Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 20th, 2025

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

With time for a response, I assure you.

My question at the end of my last intervention, was with respect to improving on the act as it exists now, improving the confidence that Canadians are able to have and simplifying it, if I may, by having prime ministers sell all of their controlled assets before they take any decisions.

The challenge that we see in this specific instance is that there are things that the trustee cannot trade away, like the carried interest that the Prime Minister is entitled to based on the performance of some of the Brookfield assets that were placed in the blind trust. Even if you set aside what the Ethics Commissioner said—that oftentimes there is very little churn in these trusts and that some things will simply be managed but not traded—do you think that...?

I understand that you said that you like the system and believe that the current system is effective. I appreciate that.

Do you think it would be an improvement on the current system to have prime ministers sell their controlled assets before they take decisions?

[Marc-André Blanchard]

Actually, I believe that, at the moment, this requirement that they divest from their assets and put them into a blind trust is a divestiture in itself. The Prime Minister has no knowledge of what has happened. At this time, he has no knowledge of what has happened to the assets that he divested himself from and put in the blind trust.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

We have just about 30 seconds left.

There are things that are in the trust or future payments that the Prime Minister is likely entitled to—this carried interest that I mentioned, for example—so that benefit still exists, and that isn't resolved by the blind trust.

Again, my question is this: Wouldn't this be an improvement upon the system that we have?

[Marc-André Blanchard]

In that context, first, I'm not aware of what's in the blind trust. Even going off the premise of your question, we find ourselves in a situation where the Prime Minister has in fact divested himself from his assets. His assets were put in a blind trust. That system is recognized around the world as a good system for managing these kinds of situations that involve elected officials and ensuring that they meet their ethical and conflict-of-interest obligations.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands—Rideau Lakes, ON]

Thank you for your response.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Ms. Church, you have two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Blanchard, one of the purposes of the act that is explicitly outlined is to encourage experienced and competent persons to seek and accept public office and to facilitate interchange between the private and public sector. It's in the very heart, the very purpose of the Conflict of Interest Act and the regime.

We heard from Mr. Sabia yesterday, too, that this is important from his perspective, not only for MPs and elected officials, but also for recruiting to non-partisan public service roles as well, at the highest levels.

In your vast experience across the private and now public sector, do you see this as an important purpose of the act? How does it contribute to being able to encourage people from diverse backgrounds and from private sector backgrounds to step up and undertake public service?

[Marc-André Blanchard]

I think it's a very good question.

If I may, being someone who believes that the public service is the highest form of service we can do—and I deeply believe that—I congratulate and thank every member around the table for doing this. It's a tough job. It's demanding, but it's so important, and I think it's going to become more important.

The situation we're going through at the moment is historical and it's unprecedented, like the Clerk said yesterday, since World War II, but important decisions need to be made. More and more, decisions involve the necessity to have the public service and the public sector work with the private sector and all stakeholders to make sure we can make things happen and we can deliver.

The biggest issue to me, in my mind, for our institutions is our ability to deliver what the citizens need in this environment. It's about delivering services to citizens. The biggest threat to our institutions is the perceived inability to deliver for citizens. This is where, whatever you conclude, Mr. Chair, in the work of this committee, I think you have to make sure we encourage the interchangeability and that actually happens more rather than less.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Blanchard.

Thank you, Ms. Church.

Mr. Blanchard, on behalf of the committee, I want to say thank you for your time today. I know we had to work out the schedule, but we did.

I also want to thank the clerk as well. I know, Nancy, that putting this meeting together was difficult. I appreciate all the effort you did to get the technicians and everyone in place.

I have no other business.

This meeting is adjourned.