Evidence of meeting #30 for Canada-China Relations in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was aiib.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
4:05 p.m.
As an Individual
Thank you, Chair.
I think if you look at the countries where the project financing takes place and analyze that along with the countries that belong to the BRI, and where its bilateral PRC lendings take place, you'll find a certain significant pattern there. That's what I would emphasize.
Also, there's a pattern in the selection of where the president of the bank goes, such as to Hungary to meet with Prime Minister Orbán, for example, or to Serbia, or to meet with countries that appear to be, in central Asia, more aligned with Russia and China in the geopolitical situation right now.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken Hardie
Thank you for that.
We will now welcome Ms. Ashton, who's subbing for Ms. McPherson.
Ms. Ashton, you have six minutes or less.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Thank you very much.
I want to indicate that I am a last-minute substitution, given the political games being played in the House right now, and I certainly will do my best to touch on some of the points here.
I understand there was some reference to the AIIB's internal review, and I'm wondering, Mr. Pickard, if you could comment on the fact that the internal review found, among other things, that there was no evidence that the AIIB's decision-making organs were unduly and improperly influenced.
4:05 p.m.
As an Individual
The internal review was a despicable pack of lies. It was conducted in a world-record time of three weeks. It was not an independent review. It was conducted by a department whose senior leaders were already criticizing me on social media. The day I left the bank, the AIIB said that my allegations were baseless. Their report said that my allegations were baseless.
I do not believe they even seriously investigated the core allegations I made at the time. The internal review also contains factual errors and a variety of other issues that I could raise separately, but I want to be succinct here.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
We do have some time. What kind of factual errors could you refer to as an example?
4:05 p.m.
As an Individual
For example, the report said that I did not raise concerns about my security, but I had raised concerns in writing with the bank's facilities and administration department and with the corporate secretary, and I did so in an email.
When Canada expelled that Chinese diplomat back in the spring, I sent an email, and the president's office of the bank was copied on it. I asked, “Do I have anything to worry about? Should I be concerned with my security?” I got what I considered to be a not very reassuring reply back from the bank's executive in charge of security, who, just by sheer coincidence, is a member of the Chinese Communist Party and well known to be so inside of the bank.
I also, frankly, contacted the Canadian embassy and I asked, “Do I have anything to worry about for my safety in light of the two Michaels,” and I can't say that I got any kind of reassurance from them either.
This made me wonder, especially when.... Keep in mind, and I think committee members have to understand, that AIIB knew of my concerns about the Chinese Communist Party, and they were aware of my plans to inform the Government of Canada of my concerns. They knew this for weeks, so I was concerned for my safety in that context, because a lot of stuff was going down inside the bank that didn't make sense to me and I found extremely unusual based on what had been going on with my own department.
I can get into more detail if we have time for it.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
You also referred to a toxic culture within the organization—“one of the most toxic cultures imaginable”—which is quite the allegation. I'm wondering if you could elaborate on that.
4:10 p.m.
As an Individual
There have been employee surveys done. Is it Mercer that does the HR consulting reports for large, complex organizations? It has persistently identified problems. The Canadian board member would know this. There were problems with staff morale. Particularly, the number one issue, I think, would be the lack of employee regard for the leadership competence of the bank executives.
When I first convened an internal town hall meeting of the bank back in July 2022—we called it “Inspire Day”, an internal communications event—we used a certain technology where the 500 staff members could answer polling questions, and we'd see the results on the screen. Right there on the screen were the words “toxic culture”. That clearly is evidence of it. I provided that to the Department of Finance officials in one of the documents I sent them.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
Niki Ashton NDP Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB
Can you confirm that the AIIB's review found that the culture was not toxic and made several recommendations that would get at the issue of culture?
4:10 p.m.
As an Individual
They said that they would look at that, yes, but they also took aim at yours truly. I think they felt I was attacking the bank's reputation, so they attempted to undermine my reputation with what I consider some very slimy or low-ethics attacks. They accused me of having disagreements with staff members. Of course, the people whom I had disagreements with were members of the Chinese Communist Party, who were championing the three toxic members in my department, who had been harassing and causing problems in the communications function.
That detail, as well, I did provide to the Department of Finance officials during the review.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken Hardie
Ms. Ashton, you're just seconds away from the time, so we'll just cut it there. Thank you.
Now we'll go Mr. Chong for five minutes or less.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have a couple of questions.
Thank you, Mr. Pickard, for appearing.
The Department of Finance announced a halt to Canadian activity at the bank and a review of Canada's participation in the bank when you announced your resignation. How many times have you met with the Government of Canada with respect to their review?
4:10 p.m.
As an Individual
I met with two officials in their Elgin Street office during the month of July for a total of 75 minutes. I think it was one hour and 15 minutes, or maybe an hour and a half. After that point, I emailed a variety of documents or observations as I thought of things, or received messages from staff still at AIIB reporting things they thought I might find of interest.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Have you met with them in person since that meeting?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Were there any other contributions, other than providing emails and that 75-minute meeting?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Do you know anything about the announcement on December 9, a couple of days ago, by the Deputy Prime Minister? It was announcement of a further halt to Canadian participation at the bank, and an expansion of the review to include the four rubrics of investments, governance, management framework and response to your resignation.
Do you know anything about this extended review?
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
They haven't contacted you about the extended review yet.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
In paragraph 13 of the AIIB's review of your resignation, they took a shot at you, talking about your workplace behaviours and managerial responsibilities. Perhaps you'd like the opportunity now to respond to what appears to be an attempt to smear your reputation.
You're in front of a parliamentary committee, so your testimony is privileged. You cannot be sued in a court of law for it, so you are free to say what you want here.
4:10 p.m.
As an Individual
The main smear against me was that I had a history of disputes with people in my department and that I was not processing certain documents or dealing with systems in a timely way. Those were among the issues. They also said I didn't show up at some key meetings, or something.
Let me just review those with you briefly. There was one meeting when I had to fly home to see my mother, who is in a cancer hospice in Ottawa. I was on family leave and I did not attend an interview with National Public Radio in Washington, D.C., that I had arranged for President Jin. But the interview took place and he successfully communicated his story during that time. That, to me, speaks to the low character of the bank that they would do that.
I'm also in the communications job. In the comms job, there are all these media, all these NGO groups, all of these fires to put out. Believe me, at the AIIB there's never a dull moment when it comes to issues to deal with.
I should also point out that my department massively increased its budget under my leadership. I got six new head counts. I got approval to build a half million dollar media studio.
I might have been the last one to hand in my promotion request for my staff, or my budget request, but everything got through and everything was done by the deadline. Maybe my other DGs got theirs in first, but I guess I was busier than they.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Were there any other employees at the bank who felt the same way you did?