Finance Committee on July 30th, 2020

[Katie Telford]

The Prime Minister announced a $9-billion package to support students, and that particular element of the package was still to be determined. He had a number of ideas at the time of how it might be administered, but he moved on to work on a number of other emergency measures while others worked it up. It then came back to him later that the only way to do this was with the binary choice that we've described to you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

That's it, Marty. Sorry for that.

We'll now go to Mr. Fragiskatos, then to Mr. Fortin for two and a half minutes, and then to Mr. Julian. If it's okay with the committee, I will allow Ms. May in for two minutes, then go to an official opposition member, and we'll probably wrap up with Mr. Sorbara.

Go ahead, Mr. Fragiskatos.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Telford, thank you for being here and for the work you've done in these past few months.

First of all, Mr. Chair, it would have been good if Mr. Poilievre had read the blues from the meeting we had the other day. I have those blues in front of me. He was trying to connect dots that, frankly, do not exist. Let me quote from those blues.

Ms. Dzerowicz asked the question to Marc Kielburger, and I'll quote her as follows: “There is another thing that I'm a bit unclear about. I see the contribution in front of me”—that's the contribution agreement, Mr. Chair—“and it was signed on May 5. Was it signed on May 5; or did the agreement begin on May 5? If you could, just explain the logistics around all of that.”

Marc Kielburger replied with the following: “Thank you for asking. The agreement technically began on May 5. We were working in advance with ESDC on putting resources to help develop the program. The turnaround time was so tight and we were, of course, so passionate about helping young people at this time that we got to work right away with the full risk and understanding that if this agreement did not go forward we would be at the financial risk of doing so. We accepted that risk because we really wanted to help.”

That's directly from the blues, Mr. Chair. Obviously the organization made the decision of its own volition to proceed on May 5. I wanted to clear that up because, as I said, Mr. Poilievre is trying to weave things out of thin air, as he often does.

Leaving that aside, I actually do want to go back to the meeting, if I could, Ms. Telford. I'm talking about the meeting to which the Kielburgers both came. I'll quote from that meeting as well.

They said in their introductory remarks.... I believe it was Craig Kielburger and I'll quote him here now:

As per the contribution agreement, WE Charity would only be reimbursed for its costs to build and administer the program. To be clear, there was no financial benefit for the charity. WE Charity would not have received any financial gain from the CSSG program—

That's the Canada student service grant program, of course.

—and it's...incorrect to say otherwise.

Ms. Telford, does that correspond with your understanding?

[Katie Telford]

I apologize, Mr. Chair. Something has just come up on my screen. I just need someone to come and....

Sorry, there's a big something.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We can see you, Ms. Telford, and we can hear you.

Mr. Fragiskatos, you're coming across kind of gravelly. Can you adjust your mike somewhat?

Did you hear what Mr. Fragiskatos said, Ms. Telford?

[Katie Telford]

Sorry, I didn't catch the last part. I had big exclamation marks flashing at me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Okay.

Then if you could repeat the last part.

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

It could be the connection. I'm sorry about that.

I was quoting from Craig Kielburger, who came and testified two days ago. I'll repeat the statement, because I'm not sure what part you heard and what part you didn't.

He said:

As per the contribution agreement, WE Charity would only be reimbursed for its costs to build and administer the program. To be clear, there was no financial benefit for the charity. WE Charity would not have received any financial gain from the CSSG program, and it's...incorrect to say otherwise.

My question to you, Ms. Telford, was whether or not that explanation matches with your understanding.

[Katie Telford]

I believe it does, yes.

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

Okay. Thank you very much.

I also had a question relating to WE's network and its being in touch with 2.5 million students and 7,000 schools.

When the public service advised that WE would be the charity organization to move ahead with administering and building the Canada student service grant, that was a key reason. Is that right? That's our understanding, as a committee. That has come up before.

Can you speak to that at all?

[Katie Telford]

Absolutely.

Despite all the things that are being talked about now, this was an organization that was internationally renowned, that was nationally renowned. I can tell you that my nine-year-old son knows the name of this organization, and not from me. There's a school named after a Kielburger. This is a very large organization in this country. It was not surprising, in many ways, to see it as being an organization that could do this.

Having said that, it was still surprising to see it as a binary choice and that is why we asked a lot of questions around it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

You can have a final quick question, Mr. Fragiskatos.

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

Sure.

Something along these lines has been asked already by Mr. McLeod. I took the opportunity to raise it earlier with the Prime Minister, and I've raised it before. Simply on behalf of constituents, though, I have to ask it again.

For youth going forward, if the Canada student service grant does not materialize, what can members of Parliament tell the youth in their communities about supports that will continue to be made available?

Obviously, there's the Canada emergency student benefit that's being accessed by so many young people across the country, but in terms of further supports that can be there for students, on the one hand, but also for not-for-profits, Ms. Telford—

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Quickly, Mr. Fragiskatos....

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

—many in the community that are reeling right now, what is the message you would put to them?

[Katie Telford]

I think there are a lot of other programs that are there to support students, and obviously there is more work to continue to do.

As I said, I know the Minister of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth is passionate about this and is working very hard, along with her colleagues, to look at more solutions and supports for students in terms of the non-profit sector more broadly or specific to youth. It's interesting because these are organizations that were used as third party organizations, and contribution agreements were organized with these organizations like Community Foundations of Canada, Canadian Red Cross and United Way-Centraide Canada.

There are a lot of different.... Minister Hussen has been actively engaged and announced a number of supports for non-profits and the charitable sector as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

We will have to move on.

See if we can get the technology people to look at that mike sound there, Mr. Fragiskatos.

Mr. Fortin, you're on.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Telford, I gather that your role as chief of staff—and your entire team's role, actually—is to advise the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister and his finance minister said they don't think they should have been involved in the decision to award the contract to WE back in May. Now, we hear that they regret what they did and are apologizing for it. You agree with them that they shouldn't have been involved. Would you say you're satisfied with the work you and your team did on this issue?

[Katie Telford]

As I said at the outset in my opening remarks, this obviously did not go the way it should have gone. I do share in some responsibility for that. Of course I do, as the person who is giving advice to the Prime Minister, but I do the best I can with the best information I have. That's what I'm going to keep doing to help serve and support Canadians.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

How many discussions did you have with the Prime Minister between May 8 and 22, before he made his decision? I'm referring to discussions about this issue, obviously.

[Katie Telford]

Okay. If it was more generally, I wouldn't be able to answer. I have no idea. It's been a lot during this period.

Specifically on this subject, during that period from May 8 to the following cabinet meeting that it went to—it was about two weeks later—we certainly had a briefing again ahead of the next cabinet meeting, and then there was another briefing, I believe, just before that as well, when we took a longer period of time to go through the details.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Who took part in those briefings?

[Katie Telford]

It's pretty usual. It's the senior officials within the Privy Council Office as well as senior staff within the Prime Minister's Office.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

All of those people were there, and yet, no one was able to stop the Prime Minister from deciding to award the contract to WE on May 22, given that he now recognizes he should not have been involved and should have recused himself? Was there no one who was able to convince him not to do what he did?

[Katie Telford]

As I've already stated, we spent our time trying to ensure that due diligence was done on this and that this was the right thing to do to support students at that time. We knew the facts as we knew them at the time in terms of the Prime Minister's having spoken at some events and in terms of Sophie Grégoire Trudeau's connection to the WE organization. We knew that had been cleared, so there wasn't a discussion on conflict at that time.