Government Operations Committee on June 7th, 2018

[Marie Lemay]

You're correct to say that I wasn't there at that time. This reflects what we said earlier, that it was thought that the system was ready to go. Obviously it wasn't.

Maybe, just to answer your question—hindsight is 20/20—I can tell you how I deal with these things today. Should I have a presentation like that, I would have to be comfortable that we are in the position of being ready to go before I briefed the minister on it.

I believe you're referring to a February.... That's the one I know of that says, “Ready to go!”

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

It's from February 18, 2016.

[Marie Lemay]

I hope I would never get to a point that I got a presentation like that and then had to go back. We're trying very hard, Les and I and Michael, our other colleague, to create a culture at PSPC—learning from Phoenix, frankly—such that the questions, the discussions will take place and that we'll be able to ask the deep questions, have those conversations, and create a safe space for employees to have a respectful workplace, a healthy workplace. That's what we're striving for.

It's not an easy thing, though, and I think we just have to remind ourselves that this is something that will take time.

We will have to be absolutely convinced.

I would have to say that in just about every speech I make to staff, we talk about this and about creating this space and environment, but we can't stop. It will take time. Employees need to see that we walk the talk and that we mean it. I would not want a presentation like that coming at me if I hadn't been prepared for those type of recommendations.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

We understand the role of PSPC and the culture you are trying to instill within your department.

What are the responsibilities of the other departments for the Phoenix pay system? I am thinking, for instance, of human resources services. What role does Treasury Board now play in that file?

[Marie Lemay]

As we said, at the time, we had all underestimated the complexity of this project. We should very clearly have defined the involvement, role and responsibilities of everyone concerned right from the outset. This became very clear with the Goss Gilroy Inc. report.

Today, Mr. Linklater manages a team that really integrates human resources and pay services. The other departments are, however, involved, because all of them must also deal with human resources issues related to employees or managers. And so it is very important that the data that is processed is specific and provided on time, and we have learned a lot of lessons from Phoenix.

We now have a governance structure that allows us to hold these discussions and to verify results.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

You mentioned the precision of the data. You said that you should have adopted an integrated approach to human resources and pay services from the beginning. Do you think that you now have the correct data? Did they play a role in the implementation of the system?

[Marie Lemay]

I think we have to admit that we have been in catch-up mode from the beginning of the implementation of Phoenix. If we could start over, everyone's roles and responsibilities would be made very clear, as well as the nature of the data. We are more hopeful; the departments are increasingly involved, but as I was saying, we are still working very hard on this.

I would have preferred that we have these discussions on roles and responsibilities from the beginning rather than after the project was brought onstream. We have learned our lesson with regard to other government-wide projects. I want to reiterate that PSPC manages a lot of large projects successfully, more than 400 at this time, as I indicated earlier, which represent $13 billion in total. This project is truly unique, I believe. There will be others but this one is government-wide. We must henceforth ask ourselves, before launching a project, if it is government-wide or if we are managing it for one or two departments. In my opinion, a government-wide project requires a different approach.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Ferguson, last week you talked about culture. What do you mean by “culture”? I read only the news report at some point, but you really hit the nail on culture. What did you mean by that?

[Michael Ferguson]

Again, the reason I raised that was that I was reflecting on the audit we had done on Phoenix and the recommendations we had made, and while there could be more changes to approaches and to policy, I was concerned about those being enough to actually prevent another Phoenix from happening.

You can look at all the controls already in place. We have program evaluations, internal audits, departmental audit committees, departmental performance reports, departmental plans and priorities, and Auditor General reports. We have all kinds of things in the system that are supposed to prevent something like Phoenix from happening. Every time there's a problem, we make recommendations and some other controls go in to try to prevent something like Phoenix from happening, but somehow it happened.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

[Michael Ferguson]

To me, the issue that needs to be examined is what it was in the culture that allowed that to happen.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to the five-minute rounds with Mr. Kelly.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Thank you.

Ms. Lemay, this was before my time on the committee, but you appeared in July of 2016 when the size and scale of the Phoenix fiasco was just beginning to be recognized. It was an emergency meeting held in the summer. I understand that my colleague Mr. McCauley asked you then who was going to be fired, and you had rightly pointed out that fixing the problem perhaps needed to be the priority.

Here we are two and a half years later and the problems all still exist. We now have an Auditor General's report, which we are discussing today, that largely placed the blame for the fiasco on three executives and the way they had controlled information and failed to convey critical information to the then deputy minister and minister.

In light of your remarks earlier, in which you said that two executives weren't paid bonuses and are no longer working in payroll administration, at a minimum, could you at least assure Canadians who rightly, as you acknowledged in your remarks, are demanding accountability that the executives who gave us the Phoenix fiasco are at least no longer employed in the public service?

[Marie Lemay]

There was actually a small number of executives working on the Phoenix implementation. When I look back, that shows how we underestimated the whole project. There were two senior executives who reported directly to the DM and had the overall decision-making authority. Those executives made mistakes and their performance was assessed. They are no longer on pay...not all of them. Some of them are still with the government; others have left.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Two individuals...so both both of them are—

[Marie Lemay]

One is still with the government; the other one is not.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Okay.

What are you doing now? You addressed it in your opening remarks, and we've heard in this report about the culture. What steps are you taking to change the culture at PSPC?

[Marie Lemay]

The first thing is that it has to come from the top. It's about what we say but also walking the talk. You can ask my colleagues. You can ask our employees. I absolutely promote an environment in which we have discussions. At every meeting, whether it's my management meeting...we want the discussions. We want to have different views. Diversity is—

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Rocky Ridge, AB]

Sorry, if I may, are there documented outcomes from these discussions?

When we look at this report, there is an organizational chart that shows all kinds of meetings from a variety of different committees that reported through to executives who then reported through to the minister and deputy minister. I can imagine that at the time, they thought they had wonderful collaborative meetings where people were encouraged to speak their minds. Maybe not...but whether that's the case or not, there were no documented decisions. It leaves the public to conclude that circular, inconclusive meetings took place, and then two or three executives made decisions without disclosing evidence and facts to their superiors.

What are the concrete steps that are going create actual accountability, rather than just more feel-good type of discussions around the culture of meetings?

[Marie Lemay]

There are three things. First of all, we will make sure that whatever policy directives are in place will be totally respected. We're doing a lot of work in response to the Auditor General's report in terms of identifying if a project is a government-wide project. Once we know it is, we will set it up differently. We will make sure there are no circular—as the Auditor General identified—committees reporting all to the same person. We're going to disperse that. We're going to make sure the DM has direct advisory committees and independent advice.

All of these things, we're developing right now. We are actually starting to apply them to the way we do business at PSPC. Concretely, we will have processes, but the third leg is not as concrete but just as important. It's making sure that we have the work environment in which people feel that even if we put all these processes in place, they can raise issues, have the discussions, and not fear anything. It's creating a safe, healthy environment on top of the processes, which is what we were trying to do.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you very much. We now go to Ms. Mendès for five minutes.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I thank all of you for being here with us today to discuss a topic of growing importance in the eyes of the public, I believe.

What do you have to say about the fact that in 2014, the managers assigned to the pay transformation initiative received the Public Service Award of Excellence for their work from Prime Minister Harper? After all, no one yet knew whether the project would be a success or not, since the system had not yet been launched. Moreover, how did the government come to award a prize for excellence to individuals who had not yet proven themselves, since the project was just at its very beginning?

[Marie Lemay]

Unfortunately, we are not in a position to answer that, because neither Mr. Linklater nor I were there at the time.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Ferguson, do you have any comments to add on that?

[Michael Ferguson]

No, not really. The only thing I could say is that the award of excellence was granted for different activities, among them the Phoenix project. In fact, I'm not aware of the way in which this prize is granted.