Evidence of meeting #41 for Finance in the 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was volunteer.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
I personally did not have those conversations with the finance minister's office.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Poilievre, give the minister a little opportunity....
Go ahead, Madam Minister.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Thank you.
Did anyone in your office speak to anyone in the Prime Minister's Office about this proposal before it was introduced in cabinet?
Liberal
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
I know it is a substantial amount that was budgeted, so I would hope that all offices had conversations to ensure that the program was delivered in a meaningful and successful way.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
So that's a yes. Your office did discuss this with the Prime Minister's Office prior to introducing it in cabinet.
Liberal
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
Mr. Chair, the member can choose to put words in my mouth. What I am stating is that we had a proposal and we wanted to move forward on a plan for students and not-for-profits, and to be able to deliver during this very challenging time. A recommendation was made by the public service. I acknowledge that many conversations take place, and I would hope that those conversations do take place.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Right, so I take that as a yes that your office did speak to the Prime Minister's Office prior to your presenting it to cabinet.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Poilievre, I hate to interrupt, but I think the minister said that isn't exactly what she said and that you could not take it as a yes.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Okay, I'll just ask her yes or no. Did your office discuss this matter with the PMO before you introduced it in cabinet?
If you can't answer, I can move on to another question.
Conservative
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
We'll follow that trail, then.
All right. The next issue is that the government website says this was a $900-million project. What was the total number of job placements that $900 million was guaranteed to create?
Liberal
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
Mr. Chair, as I said in my opening statement, the $19.5 million that was allocated or given to WE was for the initial 20,000 placements. There was an additional $10.5 million for the supplemental cohort. If the program had proceeded, there would have been an additional $13.53 million. The total amount that WE Charity could have received through the contribution agreement that was negotiated by the public service and WE Charity was $43.53 million.
The majority of the $912 million that was allocated for the program was for grants so that students would have the supports they needed for post-secondary education costs.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Originally the government claimed that WE could only get $19 million. Now you're saying $43 million. Which is it?
Liberal
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
As I stated publicly, Mr. Chair, WE would be allocated or given $19.5 million for the initial 20,000 placements. Of that $19.5 million, $5 million was for not-for-profits so that they would have the supports and ability to create placements, and $300,000 was for accessibility supports so that all students would be able to—
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
That wasn't the question.
You say the maximum amount that WE could get was $43 million. Originally, your government claimed WE was only going to get $19 million, so you have two different numbers you're working with.
Then there's the third number, which is the $900 million. That was the total scope of the program for which WE was the sole-sourced administrator. You said now that the $900 million was to create 20,000 positions, but 20,000 positions times $5,000 per position—we can do the math right here, Mr. Chair—comes to $100 million.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Poilievre, you are substantially over time. I'll let you finish your point, and then I'll let the minister give the explanation here in full.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Again, 20,000 positions at $5,000 maximum per position brings us to $100 million. Where does the other $800 million go?
Liberal
Liberal
Bardish Chagger Liberal Waterloo, ON
Mr. Chair, I actually reject the explanation of the member. Obviously, the member is not listening to what I am saying. When I came out publicly, I stated that $19.5 million was going to WE Charity for the initial cohort of 20,000 placements. Of that $19.5 million, $5 million would be for not-for-profits so that they would have the supports necessary to be able to create these volunteer placements given the COVID-19 context, and $300,000 was for accessibility supports so that all Canadians, regardless of ability, could participate.
I'm sharing today that an additional $10.5 million was provided to WE Charity to administer a supplemental cohort so that smaller and local not-for-profits could participate, because there was a demand after the announcement was made. We received an influx of desire and demand for the program, so we wanted to make sure that they, too, had opportunities.
I am sharing that the contribution agreement also included, for the second cohort, $13.53 million provided to WE for an additional 20,000 placements, should we have gotten there. We never got to that spot. It would have been after administration and checks and balances were in place, like we stated in the contribution agreement.
My initial comments to the public were in regard to the initial cohort of $19.5 million, and the member is welcome to check what I shared.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We will end it there. We're substantially over. My apologies for that.
Mr. Fragiskatos.
Liberal
Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister, for the work you're doing and for being here.
Mr. Poilievre used the phrase “sole-source contract”. This was actually a contribution agreement—a technical distinction, but an important one. I wonder if you could just explain that for the committee.