Government Operations Committee on Feb. 22nd, 2021

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes, that's the “bringing meaning to procurement” under PSAB?

[Tabatha Bull]

Yes.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I bring this to you because one of the motions that I brought before this committee was to look at this government's commitment under its existing policies on procurement. One of them is the federal contractors program, which has an agreement to implement employment equity for contracts that are over $1 million. While not directly related to sole-source procurement or procurement directly to aboriginal businesses, certainly this would manifest itself in strategic partnerships with manufacturers to ensure that they're meeting these employment equity standards.

One of the requirements of this is that once a contractor receives an eligible contract from the Government of Canada, the contractor must fulfill the following requirements: collect workplace information, complete a workplace analysis and provide an achievement report, establish long-term and short-term goals on equity-seeking groups, and make reasonable efforts to ensure that reasonable progress is made towards having full representation of the four designated groups.

The second designated group on the list happens to be aboriginal peoples. I'm wondering if your council has had any conversations around how procurement through the federal government is reflected in this way, or if some of the small and medium-sized businesses have been approached to partner up on the federal contractors program to ensure that these employment equity requirements are in place.

[Tabatha Bull]

We have seen some situations in which small and medium-sized, indigenous-owned businesses have partnered to meet these contracts.

One concern that we're currently looking at is whether the benefit actually results in supporting the indigenous business or if it's a numbers game, really, of meeting the employment equity but without building the capacity within an indigenous business or ensuring that the indigenous business is able to benefit from the contract.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I would strongly agree.

I'll share with you, just for your own note and for the note of the people who are on this committee and the folks who are watching, that there's a compliance policy in this. I've taken a keen interest in this because it also impacts many other groups.

In that, if a contractor is found in non-compliance, then the contractor will be placed on what's called the federal contractors program limited eligibility to bid list. Why I bring this up as a note is because the footnotes is that there are no names currently on the limited eligibility to bid list. Based on a previous motion I'm bringing to your attention that you could bring back to your committee, it seems as if it's the government's position on this policy that all of the contractors in the federal contractors program are in compliance, which, quite frankly, I find very difficult to believe.

In wrapping up my questions in this round to you, Ms. Bull, I'm going to ask you to take the remaining time here to suggest.... You brought up a motion, but are there other clear ways in which we can ensure that existing government programs are actually meeting the mandate? Notwithstanding that there's probably going to be a third wave, and knowing what we know now from your time on the council, what would be some recommendations that this committee could take away to ensure that all the well-intentioned good-language programs of this government, “bringing meaning to procurement”, the set-aside program for aboriginal business, are actually having tangible results for the communities that they claim to support?

[Tabatha Bull]

I think one thing we definitely need to look at is, first, the definition that's used for indigenous business under the PSAB criteria. That definition requires that a business demonstrate that 33% of its staff are indigenous under the Indian Act. That requires a business to obtain status cards or Métis carrying cards from its staff, which is not an easy conversation to have with your staff. There are definitely indigenous people in this country who do not feel comfortable providing their status cards and Métis cards to the Government of Canada for that reason.

When we look equitably across other minority-owned businesses, Black-owned businesses or women-owned businesses, that requirement does not exist, so we are currently not treating indigenous-owned businesses on an equal playing field.

For the remainder of COVID and for purchasing PPE or other products during COVID, I suggest that we put a moratorium on that requirement to ensure that we're being equal to all businesses.

The other is that—

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Do I have any more time left, Mr. Kitchen?

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Ms. Bull has about five seconds to answer, unless you'd like to conclude.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Sorry.

[Tabatha Bull]

That's okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

We'll now go to our second round, and we'll start with Ms. Harder.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being with us today. I very much appreciate your time.

Certainly the impact of COVID has been significant, and we've scrambled to respond. In particular, of course, last March and April, the government found itself in a situation where it had to scramble. Originally, it would appear that the minister thought it would be a good idea to include Canadians in the solution. She talked a lot about “a collaborative approach” that she wished to take at that time.

Out of this, she formed a special council composed of 16 individuals, and the two of you were part of that council. Those 16 individuals were selected from a variety of different backgrounds, either from the private sector or from not-for-profits. The minister originally felt that you had the ability to offer helpful insight and make recommendations to her. That's my understanding of the intent.

Then, when we look at the minutes that were made available online, we see that you had only three meetings that were posted publicly, and we found out today that there were actually four meetings. Originally there was a meeting on May 8, another one on May 28, another on June 22, and then not until December. The December meeting isn't reported online; however, you commented that the meeting did take place.

On May 8—that was your first meeting—according to the brief paragraph of explanation provided online, the only things that were done at that meeting were that the minister greeted you, she thanked you for your involvement, she went over the terms of reference and then commented that the next meeting would be in three to four weeks, without setting a concrete date and without really giving you your mandate.

We find that the next meeting was held on May 28, three weeks later. Now, we're in the middle of a pandemic at this time. The government was having a very difficult time procuring equipment, the PPE, that was necessary to keep this country afloat.

The minister said that she wanted a collaborative approach. She put these 16 people around a table who have incredible expertise to offer, but yet she didn't feel it was necessary to bring you together for three weeks, again, in the middle of a massive crisis, arguably the worst crisis since World War II.

The minister felt that she could go it alone, that she could make all sorts of decisions and...all sorts of money, without needing the expertise of industry, without needing the expertise of individuals who have collective wisdom to offer.

I find that interesting. It would appear, then, that this council was more for the sake of appearances and looking like the government cared about the opinion of Canadians—bringing expertise into the room with them—rather than actually doing so.

It seems that a blind eye was turned to qualified individuals, which is disheartening. Canadians deserved to have your voices heard. I think you had some really cool things that you would have been able to contribute had a meeting been convened during that important and crucial time from the beginning of May to the end of May, when numerous decisions were made.

I guess my question is, did you have the opportunity between meetings to submit advice or insights? Was there a mechanism by which you could do that, or was it only at meetings that were held by the minister?

[David McHattie]

If you want me to go first, the constructive criticism I think is fair. However, between May 8 and May 28...I'm not sure that criticism is all that valid, because—

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Sorry, I'm not asking you to verify whether or not it's valid. I'm asking whether you had a way to give your insights between meetings

[David McHattie]

Sure, but when we had that first meeting, we went around and we generated.... We gave a lot of ideas. We—

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Was there a way to give input in between the meetings?

[David McHattie]

Yes, it was available to us to submit emails in writing or make short phone calls. The minister and her team were available to us.

I'm all for constructive criticism, so don't get me wrong, but I think that between May 8 and May 28, there was a lot of work being done. I felt listened to at the time, and I felt that what we had discussed in the May meeting was being considered in the decisions that were being made by government.

The decisions were government's to make. We were providing some advice.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Mr. McHattie, thank you. I guess what I'm wondering is whether, if there was a meeting held today, you guys would have important things to contribute to that meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Unfortunately, Ms. Harder, we're at the end of your time.

That was a great question. I'm wondering if maybe Ms. Bull and Mr. McHattie could answer it in writing and just respond to us at that time. It would be greatly appreciated.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

I believe Mr. Weiler is next up.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you.

I'd like to begin by acknowledging that I'm streaming from the traditional unceded territories of the Squamish, Musqueam and Tseil-Waututh nations. My riding also includes the traditional unceded territories of the Sechelt, Lil'wat and N'Quatqua nations. I'm very grateful for their stewardship of these lands and waters since time immemorial.

Ms. Bull, you mentioned the disproportionate impact to first nations-owned businesses. I've certainly seen it first-hand in my riding, particularly for those involved in the arts, culture and tourism sectors, of which there are many. You mentioned that the unique circumstances of indigenous-owned businesses bar them from government COVID-19 relief programs. I'm hoping you can explain why that is.

[Tabatha Bull]

Certainly. Thank you.

Initially, the first program under CEBA was designed for access through traditional financial institutions. We know that only about 33% of indigenous-owned businesses have relationships with traditional financial institutions. There was further funding provided, $307 million, through the national aboriginal capital corporation to be distributed in the same way as CEBA through the aboriginal financial institutions, but that money was not available to be distributed until late June. Again, there was a significant delay from when CEBA was announced.

Then, on the wage subsidy program that was unrolled initially, aboriginal economic development corporations were not eligible for the wage subsidy. That's because of the structure of how they're set up. We did have many discussions across government. Again, that was also remedied, but it was about a three-month delay from when other indigenous businesses were able to access the wage subsidy in comparison with economic development corporations. Economic development corporations do employ a significant number of Canadians, indigenous and not.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Absolutely. With the funding through aboriginal financial institutions and then the additional $133 million to support indigenous businesses thereafter, has this gap now been filled and some of the inequities between indigenous-owned and non indigenous-owned businesses addressed and remedied?

[Tabatha Bull]

For some we have seen an uptake of those funds. However, we do see a significant number of businesses that did not access the programs. Part of that is because of the various bureaucracies and understanding whether the programs did fit for the business. We also see that with additional programs, such as the rent subsidy program and other programs to support businesses through grants, businesses that are on reserve and that did not have a CRA number prior to September 20, 2020, are not eligible to access those programs.