country's history.

This is a particular moment. The only reason I'm in this chair is that the Prime Minister asked me to take on this job, and I took it because Canada is at a particular moment, and this is a moment in which Canadians need to have confidence in their government. This is about providing that kind of confidence to Canadians.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Sabia.

Mr. Cooper, you have five minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

Mr. Sabia, I want to make I sure I understood your answer to a question posed by Mr. Majumdar, to which you, as I understood you, said that the ethical standards that apply within the Government of Canada and specifically to this Prime Minister are more robust than the standards that apply in the case of the institutional investment world. Did I get that right?

[Michael Sabia]

I would say that they're as good or better.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

They're as good or better.

I want to ask you a follow-up to a question that Mr. Hardy asked you, to which you didn't give a direct answer. It's very straightforward.

Where in the institutional world is there a situation, an example, in which a subordinate screens their direct boss for conflicts of interest? Just give me an example, please.

[Michael Sabia]

I think you mis-characterize the relationship between, for instance, in this case, the head of the public service and the Prime Minister. The public service in Canada—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

Mr. Sabia, you're a subordinate of the Prime Minister. You serve at his pleasure. He brought you in from the outside. You were not within the civil service. You were, effectively, a political appointment.

[Michael Sabia]

Well, wait a second. I do not regard myself as a political appointment.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

You serve at the Prime Minister's pleasure.

[Michael Sabia]

You're entitled to your own conclusions, Mr. Cooper.

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

You just said before I opened my round that you're serving because Mr. Carney asked you to. Mr. Carney asked you, and he could fire you, couldn't he?

[Michael Sabia]

I look forward to whenever that happens.

Mr. Cooper, with respect—

[Michael Cooper, Conservative, St. Albert—Sturgeon River, AB]

You made an assertion that the ethical standard is higher—

[Leslie Church, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

I have a point of order.