Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 21st, 2024

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

There will be another opportunity for one of your members.

Ms. Yip, you have the floor for five minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Ms. Poulin, I believe you were not given an opportunity to answer a question earlier.

Can you explain what your role is? I believe you know what your job is.

[Catherine Poulin]

Thank you for the question.

One of my roles is certainly to oversee various processes, starting from due diligence processes up to administrative investigations into the department. It's also to put together a framework of preventative, detective and reactive measures for any information that is brought to our attention that may suggest we have issues in the processes, up to wrongdoing.

We're taking that information. We have multiple teams that are working on that. We're taking this information seriously. We validate first whether the allegation has some other evidence that will support it. When we reach that first step and we think there's enough material to trigger an administrative investigation, we do so.

We have a great team of internal investigators within the departments who are going through all the information they have. Upon completion, they issue a report to confirm or inform if the allegation was proven to be right or if there was nothing to be seen. As soon as we identify some element of criminality, we refer those elements to the RCMP in order for them to decide if they will launch a criminal investigation into the matter.

As was also discussed, upon completion of a thorough analysis that demonstrates that we have been overcharged or overbilled—that there was some element for which we have paid too much—we have the ability to recover the funds from the suppliers, and it's in our regular practice to do so.

It's important for us to take all of that information—the outcome of those reports and the great recommendations that have been made—to make sure that we understand even after that what we can change and improve to make that framework of prevention, detection and reaction even more efficient in order to avoid the repetition of such events.

In a nutshell, that is one of the responsibilities under my area.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Are there any other responsibilities that we should be aware of?

[Catherine Poulin]

Yes. I have many responsibilities. I also have the chief security officer responsibility. It talks about the security of people, information and assets within the government. We also take seriously all information vis-à-vis that. Another area of responsibility would be the security in contracts for the Government of Canada.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Mills, names of contractors were being named in the competitive process, and then different people completed the work. Can you elaborate on what happened?

[Michael Mills]

As I alluded to previously, there are times when there is a procurement process and we will ask for certain levels of IT skills. Even in architecture and engineering projects, for instance, we will actually see that a team is proposed, and then, for a number of reasons.... There can be a delay between the time the contract is awarded and when the work is actually undertaken and, in that time, certain of those resources are no longer available. In some cases, people will actually leave firms and the firm has to replace them. In other cases, the firm isn't sure that they've won, and they may deploy those resources to another project.

In those cases, they would be required to submit for approval by the government alternative resources. They would have to demonstrate that they meet the same skill or have more capability than those who were originally proposed.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Just so I understand, does being named as part of the bid process mean that the person was paid?

[Michael Mills]

No. The persons were only paid once they did work and that work was validated.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Does the task authorization and work trigger the payment?

[Michael Mills]

The task authorization would typically identify the specific resources doing the work, their rates of pay and what work is to be done. Then they would submit invoices demonstrating that the work was completed by those individuals at those rates.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

So—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

That is your time, I'm afraid.

Thank you very much.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné, you now have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

If we consider only what happened during the pandemic and the ArriveCAN app alone, we might be tempted to believe that the problem lies with the Canada Border Services Agency and that it bears most of the responsibility in this matter. Fair enough.

However, the ombudsman's report and the Auditor General's report found that the same type of procurement issue happened at Shared Services Canada, namely a lack of documentation at Amazon Web Services and Microsoft, and yet that didn't stop ArriveCAN from going ahead. The same problem also came up at the Public Health Agency of Canada when it didn't follow procedures and awarded a contract to KPMG with no competitive process. So this issue appears to have been widespread during the pandemic.

If we take a closer look at the issue and go to the Open Government website, we see that about 3,000 contracts were awarded without a competitive process during the pandemic. Moreover, if we go back a little further, we realize that in 2017, well before the pandemic, the awarding of these types of contracts skyrocketed. We're talking about several thousand contracts awarded in a non-competitive manner, well before the pandemic.

How do you explain such a sharp increase in non-competitive awarding of contracts? How do you explain so many contracts being awarded in a non-competitive manner for amounts not always under $25,000, as they should have been, even in a quieter period?

[Michael Mills]

The reality is that 80% of our contracts are awarded based on competition.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

I'm sorry, but that's not a proper response.

We're talking about non-competitive awarding of 3,000 contracts during the pandemic, and 1,600 more in 2023, well after the pandemic. It's absurd to say that 80% of contracts are awarded based on a competitive process, for one. Furthermore, that doesn't answer my question at all. How is it that so many contracts were awarded in a non-competitive manner? This really doesn't show that taxpayers' money is being spent soundly and wisely.

[Dominic Laporte]

I wouldn't want to stigmatize non-competitive awarding of contracts. Sometimes there are very good reasons for awarding contracts in a non-competitive manner. It may be because of patent issues or because only one supplier can do the work. In that remaining 20%, there are also existing justifications under trade agreements—

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

However, we've learned in the ombudsman's report and the Auditor General's report that those justifications are lacking. There may be very good reasons for that, but how come the taxpayer doesn't see them?

[Dominic Laporte]

I'm sorry. I thought we were talking about all the contracts that had been awarded over the last few years. I was answering the question from that perspective.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'm sorry. Your time is up.

I'm turning now to Mr. Desjarlais.

You have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I believe that Canadians who are watching this, who are seeing the proceedings on this very troubling scenario, are experiencing partly grief and sadness but also anger, as I am, at the extreme lack of oversight that it seems was given to this project.

From the very beginning, there was a lack of a governance system. We see fingers pointed across the board between the Public Health Agency of Canada and CBSA. In addition to that, we see red flags being raised by Public Services and Procurement Canada. All of this is to say that, at the end of it, we still see a loss of value for Canadian taxpayers, which is an immense failure and an immense disappointment for me and for Canadians everywhere. Especially at a time when costs are soaring and things are expensive, it hits doubly hard for Canadians to know that our public service, in particular the procurement service, an organization meant to protect Canadians and meant to ensure value for money, wasn't there when we needed it most. I think this is the greatest level of failure on which Canadians across the country, I'm certain, will find unity.

However, it's a situation that I think is, in some cases, predictable as well. We know, as has been mentioned many times, not just in this committee but also in previous committees, that when we don't actually invest in 21st century solutions that are required for IT specialists and procurement within the government, that vulnerability exists. That predominant vulnerability continues to exist. Whether with the Phoenix pay system in the previous government or with GC Strategies now, the vulnerability is the same. The government does not have the ability to secure the kind of IT specialists who are required in the country, to ensure good work and to ensure that value for money is met.

To me, this vulnerability is critical. It is a systemic condition of this ongoing tragedy, which I want to be able to explore and actually fix. I don't want to see this continue to happen. We need to become more competitive when it comes to securing IT specialists within the government. We actually have retention strategies, such as the ones the Public Service Alliance of Canada has often talked about. We have the important ability to secure that talent, to retain that talent and to execute that talent in a way that actually provides value for money at the rate that's discussed in this report.

In the time I have remaining, Mr. Mills, do you have any final comment on your actions to ensure that this problem, this incredibly difficult and generational systemic problem, will be fixed?

Go ahead, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'm sure Mr. Desjarlais meant your department's response.