Government Operations Committee on March 20th, 2024

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Have members spoken about the impact to our public service by way of these cuts? Canadians know that when you cut the public service, you're going to be cutting services to Canadians.

This isn't something that should be secret. These are public dollars. This isn't personal money; this is public money for public services that Canadians pay taxes for. They deserve to know their taxes are being spent effectively and that the minister responsible for the Treasury Board takes cuts to our services in Canada seriously.

[Anita Anand]

The PBO confirmed that we are not materially reducing services to Canadians with our refocused government spending initiative. We are saving money that can be redirected towards our government's priorities. With things like outsourcing executive travel, the intention is not to reduce the size of the public service or cut services to Canadians.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

We know the—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm sorry. That is our time.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Colleagues, we are going to suspend. Hopefully, like last time, we can all agree to vote. Once we've all voted, we'll come right back. We'll give everyone about 30 seconds of notice before we restart.

We are suspended.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, everyone. We are back.

We will start with Mrs. Kusie for four minutes.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you very much.

Minister, I'm going back to what is essentially a second announcement today.

The first announcement of managerial guidelines seems to have proven ineffective in the first six months. Frankly, I don't think more guidelines are what are required. It is about ensuring public servants are complying with them. I think that's far more important than creating new levels of bureaucracy and red tape.

To go back to the $5-million first wave that was announced today in The Globe and Mail by Bill Curry, the government has identified 635 IT middlemen that do no work. In fact, the PBO has launched an entire investigation into this.

How much has your government paid to IT middlemen?

[Anita Anand]

You referenced the announcement at lunch. The role of the Treasury Board president is to ensure that we have the rules, the policies and the guidelines in place. The Auditor General stated that our rules were sufficient, and I'm taking this opportunity to even enhance them. We know that there's an RCMP investigation related to the CBSA, and we will look to follow those recommendations, but I'm taking this proactive measure of updating the guidelines in advance.

With regard to your question, that information has already been provided to the committee, and I look forward to—

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

How much is it? What's the number, Minister?

[Anita Anand]

—continuing to ensure that we provide whatever information in addition that you need.

I will ask Annie to provide any further information relating to that.

In terms of the one supplier, however, I can confirm there were 103 contracts with GC Strategies from 2011 to 2024.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

We have, of course, GC Strategies and Dalian, which, of course, given your previous roles as procurement minister and Minister of Defence—and now you're President of the Treasury Board—I hope you were aware of. You didn't verify that you were in my first round of questioning, but I hope that you were.

There was $28 million for, essentially, four employees.

How many of these 635 companies have fewer than two employees? Can you tell Canadians, please?

[Anita Anand]

Actually, we're undertaking a horizontal audit, as I announced at lunch, and we will be able to provide that information.

I will say that the individual at DND who is at the heart of your question was employed at DND after I left as minister.

PSPC is also reviewing its supply arrangement, and I will ask Ms. Samantha Tattersall if she can comment further.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

No, that's fine.

I'll move on to my final question, Minister, which I think is very important for Canadians.

Previous to you, the minister of procurement and his deputy minister were here discussing the very important issue of conflict of interest.

Your spouse is a director of LifeLabs, which received a $66.3-million contract on June 23, 2020, as well as a $1.9-million contract on August 20 of the same year.

The deputy minister of procurement said that five employees were fired, were released, for not indicating their conflict of interest, yet apparently you did not indicate a conflict of interest to the Ethics Commissioner.

Do you believe that you should be held to the same standard as these five employees who were fired?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I apologize. We are out of time.

However, next up is Mr. Jowhari. I'm sure he will allow time to answer that if he chooses.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, welcome.

Minister, can you explain to the committee what services fall under the professional and special services categories?

[Anita Anand]

I'm actually going to take a moment to respond to the honourable member's false allegations that she is touting on social media and in committee.

I have complied with the conflict of interest guidelines. I have ensured that I've complied in terms of disclosure and screens, and I would caution the honourable member against making false allegations before she has the actual facts. If she would like to make a further inquiry with the conflict of interest commissioner, I invite her to do so. They have confirmed that I have complied. I signed no contracts, recused myself from every single meeting, and voluntarily recused myself from others in order to ensure that the screens remained in place. My deputy minister and chief of staff re-enforced the screens and ensured that I was recused.

I find it highly, highly questionable that a member of Parliament would make false allegations against another member of Parliament without checking her facts.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

I can assure you that the member that you talked about was actually standing at the back of the room and listening to you.

I'll quickly go back along the same line.

Minister, did you actually.... You're now focusing on the comment that Mrs. Kusie made. She's also made the allegation—at least the way I processed it—that you're responsible for signing all of these cheques that the government is spending.

As a minister responsible for many portfolios, have you signed any cheques that had anything to do with ArriveCAN or any other application or project?

[Anita Anand]

Again, I have not. I was not involved in any way with the ArriveCAN contracts. Those contracts did not come to me as minister.

Once again, I find if highly questionable that members of the opposition would be making allegations without actually checking the facts. We are in an age of misinformation and disinformation, and it is incumbent upon us, from a legal and a moral standpoint, to ensure that before we make allegations, we actually have the facts at our fingertips.

Once again, I'm glad you've asked that question. I did not sign any of those contracts. I did comply with the conflict of interest screens and disclosure obligations, and I will continue to do so.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Minister, but I don't think that should be any surprise to Canadians. I think the Leader of the Opposition gets up during question period every day and makes false allegations and misleads Canadians about many aspects. This is something that is not new to those of us sitting in this committee, because we see it on a daily basis in the House of Commons in front of many Canadians.

I have only about 30 seconds. Can you talk about the main estimates that you just recently published? How much have voted-on expenditures changed in this year's main estimates?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm afraid you have only about 15 seconds.

[Anita Anand]

That's all I need.

Voted-on expenditures are down $6.6 billion, or 3.3%, from the 2023-24 main estimates.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks.

Mrs. Vignola, you have two minutes. Go ahead, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I want to come back to the application of the Official Languages Act.

At present, many contracts require the use of English, and some are kind enough to state that it's possible that those hired might need to use French.

Why is French not mandatory across the board? Why is French never mandatory and English never the language that might need to be used? English is always mandatory and French, when mentioned, is always optional.