Government Operations committee  Here's the way to answer that: Whistle-blower protection would provide a tremendous amount of additional information about what is really going on. In the case of Phoenix, there's absolutely no question, in my mind, that Phoenix would not have been allowed to continue anywhere near the rollout date.

Government Operations committee  I only know what's in the public domain about these contracts. I've no special inside knowledge. With regard to the Business Development Bank, to me, as an experienced person in this field, there are red flags all over the situation. The public is outraged at it, and rightly so.

Government Operations committee  I would say that when a consulting contract is going wrong in this fashion, it affects the leadership structure and the engagement of employees. It's a real downer for employees, and people leave in droves. All kinds of bad things happen. I would say that in terms of people like this committee being informed as to what's going on, there is the public sector employee survey.

Government Operations committee  It could be, yes.

Government Operations committee  I'm not sure that I heard the question clearly, but clearly there are concerns here, and the committee is right to be looking at this.

Government Operations committee  I think that a committee like this should have strong powers of obtaining information. It's a common problem that the people who hold the information have the power to reclassify it, to redact it and to make all kinds of excuses. When there's private sector involvement, there's an additional level of complication, because the private sector company may make all kinds of claims regarding intellectual property, secrecy—you name it.

Government Operations committee  I have no special or direct knowledge or insight into what McKinsey is doing at present. On your point about whistle-blowing, whistle-blowing is directly relevant to the study you're currently doing, because—

Government Operations committee  It's relevant to this study, because if we had free access to the information that employers in the trenches have, we would know a whole lot more about the work McKinsey is currently doing and has recently done in Canada. The committee would be a whole lot better informed and wouldn't have to rely on people like me to suppose what might be going on.

Government Operations committee  Fair enough.

Government Operations committee  You would expect to see some failures by any large consulting firm. That's correct.

Government Operations committee  I've heard quite a lot of discussion about ethical screens and so on in your previous testimony. Consulting firms are profit-driven, and we cannot expect them to put in place effective ethical screens. It's just not part of their mentality. They may refuse some contracts on the basis that there's too much reputational risk, but that's purely defensive; it's not in order to protect the public interest.

Government Operations committee  I think there's perhaps negligence in who is assigned to the contracts. I think people on the ground are obviously incompetent. What I saw in both Disney and U.S. Steel looked to me as if they were supposed to be strategic engagements designed to find a new business model in an industry that was suffering.

Government Operations committee  Yes. I'm obviously here about whistle-blowing. I always am. I see the committee and anybody like this as being severely hampered in getting at information if people in the trenches—employees—are not able to safely come forward with what they know. It's an absolute disaster, and it has led to a lot of the problems we've seen in the past.

Government Operations committee  Thank you, Kelly. My name is David Hutton. I'm a senior fellow with the Centre for Free Expression at Toronto Metropolitan University. Thank you for the invitation to testify. Based on my experience in the world of management consulting, I hope to provide some insights into what is likely going on in this particular situation.