Evidence of meeting #91 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was project.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
I'll be specific.
That company, NRStor, received $106,000 in so-called COVID relief payments in 2020 and another $111,000 the following year, in 2021.
That is inconsistent with what you previously stated. Your company, of which you were, and are, the CEO, received almost $220,000 from SDTC, which was approved by the board.
5:10 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
Honourable member, at the time of the board decision on those COVID payments.... You'll recall it was March 2020. It was very difficult. We were very afraid that we were going to lose the investments that we had made and the jobs, so the board sought—
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Ms. Verschuren, I just asked you to confirm that that money went out the door. It was nearly $220,000 to your company in 2020 and 2021.
It was $220,000. Is that correct?
5:15 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
The board sought legal advice on how best to proceed during the COVID payments.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
You moved the motion to funnel that money out the door, didn't you?
5:15 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
Because funding went to existing portfolio companies where conflicts had previously been declared—so they had been declared—and because no company received preferential treatment, the legal opinion—
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
No money received preferential treatment. Your company received preferential treatment in the sense that you sat on the board and provided money to it that the RCGT report flagged as likely not compliant with the contribution agreement.
5:15 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
The legal opinion was then received with no conflicts—
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
It was Osler.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
It was Osler. Was Mr. Vandenberg involved in providing that advice?
5:15 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
He was.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
He was. And he serves on the council, does he not?
5:15 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
He's a member.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Chair, Board of Directors, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
Yes, he's not on the board of directors.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Brassard
Thank you, Mr. Cooper.
Thank you, Ms. Verschuren, as well.
We have Ms. Damoff next for five minutes.
Go ahead, please.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Thanks, Chair.
I would just echo what Mr. Villemure said earlier. We can try to be respectful to people who have taken the time to come before the committee.
I'm curious. I don't know which one of you three ladies would answer this, but we got in our package a letter that was sent to Mr. Brassard that included your memo with factual inaccuracies. When was that sent? I got it just last night or this morning. It makes it really hard to review all of this information when it comes at the last minute.
5:15 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
I believe it was distributed to the committee last Friday, because, of course, we thought we were going to have to be here to be witnesses on Monday.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
Okay.
One of those things that I got at the last minute was the Osler report. It talks about the project approval process and Osler “observed a robust conflict declaration process and an awareness of employees (both executive and lower level) of the importance of avoiding actual or perceived conflicts”, and that each project went through at least 38 people. Their conclusion was that “it appears to be very difficult for a single individual to influence whether a project receives SDTC funding.”
Would you say that's accurate?
5:15 p.m.
Vice-President, Finance, Sustainable Development Technology Canada
That is accurate. SDTC is known for a very rigorous due diligence process. It's very important for the team to understand the project—the innovation that's being proposed by a potential applicant.
I can talk to you a little bit about the process. We receive applications, which are then reviewed, at a first level, with respect to whether, really, the proposal meets the mandate of the SDTC. From there, an application is funnelled through, and then we look at the criteria and whether the application actually meets the criteria of the SDTC program, which—
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Pam Damoff Liberal Oakville North—Burlington, ON
I'm actually going to stop you, because I don't have a lot of time and I see that most of that is outlined in the Osler report, so we'll just refer people who want to read it to that.
Ms. Lawrence, I have a question about the ethics adviser. In an October 15 memo to the board, you note a third party governance review recommendation from 2022 that SDTC hire an independent ethics adviser. You started the hiring process in September 2022. Is that correct?