Government Operations Committee on Feb. 22nd, 2024

[Antonio Utano]

Can I just quickly address a point from the previous question, sir?

The reason we think there are a lot of falsehoods and that this document is not at all accurate is not just that it has no evidence, but it also doesn't take any context into consideration. There are timelines in there when I wasn't even at work. I was dealing with a personal medical issue for two months, but there were inferences made, leading our being in a negative light.

I'll just pause that with respect to some points in the PSF—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks. Let's get to Mr. Jowhari's question.

[Cameron MacDonald]

On behalf of Mr. Utano and me, I will say that we both have a deep respect for the AG and we don't want to undermine her report.

The fact of the matter is that we weren't interviewed until after her report was written, and we have absolutely no idea what information was provided to her or what information was deleted so that it couldn't be provided to her.

I won't speak to anything other than the fact that she's always represented herself and her organization professionally. However, it wasn't that hard for us to find information that Ms. O'Gorman should have had about who picked GC Strategies; the AG wasn't provided with it, but she was provided with the preliminary statement of facts, which had nothing to do with her audit.

It just goes to my point that there was obviously an attempt by Ms. O'Gorman to try to slight us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, gentlemen.

Mr. Genuis, you have five minutes, please.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Utano, I want to drill down on the mechanics of the internal investigation.

I assume that you're familiar with Mr. Lafleur's testimony here on February 5. He's conducting the internal investigation.

He confirmed in his response to my questions that he is not an independent investigator and that he's not able to act independently. He's subject to the internal chain of command at the CBSA. I emphasized at the time that I thought this was a deeply flawed process. Determinations of accountability require a proper external investigation in which powerful people, CBSA leadership and politicians, can be held accountable.

The RCMP is investigating, but we also need to identify wrongdoing that falls short of criminal behaviour.

Why do you think the government is pursuing this internal investigation instead of an independent investigation into who is responsible?

[Antonio Utano]

The really brief answer is that it's an attempt to scapegoat us and point fingers at us.

If the question is around why we think there's an issue with the internal investigation, I can answer that further, but I want to let Mr. MacDonald answer, as well, on why he thinks....

[Cameron MacDonald]

It's clear that this ArriveCAN issue has drawn national attention. It's clear that Botler itself has tried to influence the media and is a marketing machine. From the statements that it has made out loud, it's clear that it has also engaged with people that it calls “leadership”, which is obviously a lot higher than Erin O'Gorman, so I think Erin O'Gorman and the CBSA are pretty much holding on to these allegations as hard as they can.

I don't know what the fabric is between those three things, but it sure seems like Minh Doan, John Ossowski and Erin O'Gorman are saying that nobody else at the CBSA, PHAC or PSPC knows anything, but these two guys here were the ones who were responsible for contracting $60 million worth of work so loosely that nobody can account for anything.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Okay.

There is a serious discrepancy in the testimony around the timeline of this investigation that I think is important. Mr. Lafleur said that they initiated an investigation in November of 2022, but you said that the investigation was initiated into your conduct after your testimony in November of 2023.

Did the internal investigation specifically looking at allegations against you two begin in November 2022 or November 2023? What evidence can you provide to support your position on that point?

[Cameron MacDonald]

The document is classified as “protected B”, but I believe it's my personal information, so I'll verify that I can share it.

I received a letter saying that the investigation for the Botler allegations from 2022 was initiated 10 days after I testified here at OGGO on November 17, 2023, I believe. Mine said “initiated”, and Mr. Utano's said “reinitiated”, which just doesn't make any sense to us.

[Antonio Utano]

Can I add some more clarification?

I learned in November 2023 that something was opened and closed. I believe Ms. Dutt from Botler confirmed that she got a call from Pierre Lessard, the chief security officer, saying exactly the same thing that we told them in 2021 and exactly the same thing that PSPC told them in the summer of 2023, which was that this was a matter between them and their business partners, not the Government of Canada, and that it appeared to be a misunderstanding on how procurement contracting works in the Government of Canada.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

You're saying that you have written documentation—which you can share with the committee, I hope, as soon as possible—to confirm that the government's telling you in November 2023 that they were either initiating in one case or reopening in another case an investigation.

Can you supply that to us? It explicitly contradicts the testimony that we received from Mr. Lafleur. Answer quickly, because I want to get to another question, but is that correct?

[Cameron MacDonald]

I can confirm it. If I'm able to provide it, then I will.

Also, the document says they are entering the fact-finding stage, which clearly goes into this.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

If what you said is accurate and if it's supported by the document, it would very clearly contradict the testimony that we heard from the investigator.

You referenced the Prime Minister's words and suggested in your opening comments that it wasn't just a matter of other people in CBSA trying to put the whole blame for what happened onto you two. You referenced the Prime Minister's comments. What do you think is motivating the Prime Minister's words? Why is he invested in the outcome of this investigation?

[Antonio Utano]

I can start.

It's a great question. The answer is that we don't know.

We've been trying to access information to defend our characters and our ability to defend against what's happening with this investigation. Our ATIP requests have been delayed and blocked. Access to the original allegations has been denied. We keep trying to ask CBSA to clarify, but we've been denied. We don't know. That's the issue.

There's been a cover-up and a doubling down, if you will, to try to protect and withhold information from us. Information has been deleted. We just saw an announcement from the Government of Canada that the internal ATIP machine within CBSA has been down for the last two weeks. Something is going on. This is what is concerning to us.

[Cameron MacDonald]

I would just add that I'm not a politician and I don't want to get into politics, but there's a lot of it going on right now. When we see what's happening with the OAG report and with this, it just seems as though there's been a lack of accountability overall.

I was kind of shocked when I saw the media reports on the news that the Prime Minister had said what he said. You can't say there won't be consequences when you're saying that there is an investigation, and in this case we haven't even been contacted by the RCMP. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much, Mr. Genuis.

Colleagues, we're going to take a short five-minute suspension to use the facilities, etc. We'll be back in five minutes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We are back in session.

We're over to Mr. Sousa, please, for five minutes. Go ahead, sir.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and witnesses.

I have a preamble here.

Based upon Mr. Utano's and Mr. MacDonald's opening statements, I don't believe that anyone's been charged here. I don't believe that anything has been laid against anyone. Neither the Prime Minister nor any other elected officials are stating that. What they're stating is that if anyone is held accountable, they should then be appropriately dealt with. I think all of us have recognized that, and that's why we're going through this process.

I do appreciate Mr. Utano's recognizing that ArriveCAN would have cost more had it been done another way, but there is value in the intellectual property of the work that has been done. I think that's also critical to reaffirm.

Mr. MacDonald, I appreciate your recognizing that you've known Mr. Firth and first met him in Stephen Harper's days in 2010.

Now I'm trying to understand the confusion between this preliminary statement of facts that has come out. It's not the final result; it's just a preliminary indication of what you did as part of the investigation.

As we go through the investigation, there is a next step. The next step, of course, is to provide interviews and to reach out to you and Mr. Utano. I think you've already responded via your lawyers as to coming forward, having an interview and going forward in this.

Can you please confirm that you have actually held back on providing interviews with the investigator?

[Cameron MacDonald]

Maybe I'll start.

When you say “held back”, I think what we've done is maybe pushed back for our rights.

We have asked for disclosure. We know that Botler provided some form of email to Erin O'Gorman and what they refer to as “leadership”. There was also a request for a misconduct report, and the CBSA received the misconduct report some weeks later. That's what CBSA wrote in the document.

We've asked for that information in order to prepare for our participation. We will continue to do so.

Short of the fact that we received notification that said that they initiated—

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

That's fair enough.

We have a situation in which an investigation is under review. You have concerns about sharing your evidence to ensure that the truth is made and that we get to the bottom of it, and we all agree with that. I believe the investigation is also looking, for that matter, and the RCMP is making its investigations. I don't know to what extent that's happened, because that's part of the integrity of the investigation.

Certainly when we're dealing with this now in public and individuals are having conversations with you on the side and we're here before this committee, we're prejudicing the possibility of a proper outcome, in my opinion.

Notwithstanding, I don't want to discuss the actual details of the preliminary statement of facts, because that's where we're trying to protect you as well, in that circumstance.

You mentioned that one of the members.... Well, he's not a full-time member of the committee; he's part time. He comes in and he's reached out to you. When did that first happen? When were you first approached by a committee member?

[Antonio Utano]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Sousa, I think we've answered that question and I think we've committed to providing those timelines. To be completely honest, I don't have the exact dates and timelines in front of me. We did work with our counsel, and communications did happen through our counsel.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Did you give your counsel authorization to share documents with other members of the committee?

[Antonio Utano]

We authorized our counsel to do what is in the best interest of his clients, which would be us.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Were you aware that your counsel was providing information?

Obviously, you're telling me that neither one of you actually shared information with a member of the committee.

[Cameron MacDonald]

What we have said is that initially there were elements of the report that were shared. That's the truth.