Nope.
Evidence of meeting #109 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 company.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #109 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 company.
A video is available from Parliament.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
They never participated in any meetings.
Do you know the principals of Botler? Did you ever meet with them?
2:25 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
No, I have never met with them. The only interaction I've had with Botler has been for security.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
What did you do with regard to providing security clearance? What did you do in that case with those two individuals?
2:25 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
Those two individuals reached out to me, asking how to get security-cleared with the federal government. I gave them the instructions that they needed to get fingerprinted. I found a place in Montreal—that's where they were residing at the time—that does federal fingerprinting. I got them through that process. They sent me back their documents with the DCNs, the document control numbers, on them. They sent me their dates of birth and their citizenships. I submitted that through the OLISS portal, and they were able to get security-cleared.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
You facilitated their engagement. They didn't have a contract. Is that correct? Why did they need security clearance? What exactly was taking place?
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Who instructed you to provide the requirements for fingerprinting and security engagement? How did that come to be?
2:25 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
I believe they reached out to me to say that they needed security clearance.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
The two principals reached out to you. This would have been Amir Morv and Ritika Dutt.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Their request was that they needed clearance in order to engage with the federal government.
2:25 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
At that time, without a contract, you were able to do that to start the process.
If you were submitting a bid on an RFP that you were not awarded, there could be a number or an identifier associated with that, but prior to a few years ago, you would be able to submit a name for security clearance and say that they were just a consultant, and they would be able to get a clearance.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Had Mr. Firth been in contact with them as well, concurrent with you, in terms of their engagement?
2:25 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
I don't have any knowledge of his contact with Botler.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Okay. Botler contacted you for their security, and no contract was evident. They were going through a preliminary study or pilot or whatever it was called. That's why they needed this clearance, which you helped them to get.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
You, being an owner of GC Strategies—a major owner, a 50% owner—didn't have a contract with the government regarding their engagement either. Is that correct?
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
GC Strategies doesn't have a contract. Botler doesn't have a contract. You're facilitating security clearance for them to potentially get a contract.