Government Operations Committee on Sept. 19th, 2024

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

I'm just going to jump in because I'm running out of time.

The irony of this, though, is that this government has for so long been reluctant to hold these big corporations accountable for what happened in the opioid crisis. Your criteria for considering them eligible for procurement—whether or not they've been held accountable for these actions—isn't triggered precisely because this government has failed to take actions to hold these companies accountable. There is a close relationship between Dominic Barton, McKinsey and the government, a failure to hold them accountable and then that lack of accountability being invoked as a justification for continuing to use them to procure services.

Meanwhile, so many Canadians have suffered as a result of the opioid crisis. McKinsey and Purdue have had to pay massive compensation in the United States. McKinsey alone, I think, has had to pay half a billion dollars in the United States. They're not being held accountable because of the cozy relationship we see between these big corporations and the government.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks. It is past your time.

Next is Mr. Sousa, please.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you again to the witnesses for returning to OGGO.

Unfortunately, there seems to be an ever-increasing practice of infantile name-calling and an attempt to disparage prominent Canadians who promote success around the world. I guess my question for you, then, is this. Is it appropriate for leaders to seek out global economic advice from industry experts?

[Michael Mills]

Thank you for the question.

As I said before, I think that if you're dealing with large transformations, which many of these projects involved, it is appropriate to try to look globally to G7 counterpart countries to see what other countries are doing, to see what lessons have been learned in similar types of projects as part of the formation of strategies and to also benchmark and compare how you're doing.

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

There have been standards for departments to review global business processes and performance metrics in regard to professional services contracts. Has that been the case?

[Michael Mills]

Yes.

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

Is that anything new? Is that something that has been the case throughout previous generations of government?

[Michael Mills]

I might turn to my colleague from the OCG in terms of some of the analytics that are done around projects. That was driving some of this analysis.

[Emilio Franco]

When it comes to projects in government, there is a view that it's important to get independent advice.

Now, that independent advice doesn't always have to come from outside government. It can come from internal evaluators, as my colleague has highlighted. As part of a regular practice, when you're embarking on something new, you may not have expertise in-house, so it is important to look at outside advice.

We can't speak for how the government is deciding to get that advice, but within the Government of Canada and the public service, we do look to contracts when that expertise cannot be found within.

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

Is there any evidence, then, of conflicts of interest relative to some of the advice provided to the leaders of government, who are not engaged in the procurement process or the decision-making, or to yourselves and your group, who are actually dealing with the procurement practice and processes? Is there any evidence of conflicts or interference by elected officials?

[Emilio Franco]

I think it's important to reiterate that, in our own internal review, in the review of the procurement ombud and in the review of the Auditor General, there was no political interest found, no corruption and no cases of fraud.

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

What is the role for PSPC in dealing with setting those requirements for client departments? What is that engagement?

[Michael Mills]

Again, thank you for the question.

The client is responsible for determining what their business needs are. They're requiring that for the statement of work and ultimately identifying what kinds of outputs and outcomes they're trying to achieve. Really, our role is working with them to try to ensure they have a procurement strategy that will get them the most qualified firm that will actually be able to meet those needs and deliver value for Canadians.

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

Right. We know that PSPC awarded three contracts through the standard competitive process. How much do they represent the total value of the contracts awarded to McKinsey? I'm trying to get a sense. McKinsey is a global organization. What is their actual engagement in Canadian procurement with the Government of Canada?

[Dominic Laporte]

If I may, the information that I had...and it really depends on the time period you're looking for, but if I remember, over the last three years it was basically 13%. It was in terms of the amounts that were represented by McKinsey. We need to confirm the time period on that, but it was 13.5%, if I'm not mistaken.

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

Has McKinsey been found acting untoward? Have they been producing what they've been engaged to do?

[Dominic Laporte]

It's really for the client, basically, to make that judgment call when we look at the contracts that were awarded to McKinsey, but there was no evidence brought to our attention of the client not having received the services under the contracts.

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

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

You still have a bit of time, if you wish, Mr. Sousa.

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

Let's chat a little bit more then.

This is important, because what I'm trying to ensure is that the relationship that has occurred and the requirement for leaders to take on advice from others.... The idea being proposed is to be closed-minded and not seek out advice. Advice is I think important for all of us concerned, at every level.

In regard to some of the other questions being proposed, I would like to know if, on the previous testimony on this horizontal audit that's been discussed in the assessing of these professional contracts, you could describe to the committee what is involved in doing such an audit.

[Sheri Ostridge]

Sure. Thank you for the question.

It's always exciting to talk about audits when you're in my job. For a horizontal audit, it is across government that we're taking a look, and it's, I think, positive into.... It's a balance between....

There are a lot of audits and reviews out there already. We need to let the system correct, but we are going in because it takes time for the system to.... There are so many recommendations to be acted upon, and there is good progress happening.

This particular audit will shed a light across large organizations, a couple of small organizations and common service providers to look at three areas. These are in governance, decision-making—these two are key—and the integrity of the processes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much. That's your time.

Mrs. Vignola.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I was talking earlier about the difference between a cruise ship and a rowboat. These days, people seem a bit afraid of the words “accountability” and “reporting”. It seems to be part of the current climate. It isn't just the government. It's everyone. Human beings, in general, don't take kindly to a slap on the wrist. They don't like recrimination and criticism. However, regardless, it's necessary. It doesn't mean that the person held to account will lose their job if they make a mistake. The important thing is to learn and improve.

When the procedures are too simple, they don't cover every angle. When they're too complicated, you get lost. How can you find the right balance, without forcing public servants to keep a checklist? That wouldn't be a bad idea. However, it could be complicated.

How can you strike a balance between keeping things too simple and making things too complicated, in order to achieve efficiency?

[Annie Boudreau]

Thank you for your question.

As I said earlier, when the new procedures were introduced, we consulted the specialists in the company so that they could tell us exactly what could and couldn't be done. We did the same work with the people in human resources, the chief financial officers and the Canada School of Public Service.

As you said earlier, the goal is to improve. However, the practices must be effective and efficient. Moreover, we need the courage and the time to ensure the best possible implementation for all concerned.

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

You just said that you included internal people. In my former career as a school administrator, I realized that one thing often lacking was a feeling of recognition. Without this feeling, employees become disengaged when it comes to ongoing improvement.

How can you make sure that employees' ideas are recognized whether the employees are at the junior or senior level?