Government Operations Committee on Jan. 18th, 2024

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

I don't really believe you, but in any event, it sure looks that way.

Can you provide some other explanation as to why immediately after they came to this committee they said they were threatened by other public servants and that nothing was done on that? They said that you and others had lied to this committee, and then you're the one who gets to decide whether or not the department covers their legal fees, and you, perhaps unsurprisingly, make the decision to pull their legal fees.

Doesn't that look like you made a decision to punish people who criticized you at a parliamentary committee?

[Erin O'Gorman]

I approved their legal fees for their first appearance. I received no requests. I have no—

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

Yes, you approved their legal fees before they appeared and they're coming back to this committee.

[Erin O'Gorman]

Can I just get back to my response?

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

I'll give it to you in a moment.

They came to this committee. They were supported with their legal fees before they appeared, but after you heard what they said, you pulled their support. The next time they come before this committee, they will not have the support for their legal fees as a result of the decision you made, because now you know what they're going to say. Is that not the case now?

[Erin O'Gorman]

No. They have not asked for legal support for their appearance and they have been encouraged to make that request so that I can render an answer for that. They have not asked for legal fees for their appearance before this committee coming up.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

We're going now back to Mr. Bains, please.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I believe I'm ceding my time to Ms. Atwin.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you.

We've talked a lot and we've kind of gone in circles a little bit on some of these questions today.

I really want to thank our witnesses for your patience, for your tenacity. It hasn't been easy.

I also would like to caution some of our colleagues on the committee for some of the harshness of their words and insinuations. We really need to be careful about how we conduct ourselves, and we need to treat our witnesses with respect, because they've given their time to come here today.

Again, I think each of us wants to get to the bottom of this. I think that's the point of what we're trying to do, and I think it can be done in a manner that's becoming of parliamentarians.

In saying that, Ms. O'Gorman, I asked Mr. Ossowski if he would have done anything different during that experience. You're here in the seat now. You're in this important role. You've already initiated some key changes around procurement moving forward, which I think is great. Are there any other lessons that you can take away from this?

[Erin O'Gorman]

I think every day the people of CBSA are doing outstanding work.

I'm very concerned about the public nature of this investigation. I ask myself whether anything could have been done.

It was duly provided to the professional standards people, who have undertaken an investigation. I've assured myself that the process is consistent with any investigations they would undertake in the CBSA; I need the people of the agency to have confidence in these processes. That is my absolute preoccupation.

We have discussions about accountability, about values and ethics. The people of the CBSA are doing excellent work, and it's an organization of accountability. People in the CBSA—frontline officers—take decisions every day, and they have those decisions tested in court. It's an organization that understands accountability.

I'm trying to get to the bottom of what happened. I'm impatient to do so, and I regret that the people involved have to have the added stress of the public aspect of this. I look forward to a final investigation and, as I've said, I will take any additional actions that support any of the findings of that.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you.

Do you as a witness, as someone appearing before a parliamentary committee like this, have any kind of general comments? How has your experience been?

[Erin O'Gorman]

It's difficult to be accused of lying in a general sense. As I've said, I've provided truthful testimony. I have provided and continue to provide the materials that were requested, and I stand ready to continue answering questions.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you.

Mr. Ossowski, now that you are again kind of on the other side of things, I think about what lessons you would really like us to learn. I was going to ask this question, but as far as recommendations moving forward go, we have a couple of reports we're looking forward to. We have the Auditor General's report. We're to look into procurement processes more broadly as far as the ombudsman's report goes. I'm wondering what the main takeaway for us is. What do you want us to have taken from these few months of discussions? What can we as committee members and as parliamentarians do better?

[John Ossowski]

That's a good question. The only thing I would offer to the point of my colleague Erin is that these processes take time. The committee is hungry for all kinds of answers and information, and I totally understand that, but I think there's an appropriate balance to be struck in terms of ensuring a fair process for all of the people involved. I think some thought could be given to that in terms of the demands for information versus the due process that needs to unfold.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you.

Ms. O'Gorman, you alluded to the idea that we need to have faith in disciplinary processes as well. Each of us needs to be assured that if there's wrongdoing, you will have to meet the decision and you'll have to feel the repercussions of that. I have faith that's going to happen and I'm just wondering if you have faith that will happen as well.

[Erin O'Gorman]

That will happen.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Great.

Those are all my questions.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

You're just on time.

Thanks very much.

Ms. Vignola, go ahead for the final two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First I want to complete the comment I wanted to make earlier.

When we establish as a language requirement that it's mandatory to be anglophone and that bilingualism is optional, we send French‑Canadian or Quebec experts, who are usually bilingual, the message that, no matter how good they are in both languages, it will probably never be enough.

Canada is willing to do without a potentially world‑class expert in any subject. Indeed, this requirement to speak English is common, not just in IT; I've seen it everywhere. So Canada is prepared to do without an expert because, according to the government, the expert doesn't speak the “right language”. That's how it's repeatedly interpreted, not just in IT, but elsewhere too.

We have to be sensitive to that, because experts don't just speak one language. There are Spanish or Japanese experts who don't speak English and who still do high‑level IT work. I just wanted to make that comment.

That said, is it usual to see the same teams working with the same suppliers, as we see in the case of Botler AI and ArriveCAN? Is that typical, given the nature of these contracts?

[Erin O'Gorman]

I'm not sure I'm in a position to answer definitively. It's a matter of perception. Entrepreneurs—

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

Okay. Thank you.

As for lawyers, since Mr. Utano and Mr. MacDonald no longer work for the Canada Border Services Agency, but for two other organizations, why do you still have to give authorization or not, and not their current supervisors?

[Erin O'Gorman]

It's because it involves activities that took place while they were at the agency.

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

Is it possible that the lawyers for these people sent legal opinions to other witnesses to tell them to keep quiet or to withdraw their statements without your being informed?

[Erin O'Gorman]

If it happened, I wasn't informed.

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

Thank you.