Evidence of meeting #108 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was contract.
A video is available from Parliament.
Partner, GC Strategies
They have never subcontracted through my contracts, and I think through Dalian and Coradix it would be a handful of times. I don't have the exact number.
NDP
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
Thank you, Mr. Bachrach.
We now have Mrs. Block for five minutes.
Go ahead, please.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I'm going to circle back to some of the questions that my colleague was asking with regard to who from the government would have contacted you for these contracts. I know you provided us with a name for a contract. You stated that Angela Durigan from PSPC signed off on an email. I think that was in regard to the first contract you received, but, in fact, you received four contracts for ArriveCAN, three of which were non-competitive and one of which was supposed to be competitive.
I'm going to ask if you could provide us with the names of the contacts on those contracts.
Partner, GC Strategies
Again, they were never ArriveCAN contracts. They were all pandemic response contracts. There was not just one contract for ArriveCAN. It was in two of them. They were pandemic response ones as opposed to four ArriveCAN contracts.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Okay. I understand that the national security exemption was put in place during the pandemic, so can you provide us with the names of the contacts from the government when you were awarded the four contracts?
Partner, GC Strategies
Angela Durigan was the contact for three of them. I don't have the lady's first or full name for the fourth one, but I'm more than happy to share that with you after this.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
I would appreciate that, because this information was requested from you last October. You promised to undertake to provide those names for us and you didn't, so I'm a bit leery about that.
Partner, GC Strategies
I'm sorry, no, I did provide those names. As part of our evidence package, I gave all three emails with the contract awards, and all three of them showed Angela Durigan.
The reason the fourth one wasn't provided was that I was asked only for the COVID contracts, not for the fourth one, but that information was provided.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Okay. We're going to make a distinction with regard to your contracts as to whether they were for the pandemic, COVID or ArriveCAN. I got that. You will provide—
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Yes. A national security exemption. Absolutely.
You have agreed to provide us with the name of the other individual whom you were in contact with.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Thank you very much.
On the Auditor General, I understand you've testified here today that in her report, she didn't provide accurate information. However, she found that GC Strategies was involved in the development of a contract from the Government of Canada to your firm, valued at $25 million, which you received in May 2022.
Whom did you communicate with from the Government of Canada while you were helping to create those criteria?
Partner, GC Strategies
First of all, the committee has subpoenaed me here to speak about things that I can talk about.
Also, my understanding is that these allegations have been moved to the RCMP. In fear of interfering with the RCMP investigation, I don't think I can comment on that right now.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
It's my understanding, from testimony just a few minutes ago, that you haven't been contacted by the RCMP. You're not under investigation right now, but you know what the RCMP is investigating.
Partner, GC Strategies
I have the same information as everybody else. I have what I'm watching in testimony and seeing what committee members are putting on Twitter.
I'm assuming that.... All of PSPC's testimony said that all the findings from the Auditor General's report were sent through there. Again, with that being a broad stroke and not actually getting disclosure, like we asked for prior to being here—understanding what those documents and that information were—I cannot comment right now on that information.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
You're not going to let us know who it was you were meeting with as you were constructing a contract that you knew you would end up getting.
Partner, GC Strategies
Those are your words, not mine.
I'm just saying, right now, as a result of this being pushed to the RCMP and with all efforts of the committee behind it, unfortunately I cannot comment on an ongoing RCMP investigation.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
I guess what I would ask is whether this is commonplace. We'll get away from the actual contract in question. Is it commonplace for IT firms and consulting firms to sit at the table and help determine the criteria for a contract they are going to be bidding on?
Partner, GC Strategies
I'm not sure if I can comment on that. I can't comment on what everybody.... I don't do that, personally. I can't comment on what every one of the other 635 firms does.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
On a point of order, Chair, the witness is refusing to answer questions under the auspices of a hypothetical, according to him. He is required to answer the questions put to him by this committee, unless I'm mistaken.
If I am mistaken, I'll ask for you to correct my understanding, but the witness is required to provide this information, and his lawyer will be able to tell him that it wouldn't prejudice a police investigation.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
It's a fair point. We do require witnesses to answer questions.
Actually, looking at the section “Swearing-in of Witnesses”, it says, “refusal to answer questions or failure to reply truthfully may give rise to a charge of contempt of the House”.
We will get to the next intervention, which is Mrs. Atwin's, and then we will have a chance with Mr. Deltell, but we will have a break after the next round. Perhaps Mr. Firth can confer with his lawyer and we can get back to this issue.
Mrs. Atwin, go ahead, please.
Liberal
Jenica Atwin Liberal Fredericton, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Firth, for being here.
I'm going to bounce all over the place, so forgive me. To start, there was a question around Coredal. I just need a bit of clarification. In relation to Coredal, you stated that you bought the company in 2015. Who did you buy it from?
