Evidence of meeting #24 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was program.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:45 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
Originally, the government asked us to deliver it to 20,000 students. We told the government it would cost $50 million. Over time, it increased the number, so exponentially, it grew to $543 million and 100,000 students, but it contacted us originally for 20,000.
Does that answer your question?
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC
Initially, it was 20,000 students, and it grew to 40,000. Did the government reveal the total amount to be distributed?
We were told the program was valued at $957 million. Can you confirm the amount published by the Government of Canada for the Canada student service grant program was $957 million?
3:45 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
The program kept on changing at the request of ESDC, and it kept on getting bigger and bigger at the request of the government. This was not being requested by us, it was being requested by ESDC.
Secondly, regarding this whole initiative in terms of this $912 million that keeps on being shared, especially by Mr. Angus incorrectly, we never heard of this figure until it was shared in a public forum.
We looked at ourselves, and were dumbfounded, because it was only up to $543 million. I say only, because it's still very significantly important to recognize that if all 100,000 youth did the maximum hours of service, it would have equated to the maximum threshold. The real value of this program, still a very significant sum, would have been a couple of hundred million dollars.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC
It was $543 million, then. That's about $11,000 per student for 40,000 students. If memory serves me correctly, the government said the grants ranged from $1,000 to $5,000 per student. If we assume all 40,000 students received the maximum $5,000, the program would have cost $200 million. You're saying the value of the program was $543 million, so where did the difference of $343 million go?
3:50 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
Mr. Chair, the honourable member has incorrect numbers. It's up to 100,000 students, up to $5,000 per student if the maximum number were reached, so 100,000 times $5,000 is $500 million.
The remaining amount was up to that amount if all 100,000 students participated in the running of the program. This is why I was sharing that this could potentially be much lower, because this is how ESDC decided to do the budget.
3:50 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
If I may also add for the clarity of the member, it was funds for students, administration costs to deliver the program and funds that we were to disburse to other non-profits.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC
Thank you for clarifying that it was 100,000 students. A moment ago, you referred to 20,000 students and, then, 40,000 students. If you are saying it's 100,000, the numbers add up, but that should have been made clear from the beginning.
You received two phone calls. You said you received a call from the government to set up the program. The Clerk of the Privy Council told us that he called you to discuss the program architecture and ideas. Can you confirm whether your organization was involved in developing the program criteria?
3:50 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
No. If I may gently clarify, the Clerk of the Privy Council did not contact us. Members of the senior civil service, led by assistant deputy minister Rachel Wernick, first contacted us. She asked us to submit a proposal, based on the government requirements, for how the charity could assist in implementing this for the civil service.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC
You are challenging what the Clerk of the Privy Council told this committee, then. He told us that people from your organization helped develop the program. That means the Clerk of the Privy Council lied to the committee.
3:50 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
I appreciate this opportunity.
To provide context, I think people think there was a call to us completely out of the blue. In 2017, we started to work with ESDC delivering youth programs. In 2018, they awarded $800,000 to us to start testing service programs. In 2019, ESDC asked us to build a white paper for the government on how service could happen. In 2020, [Technical difficulty—Editor].
It was not sudden or out of the blue that we had a call from ESDC [Technical difficulty—Editor]. It is incredibly important to understand that we had been working with Rachel Wernick and ESDC for years to develop service frameworks and service programs.
3:50 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
Thank you very much, Chair.
First of all, I've been waiting patiently for my turn. I've been listening carefully, and I'm sure many members of the public and media are watching these questions and answers as well. This is not a political debate. I think, although it may be entertaining, we still need to conduct the business of the standing committee properly and respectfully. With that, I would like to thank both witnesses for coming to our committee meeting today.
I will first ask a question that we've heard in previous testimonies. The owner of Speakers' Spotlight, Mr. Perelmuter, said that their lives have been affected by having to deal with threats of violence against them. He can no longer guarantee the safety of his own family.
Have you or your staff had any similar experiences?
3:55 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
Yes. It has been terrible for our staff. The death threats come into the office. On a personal note, my youngest isn't even one year old and he's already received death threats. Two journalists and newspapers in Canada felt they could publish our home addresses in those newspapers. We've had the police come multiple times to our home. My three-and-a-half-year-old can't play outside anymore.
On the day we announced the charity was closing, when certain members of Parliament got on their social media accounts to inflame people, someone showed up at my house. This person felt they had the right to intimidate my wife. We called the police to address the matter that evening. Then our 80-year-old parents got dragged into it, as we previously shared.
This has been beyond words.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
I'm sorry to hear that.
We have heard testimonies from various public servants, as well as the minister responsible for the file, that the public service first reached out to your organization in regard to the possibility of administering the CSSG. Ms. Wernick said that the pitch sent by your organization was designed to meet the new parameters set out by the government.
Could you indicate that that was in fact the case?
3:55 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
Ms. Wernick reached out and asked for our help. ESDC, in the months that followed, evolved the program requirements, and we did our best to meet the program requirements.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
All right.
Mr. Angus keeps on saying that, despite the public service saying that this wasn't a case where your $12-million proposed social entrepreneurship program was accepted and received funding.... Was it accepted, or was it just pitched? Did you ever receive funding for that proposal?
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you.
I'm sure Mr. Dong wouldn't want to bring down the quality. I have never said that they received funding. I said that it was verbally approved by Minister Morneau, and it is in his notes. I don't think he should try to misrepresent what I said.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
This sounds like a matter of debate. I'm sure that Mr. Angus will have an opportunity to correct the record if he thinks that this is required.
Mr. Dong, we'll turn back to you.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
3:55 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
The question is not...accepted, and we actually have the verbatim quotes of Mr. Angus on that 101 list where he says it was.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Han Dong Liberal Don Valley North, ON
Okay.
Now, though, there are important issues before this committee and other committees to study as they relate to CSSG [Technical difficulty—Editor] and you believe that some members of Parliament, including some on this committee, could say.... Well, you said that, literally, they can say whatever they want or that it's like a “surreal political boxing match”—that's the term, I think, you used—and you haven't been given the opportunity to defend yourself. This is your opportunity. What would you like to say to those MPs?
3:55 p.m.
Founder, WE Charity
I appreciate that, sir. Thank you.
WE Charity was asked to be of service during a national pandemic. That was what we sought to do for 100,000 young people. The program launched successfully, and 35,000 youth signed up in the first week—over 60% minority youth, English, French, coast to coast to coast. We built the program, and it should have served youth and families. Not only did those youth lose out, but now 7,000 schools in Canada are losing out on having this program because of politics.
This charity is not perfect, and we have learned a lot along our journey, but this didn't have to end this way. This is because of the tidal wave, the tsunami of politics, that came at us. The people who lost the most are the children in the ridings of each of you, my own kids, Marc's kids, and really good staff.
We need a little more compassion in this country, a little more patience, just a little more looking—