Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, witnesses.
I understand that PCO is sort of a cog in the wheel of this whole machine of a massive number of government appointments to make things work, so I appreciate what you're saying. However, it's really important that we understand it. I appreciate what MP Desjarlais said about how this is what we want to avoid in the future.
Something that strikes me as a person who has served on both Crown and private boards is that the best way to avoid what has happened in SDTC's case is to not appoint people with conflicts of interest. That's the starting point. It doesn't guarantee that in the future they won't abuse it, but appointing people with conflicts of interest seems to be at the root of this problem, because their view, ethically speaking, of what their roles are and how to take advantage of the public purse seems to be different from the views of those who do not have them.
That's obviously a statement, but I'd like to explore this a little more. When Minister Bains appeared before committee, this is what he said, and I think it meshes with the process you've outlined:
After receiving applications for an appointment, a selection panel that included the Privy Council Office [and the PMO], with supports from across the government, was struck. These panels conducted interviews and presented ministers with a short list of candidates.
We've talked a little bit about that, about how many were on that list. He continued:
As part of the process, ministers would speak to the prospective applicants before formally recommending them for an appointment. Finally, the minister would make a recommendation and the GIC would pass it.
For those watching, GIC is the process that goes from the minister to the cabinet for the final approval of the Governor in Council.
He has that right. Is that correct?