Finance Committee on July 16th, 2020

[Rachel Wernick]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I think the context is important: 12-hour days, lots of different conversations, everybody working at home, mostly on conference calls. I know that the official I mentioned was the lead on the student package at the Department of Finance, but my recollection is that I volunteered, in the context of going through many organizations, some of which I have mentioned, such as Canada service corps partners—

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

This is an extremely long answer for a very direct question.

[Rachel Wernick]

Again, Mr. Chair, I'm not allowed to finish my answer.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Right, because you're not answering the question.

[Rachel Wernick]

I am. I'm answering—

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

You're very evasive.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Okay.

Mr. Poilievre, go ahead with your next question.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

All right. We know we're on to some trouble there.

Moving on to the next question.... You said that WE Charity had circulated a proposal, and that proposal had gone to ministers. This was in mid-April. How did you know that?

[Rachel Wernick]

My recollection is that I would know it for two different reasons. One, Mr. Kielburger told me that it had been shared, particularly with Minister Ng; that's my recollection. But I also recall approving a briefing note for Minister Chagger to meet with WE Charity, which spoke of the proposal, and I do recall some emails from other government officials at PCO and ISED also referring to this proposal.

I would prefer—

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

When would you—

[Rachel Wernick]

If I could finish—

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

When would you—

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Mr. Poilievre, let her finish her answer and then we'll go to the last question.

Go ahead.

[Rachel Wernick]

As I said earlier, I would prefer to provide the committee with more accurate and complete information about that, the best I can contribute, in terms of that proposal and who had it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We look forward to that information.

Mr. Poilievre, go ahead with your last question.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

You claim that the contribution agreement was only approved on June 23, yet there is evidence that WE Charity was advertising internally its plan to administer this program on June 12, 11 days earlier. How is it possible that WE Charity knew 11 days before the contribution agreement was approved that it would be administering this program, unless it was communicated to them by a back channel?

[Rachel Wernick]

We entered into a negotiation of a contribution agreement with WE Charity in mid-May, and, as anybody familiar with this knows, it takes many weeks to negotiate a contribution agreement. Any activities that WE Charity took on during the period leading up to this finalization and approval of the contribution agreement were completely at their own risk.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We will have to end that series there.

The last questioner is Mr. Fragiskatos. We'll go a little over on this panel.

Mr. Fragiskatos, you have five minutes.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

I want to ask more about third parties, just in general terms, because obviously this was a third party that was looked at.

How common is it for governments to rely on third parties? I know that in the context of COVID-19 the federal government has partnered, for example, with United Way and with Food Banks Canada. WE was suggested; obviously, that's not going ahead. How common is it for third parties to carry out work that the government has prioritized, and what are some of the reasons that lead in that direction?

[Rachel Wernick]

The primary vehicle used in grants and contributions programming is to work with third parties. We have 13 third parties delivering service programming for us under the Canada service corps, so we are funding organizations to do direct delivery of programming on the ground. The government generally does direct-deliver benefits and payments, as we've talked about with the CERB, pensions and things like that, but when it comes to delivery of programming in communities across the country, we're very much dependent on third party organizations to deliver that programming and provide those supports on the ground.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Ms. Hébert, did you want in there?

[Stephanie Hébert]

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

To build further on the response provided by my colleague, yes, we do work very closely with third parties in the context of contribution agreements. I would just like to put on the table some of the factors we would consider. As my colleague mentioned, there's the time frame in which we need to work and the volume of desired recipients whom we ultimately need to reach. We would want to leverage their networks, leverage their experience and leverage their knowledge in this space.

My colleague mentioned partnerships and the work we do with organizations in the context of the Canada service corps. We have also done this in the context of the emergency community support benefit, the emergency community support program, where we're working closely with the Red Cross, Community Foundations of Canada, as well as United Way Canada. Again, to support funding to seniors in their communities, we also established a contribution agreement with United Way Centraide Canada. This was to enable us to be able to disburse funds and really reach Canadians in their communities.

We were really able to leverage the expertise and the networks of the third party organizations to ultimately help us achieve the policy and program objectives that had been set out in these different programs and these different initiatives that we were funding.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

As I did for others, Peter, I'll give you some of that time back. Go ahead.

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

That's appreciated, Mr. Chair.

This is for either Ms. Wernick or Madam Hébert, whoever wishes to take it. This is in the context of COVID-19, with a public service that was squarely focused on helping as many Canadians as possible, millions of Canadians, and had devoted itself in that way, reorganizing itself particularly around things like CERB and other programs. Is it fair to say that the public service found itself in, if not an overwhelmed position, then certainly a challenged position? The context helps us to understand, in particular, the need to reach out to third parties.

If in the best of times third parties are looked to, then certainly one would think that during COVID-19 third parties would certainly be looked to. Is that a fair statement?

[Rachel Wernick]

Yes, that is a fair statement. As we said, depending on the requirements and the speed of implementation, a third party is used. In the COVID context, as I think we've all mentioned, the capacity of this department and Service Canada was stretched to the absolute maximum.