Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss my responsibilities as chief of staff to the Prime Minister and, more importantly, as the administrator of the verification mechanism agreed to between the Prime Minister and the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner.
Last April, Canadians elected Prime Minister Carney in a moment of economic volatility, geopolitical realignment and growing pressure on democratic institutions. Canadians chose Mark Carney as Prime Minister because of his deep experience in both the public and private sectors. In fact, they did not elect him in spite of his vast global private sector experience but precisely because of it. Canadians understood that if we are to build a stronger, more resilient economy—one worthy of being the strongest in the G7—this experience is not optional. It is essential.
A key condition for this government's success is public trust. At the heart of that trust are the high ethical standards the Prime Minister set for himself and for everyone who works with him in his office and across government. Part of protecting that trust is ensuring that the ethics screen, agreed upon by the Prime Minister and the Ethics Commissioner, is implemented, always erring on the side of caution. An important part of my role as an administrator of the screen is precisely to ensure that the Prime Minister is not put in a situation of conflict of interest.
As you know, the conflict of interest screen is a compliance measure developed under the direction of the Ethics Commissioner, in accordance with the requirements of the Conflict of Interest Act. The fundamental purpose of the screen is to prevent conflicts of interest. It serves as a mechanism to identify, report and redirect issues that fall into the categories established by the Ethics Commissioner. It is an administrative and procedural mechanism based on the principles of transparency and integrity set out in the act.
Conflict of interest screens are frequently used in legal and commercial settings, and they are also an effective way to manage potential conflicts for individuals within the government.
In recognizing the reasonableness of the application of ethical screens in government, the Federal Court of Appeal confirmed:
This practice of publicly identifying the potential conflicts of interest of each public office holder before any problematic situation has occurred strikes me as an eminently reasonable way to ensure the furtherance of the Act's purpose
The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner determined that a blind trust combined with a conflict of interest screen is the appropriate measure for Prime Minister Carney. When appearing before you, the Ethics Commissioner confirmed that the Prime Minister divested himself of all his interest in a blind trust.
The Ethics Commissioner further added:
to avoid a situation where he would make a decision knowing that it would increase the value of one of the companies he divested...we set up this screen.
It is in this context that the Prime Minister and the commissioner agreed to a screen as a preventive and appropriate measure of compliance. The Clerk of the Privy Council and I, as chief of staff to the Prime Minister, are the administrators of the screen.
On this issue, I want to refer you to what the commissioner said to this committee in response to a question asked by Mr. Cooper.
The commissioner said:
Let's be practical. Anything that goes to the Prime Minister for a decision goes through either one of these men or both. They are in effect the keyholders of what gets on his desk and what he deals with. They are the logical ones to make sure he does not get involved in these things.
It is important to underline that my role is first and foremost about ensuring that conflicts are prevented. The administration of the screen is a responsibility I approach with utmost seriousness.
In practice, the Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister's Office are in constant communication. Although some meetings or events can be planned without the direct participation of the Privy Council, no official policy or government decision can be adopted without the participation of the public service and the political arm.
The screen is administered on a daily basis by the Privy Council Office. When a department or agency prepares a note, a policy proposal, an update or any other document for the Prime Minister, that document is first assessed using the assessment tool developed by the Privy Council with the assistance of the Ethics Commissioner. That tool enables us to determine whether the screen may apply.
Privy Council governance officials then perform due diligence, review the analysis and ensure that all relevant information has been considered. Their recommendation is submitted to the Clerk of the Privy Council for review and approval. Once the clerk has confirmed his position, his office sends it to me for review and agreement. When both administrators agree, the decision is referred to the Privy Council governance officials to continue implementation.
Today, all the recommendations from the public service have been jointly confirmed by the Clerk and me.
For negative determinations, where the screen does not apply, no further action is required by departments or agencies. For positive determinations, departments must clearly identify the material as subject to the screen. These documents are not shown to or discussed with the Prime Minister. The screen is applied on a precautionary basis. As soon as the analysis indicates there may be a triggering factor, access is restricted pending the final determination of the administrators.
I would like to point out that the system currently in place to prevent the Prime Minister from being in a conflict of interest is one of the most comprehensive and rigorous I have seen in my career. It is proactive and preventive and, above all, it is extremely rigorous because of the high level of awareness within the government.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I look forward to questions.
