Government Operations Committee on March 13th, 2024

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

All right. Thank you.

Were you aware that the procurement process currently in use was put in place by former minister of public works and government services Rona Ambrose?

[Kristian Firth]

I'm sorry. I can't answer that question. I don't know the answer.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

All right.

I'll ask you an easier question. Do you think the procurement process is simple, responsive and resilient, or cumbersome and complicated? Does it need improving?

[Kristian Firth]

I find it straightforward, after having been in the industry for a long time. However, I think there needs to be a component whereby it's quicker for the government to go directly to the source.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Bachrach, please go ahead, sir.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Looking at the relationship between you, Mr. Firth, and Mr. MacDonald, I think it's pretty clear from your testimony what's in it for you, which is that you've established yourself as the government's go-to guy. You have the ability to run these contracts through your company. Mr. MacDonald, therefore, funnels a bunch of work to you, and you're able to charge these commissions. That's been well established.

What I've had a harder time understanding is what's in it for Mr. MacDonald. I'm going to go back to some Globe and Mail reporting from January 16. This involves communications between you and the two Botler principals. You urged them “to single out Mr. MacDonald for praise when meeting with other senior government officials”.

The quote here from you, Mr. Firth, is, “I just want to make sure that he gets taken care of, right?” This was told to Ms. Dutt and Mr. Morv.

I'm just wondering if you can clarify what his being “taken care of” would entail, and why it was so important that Mr. MacDonald got taken care of, in your view.

[Kristian Firth]

There was no financial benefit at all or any kind of transaction put forth. I just felt that the opportunity to have Mr. MacDonald working with Botler, understanding the importance of the harassment that was happening within the Public Safety portfolio.... I felt like there had to be some recognition, whether it was a pat on the back or a “job well done” for identifying the issues with Public Safety and being the pathfinder organization to move forward.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

The benefit for him from this relationship was that praise sent his way would help him advance in the organization. The benefit for you was that you would be able to charge these commissions and continue to get work. Is that a fair characterization of this reciprocity that you had going on?

[Kristian Firth]

No, not at all.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Why not?

[Kristian Firth]

Well, it's because the intention.... I was not going to rub his back and he rubs my back: This was not, “I'm going to make you have advancements through your career so you can keep funding contracts.” You have to bear in mind, after knowing Mr. MacDonald since 2010, that the first contract I was awarded while he was in the department was 10 years later. That doesn't sound like it's a relationship that's been going back and forth many times.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

The quote is, literally, “I just want to make sure he gets taken care of, right?” That's—

[Kristian Firth]

That could be recognition for a job well done. That doesn't guarantee a promotion.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Okay. It reads to me like something more than recognition—being “taken care of”. I'd like to—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Make it a quick question, Mr. Bachrach, please.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Okay. I'll cede my time, Mr. Chair, and dive into the next question in the next round.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks.

Mrs. Block, please go ahead.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Firth, I'm going to circle back to my line of questioning regarding GC Strategies' involvement in developing criteria on the fourth contract that you would have been awarded through the CBSA.

Both the Auditor General and the procurement ombud identified the overly restrictive criteria on that fourth contract, which obviously raised concerns for both of them. A deeper concern to the Auditor General is that she went further and identified that GC Strategies were at the table.

Look, you would have been meeting with public office holders in order to set these criteria. They are accountable to Parliament. I'm going to ask you the same question I asked earlier. I'm trusting that you've had an opportunity to speak with your lawyer. Who did you communicate with from the Government of Canada? I need the names.

Thank you.

[Kristian Firth]

Let me address the question of the requirements being overly restrictive. I think I've heard in testimony and read in reports that the ePortal did a CPSS search, and there were actually 40 qualified vendors that bid on this RFP. Actually, I think 10 even showed interest. It seems a little subjective after the fact to call it “restrictive”, when there were already 40 qualified vendors who could actually respond to that.

Secondly, I've had a chance to speak with my lawyer, and I'm sticking to my line with regard to the fact this is under investigation by the RCMP; therefore, I cannot interfere with that.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Mr. Chair, I'm wondering if you could provide us with any clarity on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Yes. Thanks, Mrs. Block.

Mr. Firth, I understand what you're saying, but it's a very direct and simple question. We do have rules. I'm going to refer back to them:

Witnesses must answer all questions which the committee puts to them.... [You] may object to a question asked by an individual committee member. However, if the committee agrees that the question be put to the witness, the witness is obliged to reply.... The actions of a witness who refuses...questions may be reported to the House.

I think I can speak for everyone when I say we don't want to get to that point. I think it's a fair question. I don't think it's one directly related to any potential investigation. If I read it right, it's regarding the comment that GC Strategies helped to write the requirements for the contract that you then won. I think what we're looking for—if I'm correct, Mrs. Block—is, who did you discuss this with in the department?

[Kristian Firth]

Again, in the first three contracts, the names have already been provided, back in October 2022. I promise the committee member that I'll get the fourth person to them after this meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Okay.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

For greater clarity, I'm looking for the individuals or individual that you would have met with in developing the criteria, not who signed off on the contract in this particular case. I do want that name, but now I'm asking, who did you sit at the table with to develop the criteria for this contract?

[Kristian Firth]

Again, I apologize, but after speaking with my lawyer, my stance still stands the same with the RCMP investigation pending. I don't interfere with that.