Government Operations Committee on May 1st, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mrs. Block, go ahead, please.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I think the good news out of this debate, or what is fortunate, is that Canadians are watching what is happening in parliamentary committees more than ever before, and they are watching what's happening in this committee, because they understand the very important work we are doing in scrutinizing the spending of their taxpayer dollars.

On that note, I would like to move the motion that I put on notice I believe a week ago or a little more than that. It reads:

Given that a Global Affairs Canada investigation into government contracts found a failure rate of 26% and the report found that “the signed contract was not provided” and “one contract was approved 'by an individual who benefited from the transaction'”, the committee call the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Honourable Mélanie Joly, to appear for a two-hour meeting and the deputy minister and officials responsible for the report to appear for a two-hour meeting.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you.

I have a speaking list with Mr. Genuis and Mrs. Kusie. Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank Mrs. Block for putting forward this important motion.

We have seen across this NDP-Liberal government so many examples of outrageous contracting irregularities. Taxpayers are now coming to see the pattern through which their money is wasted through broken, unfair, unreasonable contracting processes that reward well-connected NDP-Liberal insiders and do not deliver value for money.

We have seen this pattern over and over again. This committee has done extensive work on the arrive scam scandal, but we are now seeing that the arrive scam scandal is the tip of the iceberg. It's part of a larger pattern, which is that we have a government that is focused on paying and rewarding well-connected NDP-Liberal insiders instead of delivering efficient, effective results for Canadians. There is so much waste. There is so much in the way of savings to be realized and value to be created by improving the system.

Mr. Chair, it's not lost on me and, I think, on many Canadians that many of the people who are at the centre of sketchy procurement and contracting questions also happen to be those who are being considered or who want to be considered for future Liberal leadership.

We have Minister Anita Anand, the President of the Treasury Board, and all the problems we have seen there. We have the public safety minister responsible for the CBSA where the arrive scam scandal is happening now being rumoured...and now Minister Joly with the contracting problems at Global Affairs.

I would say that these ministers responsible for outrageous procurement problems within their departments who are looking for a promotion in their role should come before the committee and provide an explanation for their management of their current roles and the procurement problems we have seen.

It's a common-sense motion, giving Minister Joly an opportunity to be accountable and to provide a report to this committee on what has happened. I hope that members will see the obvious logic of supporting this motion that the minister should appear. I will say, Mr. Chair, that hopefully it's not on the 29th as well. You never know with the government. However, if the only time she will come is from 8:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. on the 29th, we will take it. Ministers need to provide responses.

I will say, as well, that this committee has developed, I think, over the months we have been working on this issue, a particular experience and knowledge as it relates to government procurement problems, best practices and how far this current government is missing the mark when it comes to best practices for procurement. I think we are ready and well positioned to do this.

As the various leadership candidates try to position themselves for being the future leader of the Liberal Party, they should be willing to, in their current roles, come before committee and provide answers.

I will say, as well, that this committee has rightly asserted the prerogatives of parliamentary committees when it comes to getting answers from government contractors. Kristian Firth was supposed to appear. He refused to appear. He refused summons. Eventually, he appeared before this committee, but he didn't answer key questions. As a result of that, we made a report to the House, and he was summoned to appear before the House.

It would seem to me that after we have established that we are committed to ensuring that the private citizens who are involved in sketchy government contracting provide answers, we should be equally insistent and equally willing to use the tools that are available to us to assert also that ministers of the Crown who are elected and charged by the executive with running departments and being accountable for them provide answers for what happens in their departments.

If we're going to go all the way to say that Kristian Firth, Darren Anthony and other such people have to provide responses to committees, then we should say the same thing about ministers of the Crown and should not have a dynamic in which cover is provided for ministers not being accountable for those activities.

I hope that we see consistency from this committee and that we expect the same accountability of ministers as we have asked for from private citizens involved in contracting. I look forward to seeing where members land on that.

Chair, I'll wrap up my remarks on that point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, sir.

Mrs. Kusie.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

First of all, I would like to thank the leader of the official opposition for the birthday card he gave me last week. Those well wishes were very well received. I'm grateful for that.

I want to follow up on my colleagues' comments.

I think this motion follows a theme we've had in this committee, and that is to search for accountability, not only from departments, but also, fundamentally, from ministers. It would have been my desire to have seen the ministers of all departments that had contracts with GC Strategies show up at this committee, but unfortunately, we didn't have that opportunity.

Given this report, specifically at Global Affairs Canada it behooves us to call in the minister to defend the procurement within this department. I would encourage all departments to conduct the same exercise within their respective departments, to really look at what is going on in their departments and to look at how money is being spent. That is fundamentally what this committee is about: ensuring that the funds that were granted, out of trust, by the Canadian people were well spent by departments that are overseen by ministers. To me, the appearance of the minister would absolutely be in alignment with the mandate of this committee and the oversight for which this committee has the responsibility.

My second point comes from my personal experience as a management consular officer at Foreign Affairs Canada, which was then DFAIT, which was then DFATD and which is now Global Affairs Canada. The audit team at Global Affairs Canada is the best there is. They go into missions and departments, and they leave no stone unturned, in terms of their evaluation. I can truly say that their work is invaluable, and I give them thanks and credit for shining this light on the department and for having the courage to bring this information forward.

Really, the job of a bureaucrat, and I was proudly one for close to a decade and a half, is not only to do the work of the Canadian people but also to speak truth to power. I feel that, in bringing this forward, this brave group of public servants at Global Affairs Canada is bringing truth to power. I was also very proud to be the interim director of a sister group of this audit group during my time at Global Affairs Canada.

I am in strong support of the quality and the objective of this work and I give thanks for it. I would like the minister to be held to account for what this outstanding group uncovered.

My final comment is that certainly the ongoing role of the Minister of Foreign Affairs has been one of relations external to Canada, which, my colleagues would agree with me, I believe, we have seen to be reactive. Those relations have not been consistent. They have not come from a place of consistent values, as we saw with the previous government, the Harper government. I'm very excited about the return to a values-based foreign affairs platform in a future Poilievre government.

However, what the minister did make as her mandate was the revitalization of Global Affairs Canada, and with that, supposedly, a new hope that the members of the Canadian foreign service and the public servants at Global Affairs Canada could have faith in the work their department is doing, yet this audit team uncovered cracks, faults and areas that need to be improved upon.

Global Affairs Canada serves as the emissary of Canada to the world and, therefore, serves as a foundation of values for Canada. One of the fundamental values of Canada under a Poilievre government would be value for money, yet this procurement report did not show that this was so and did not show that this work was always conducted in an ethical manner. If this is being conducted in this manner at the very heart of our foreign policy, that's a problem.

Canadians deserve answers from the chief diplomat—from the Minister of Foreign Affairs. We need to bring her in here to be held to account for what this incredible audit team uncovered. I think it's very important as it serves as a beacon not only within the government itself currently—to show that they are willing to account for their work and improve upon it—but at the very foundation of our values here in Canada.

Global Affairs Canada is supposed to act as a guiding light for the rest of Canada. In this instance, that was not the case. We need the Minister of Foreign Affairs here to account for that

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Jowhari, go ahead, please.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's great to hear that we acknowledge the work of the internal audit team at GAC. I echo that statement, but I think the rest of it was political.

The good thing is that the internal team did a great job and it was proactively and publicly released. This was an internal audit focused on low-dollar-value items. The ministers—plural—did not have any involvement in approving the low-dollar-value items. However, having an opportunity to ask questions and gain an understanding of what those low-dollar-value items were was a great idea, as was having an opportunity to talk to those who authorized them.

By the way, there are three ministers as part of GAC, and we are not sure why—aside from the political reason—Minister Joly has been highlighted here. There is the Minister of International Development, the Minister of International Trade as well as the Minister of Foreign Affairs. All three ministers are part of GAC, so selecting one minister as opposed to the others for an area for which they have no signing authority or were not engaged in signing authority is questionable.

We would gladly invite the officials to come and give us an understanding and a breakdown of these. They are publicly released so it would be a good opportunity for us to look at what types of contracts there were, what the purpose was and how many of the low-dollar-value contracts were under one theme.

After that, if we see any trend that points to a specific ministry, then we would be open to having senior officials come. If that brings to light any type of ministerial involvement, then we'd be glad to support a motion to bring the ministers.

Therefore, given the way it's drafted, we will not be supporting this motion—at least I won't be supporting it. I believe the approach that we should take is to first of all commend the internal audit group, as I believe everybody is doing, and get an understanding of the scope of the audit. Since it's publicly shared, there's a great opportunity for us to all look at it and then have the procurement department within GAC come in and explain.

Then, if we needed to, we would be able to move into having officials at the next level and then—although I doubt it—we'd be in a position to look at any ministerial involvement, unless we vote on this and we vote it down—or at least I would vote it down—or we could look into amendments.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Genuis, go ahead, please, and then it will be Mrs. Block.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

This is the typical approach of Liberals to try to bury the necessary accountability. Let's start with establishing what the principle of ministerial responsibility is about.

Ministerial responsibility means that the minister takes responsibility for what happens at their department. If there are problems, those problems may relate to decisions that they were not directly involved in, but nonetheless they are responsible for establishing a culture and protocols through which there is respect for taxpayers' money.

The Liberal member across the way was kind of dismissive regarding these concerns, saying that what we're talking about here are low dollar values. This audit—

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm sorry, Mr. Genuis, but there is a point of order.

Mr. Jowhari, please go ahead.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Just as a clarification to my colleague, I was not dismissing it—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Chair, that's not a point of order, that is editorializing—

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

—I was just highlighting the fact that it was a low dollar value, and I said it is worth it to bring the officials so they can explain. It was not dismissive. Thank you.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

That's not a point of order, Mr. Jowhari. You should reflect on—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Jowhari had the floor.

Mr. Genuis, it's back to you.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

That was not a point of order, and the members across should learn the rules both of contracting and of parliamentary committees.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

We're [Inaudible—Editor] the best.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

As I was saying, the auditor has looked at a random sample of contracts—72—and 26% of them did not comply with the Financial Administration Act. Over a quarter of the contracts that were sampled just didn't comply with the law as it relates to contracting.

This is a massive problem and clearly a systematic problem. If there's a systematic problem in a department and we let ministers repeatedly get away with saying “Oh, well, those decisions are being made by other people”.... The minister is responsible for administering the department, and if there's a systematic problem, the minister needs to take responsibility for that problem, and for taking action to resolve that problem.

The Liberals just don't believe that they're accountable when things go wrong inside the government. We're not talking about a case of one or two bad apples; we're not talking about a junior public servant who, by themselves, independently broke a rule. We're talking about a systematic issue where over a quarter of contracts in the foreign affairs department do not follow the law. That's a situation where leadership is required and where leadership has to take responsibility, and as a parliamentary committee, yes, we should seek responses from those responsible for leading the department.

That said, I am interested in trying to meet Mr. Jowhari in the middle with his proposal. I'd like to move an amendment to the motion to say, “That the committee call the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mélanie Joly, the Minister of International Development and the Minister of Trade to each appear for a two-hour meeting, and the deputy minister responsible for the report to appear for two hours.”

I think it reads fine from there. It is simply to add in the Minister of International Development and the Minister of Trade.

Hopefully that is an acceptable compromise for Mr. Jowhari, and we'll be able to proceed with that accountability.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mrs. Vignola, please go ahead on the amendment.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

I'd like to receive the amendment in writing in order to compare Mrs. Block's and Mr. Genuis' motions.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I think it just adds two ministers, if I'm correct. It adds the ministers of international development and international trade. There was no other wording; it just adds those two ministers to the motion.

Does anyone else wish to speak on the amendment?

Colleagues, I'm just going to suspend for a couple of seconds.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you for your patience, everyone. We are back.

Mr. Genuis, I understand you wish to withdraw your amendment.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

With extreme prejudice.