Information & Ethics Committee on Dec. 7th, 2020

[Martin Perelmuter]

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Colleagues, we're going to go to the next round, which is that flash round of two and a half minutes each.

Before I do, Mr. Daraiche, you were directed by a member of the committee to deliver some documents. I want you to know that's an obligation that you have. They'll be treated with respect and no business secrets will be released from the committee. Just as Mr. Perelmuter had to produce documents, we'd ask you to produce the contract.

I'd also like to ask you this as well. You've mentioned several times a May date that you were engaged with WE Charity. Do you have other partners in your firm that work with WE Charity?

[Martin Daraiche]

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Jean-Pierre Vasseur was not involved in the management of this contract or another contract with WE Charity?

[Martin Daraiche]

Mr. Chair, the sound cut out. Would you mind repeating the question?

I answered the question about whether other partners had had any dealings with WE Charity.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Certainly. I just want to make sure you've heard everything I said.

You have on record the demand for the documents that Mr. Gourde said you'll need to produce to the committee in regard to the agreement with WE Charity. Then I started with a question about whether there was another partner in your organization who had any dealings with WE Charity in a separate contract prior to May.

[Martin Daraiche]

The answer is no, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Okay.

Upon my request, would you also make sure you submit to the committee, along with the contract, any emails in regard to your communications with WE Charity and the federal government in this case?

We'll now move to the next round, colleagues.

[Martin Daraiche]

Sorry, Mr. Chair, but the sound cuts in and out when you speak. Your mike might be too far away, I'm not sure.

We took note of the committee's requests and we will get back to you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Thank you very much.

Now we'll go to the two and a half minute round with Madame Gaudreau.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you.

I want to reiterate what we are trying to do here. As members of the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, our job is to bring to light any potential conflict of interest. There is no doubt that this whole situation is doing harm.

I am new to Parliament. I have learned a lot about my duty to disclose information, but I have also learned to be wary when mistakes are made. You are business people, so when you know that a government has already made mistakes and has ventured onto fuzzy territory for a third time, do you take that as a sign to be cleaner than clean, so to speak? For instance, Mr. Perelmuter said earlier that he had never made a donation to the Liberal Party.

Did it worry you knowing that the government had publicly been found to have made a mistake twice before?

Who would care to answer?

[Martin Daraiche]

I can answer, Ms. Gaudreau.

As I mentioned, cabinet made a decision on May 22. From our standpoint, when the government makes a decision of that scale, with all the steps that have to be completed beforehand, we were certain the program was legitimate. Cabinet made a decision to proceed with the program. For us, that was enough.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I see.

Earlier, Mr. Perelmuter explained that he was very neutral. Now, I would like to hear your position, because it's important to get your point across. On your website, you talk about your extensive political experience and your knowledge of the workings of government. I imagine that you, too, are mindful and want to show that you are completely neutral.

What have you done to do that?

[Martin Perelmuter]

We don't have any connection with anyone in government. I'm not a 100% sure I understand the question, but we've never used any political contacts to secure agreements. We just—

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

You showed us that, Mr. Perelmuter. The question was for Mr. Daraiche. He has extensive political experience, so he must know how the system works.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Madame Gaudreau, that's all the time we have.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

He must know how it works.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

In fact, you were over quite a bit on that one. I know two and a half minutes flies by pretty fast.

Mr. Angus, you have two and a half minutes.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you very much.

When the Kielburgers were pitching this they claimed a lot of partnerships. Volunteer Canada they said was on board. Volunteer Canada walked away. Imagine Canada walked way. The YMCA didn't get involved. They claimed to the Treasury Board that WE Charity “has a significant presence in Quebec”, yet, Mr. Daraiche, they hired a PR firm and they said your job was to reach out to the francophone and Quebec organizations in the area of non-profit organizations. Only 4% of the people who signed up were young people from Quebec. I would think that would be registered as quite the abysmal failure of outreach in Quebec.

What happened?

They said they had significant presence in Quebec. They said you could get them organizations on the ground. Why were only 4% of the youth from Quebec?

[Martin Daraiche]

Mr. Angus, if you're asking about the program's effectiveness, I can only provide a partial answer. It's a question government officials might be able to answer.

I want to set the record straight. We only had a few weeks to reach out to people. That brings me back to how challenging implementing the program was. For the month of June, we had a mandate to inform organizations and students. Basically, we were working on it just a few weeks, less than a month. That is the extent of our involvement. We did indeed endeavour to inform as many organizations as possible, but the time frame was very limited. As you know, WE Charity decided to hand over the program's administration to the federal government on July 3.

I can only comment—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you for that. I'm running out of time so I will move on.

Students applied from across Canada but only 4% from Quebec.

Mr. Perelmuter, I want to apologize that you and your staff were abused like that. We live in a very toxic climate. I have certainly been abused relentlessly on Twitter and Facebook for my work on this file. I hope some of my abusers and trolls aren't the same who went after you. Some of them were pretty ugly. I want to apologize. I don't think that should have happened. I appreciate the fact that you've come here and given us clear answers. That's what we've asked of you and you've delivered, so thank you for that.

[Martin Perelmuter]

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Sweet]

Colleagues, we have names down for one more round and we have time. Unless there's an objection I'll give those members the go-ahead. Two of them are going to split, one Conservative and one Liberal. Are there any objections?

Mr. Berthold, you may go ahead for five minutes.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to revisit the period between May 15 and 22 with Mr. Daraiche.

My first question is this. Is it common in your industry for someone to approach you on LinkedIn about such a major contract or mandate?

[Martin Daraiche]

Mr. Berthold, our clients approach us in various ways. Over the past few months, more of them are reaching out to us via our website and social media. We don't have a lot of people contacting us through LinkedIn, but it does happen from time to time.