Government Operations Committee on Nov. 21st, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Good morning, everyone. Welcome.

I call this meeting to order. It's meeting number 154 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Yes, I'll get to you in two seconds, Mr. Brock.

Very quickly, I have a gentle reminder to please keep your earpieces away from your microphones at all times so we can protect the hearing of our very valued interpreters. Also, do not touch your microphone at all.

Mr. Brock, go ahead, quickly.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I'd like to remind all colleagues that during the last appearance of Tom Clark at this committee, he indicated that he'd be willing to be put under oath to reiterate his talking points.

With that being said, I'm seeking unanimous consent from committee members that Mr. Clark, prior to his opening statement, be given the opportunity to either swear to tell the truth or affirm to tell the truth, Mr. Chair.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We're fine with that.

Mr. Clark, I understand you have the text.

Go ahead, Mr. Clerk.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Marc-Olivier Girard]

Hello, Mr. Clark.

Would you like to perform an oath or solemn affirmation, sir?

[Thomas Clark, Consul General of Canada in New York, United States, Consulate General of Canada in New York]

I will do the affirmation, please.

[The Clerk]

Please repeat after me.

I, Tom Clark, do solemnly, sincerely and truly affirm and declare the taking of any oath is according to my religious belief unlawful. I do also solemnly, sincerely and truly affirm and declare that the evidence I shall give on this examination shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

[Thomas Clark]

I, Tom Clark, do solemnly, sincerely and truly affirm and declare the taking of any oath is according to my religious belief unlawful. I do also solemnly, sincerely and truly affirm and declare that the evidence I shall give on this examination shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much, Mr. Clark. Welcome back.

We'll start with a five-minute statement from you. Go ahead, please, sir.

[Thomas Clark]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, members of the committee.

I'm pleased to be here in support of the committee's important work to ensure the full accountability and transparency of government operations, including those of Global Affairs Canada.

Today, I will speak to my role as consul general to New York and clarify any remaining questions you may have.

As consul general, I am mandated to advocate for Canada's interests in the five-state territory of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Connecticut. This region has a combined GDP of more than $6 trillion, and it has two-way trade with Canada of more than $200 billion a year. The consulate is one of Canada's most important missions in the United States and in Canada's global network abroad.

An official residence is one component of the diplomatic tool kit used by countries around the world. For the New York consulate, events hosted at the official residence foster partnerships between American business and political leadership and Canadian federal, provincial and business leaders. With the world focused on the changing administration in the United States, these relationships—and the economic opportunities they generate—are more important than ever.

Upon my arrival at the consulate in February 2023, I began hosting events in the official residence to build these networks and create opportunities to advance the political and economic interests of Canadians.

As we’ve learned, Canada’s official residence in New York was purchased in 1961 and last renovated in 1982, more than forty years ago. While hosting events at the official residence to advance Canada’s interests, I observed that the property could not appropriately accommodate guests with mobility issues and posed challenges between the family and representational space. I was informed that these concerns were in line with deficiencies reported to Global Affairs Canada headquarters since 2014.

As I indicated in my previous testimony, I did not provide input to the headquarters-led multi-year process to address the deficiencies of the official residence. With respect to previous questions from the committee regarding a report prepared by the department's property bureau in April 2023, I want to be clear that I was unaware that any mention of my observations had been included as part of the mission's input to the property team.

Any mention from the mission referencing my views on the state of the official residence was the result of an indirect, third-hand report of a remark made to a colleague. This in no way constituted an effort to influence a complex departmental process initiated in 2014—that is, eight years prior to my arrival.

As all officials who have come before this committee have stated, the property project for the official residence was led by Global Affairs Canada headquarters. The decision to relocate the residence was taken in Ottawa, based on a detailed financial analysis and needs assessment overseen by a governance structure designed to prevent against any undue influence. As with all departmental property decisions, this process followed a strict set of guidelines and requirements designed to ensure that decisions are based on value for money and long-term benefits for Canadians. As we have heard, Canada's new official residence is smaller, cheaper and accessible.

In closing, I did not seek or have the opportunity to exert influence or direct the department's ongoing consideration of the residence, nor did I exert any influence or direction on the purchase of the new residence.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, Mr. Clark.

We will start with Mr. Barrett.

I'll just remind everyone, because we have a short time with Mr. Clark today, to please watch the clock, so that we do not go over time.

Mr. Barrett, the floor is yours for six minutes, please.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

On November 5, news broke about your involvement in the purchase of the $9-million condo on Billionaires' Row. Then, having been found out, you sent a letter. The letter said, “I was not aware until media reports this week that this comment made in passing to a colleague had been reported by the Consulate General to the Global Affairs Canada property team.”

Let me give you an example of a comment made in passing, Mr. Clark. “Hey, that meeting didn't go so well.”

Now let me give you an example of someone who holds the most senior position at an organization telling their team that the facilities for them to live in and for them to work in were insufficient.

That's what you did, sir. Isn't that right?

[Thomas Clark]

Mr. Chair, as previous testimony has shown, the concerns about the official residence—let's call it the old official residence—had been around since 2014. I was warned that—

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Let me stop you there, Mr. Clark. The difference, sir, is that you got the job and then the condo got bought. That's the difference. This isn't about what happened eight years ago.

What we need to know, sir, is why you didn't tell the truth—why you lied to committee the last time you were here. Why did you do that?

[Thomas Clark]

Mr. Chair, the evidence I have given this committee has been consistent with the evidence every other witness has given to this committee. It is straightforward, and it is simple. There was a process—

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

That's not true. Let me display for you some of the evidence that comes from your own department.

First of all, there's the ATIP that was the subject of the November 5 story that was published, in which you are the current CNGNY HOM, as follows:

The current CNGNY HOM expressed concerns regarding the completion of the...kitchen and refurbishment project and indicated the unit was not suitable to be the [consul general's] accommodations and it does not have an ideal floorplan for [consul general] representational activities.

That's not what you said when you were here last time. You were asked pointedly. One of the Liberal members helpfully asked, “Did you at any time talk to anyone regarding a desire for relocation?” You replied, “Never.”

We know now that's not true. We know, in fact, that you did make the comments. You just didn't know that it was captured in official briefing notes. You knew that you had made the comments. You just didn't know that you got caught. Isn't that right?

[Thomas Clark]

Mr. Chair, as every other witness has testified, and as I have testified, this process has been going on for a long time. As I testified to this committee, I did not ask for, or request, a change of residence. I will restate that now. However, this has been a process that has been led by Global Affairs headquarters property division in Ottawa—

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Sir, let me tell you this. You described the importance of the mission, which you're the head of. You described how important it is. In order for you to get things done, I don't imagine you need to directly instruct individual members of your team to do them. You need to identify that there's a problem, and then the team engages to solve it. That's how it works. This isn't some comment made in passing.

Again, you talk about the evidence. Let's talk about the June 17 email from Emily Nicholson. Ms. Nicholson says that the “[head of mission] and staff have been instrumental throughout this process, with the [head of mission]”, which is you, “providing the greenlight for the selection of the new residence.”

We know, once this scandal ended up in front of a parliamentary committee, that damage control was engaged, and Ms. Nicholson swallowed herself whole, saying that you had nothing to do with it. Well, I imagine, when she was trying to save her job, that's exactly what she would say.

However, there are now multiple data points that didn't come from admissions by you or your staff; they came from access to information demands and from document production orders from this committee, which revealed that you were involved, that your champagne tastes weren't being met, either with the recently modified shared representational space at the mission or with the multi-million dollar condo on Billionaires' Row.

With my last 30 seconds, sir, we know that you're not going to resign for having bought a $9-million condo on Billionaires' Row and for having personally initiated that process. Will you resign for lying to a parliamentary committee?

[Thomas Clark]

Mr. Chair, the evidence I have given to this committee consistently has been the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

It's too bad that the facts don't back that up.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, gentlemen.

We'll now go to Mr. Jowhari for six minutes, please.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome back, Mr. Tom Clark, and thank you for making yourself available.

I am the member of Parliament our colleague MP Barrett was quoting, and I'm going to go back to the same line of questioning that I had very shortly. I want to pivot to something a lot more important.

Given the fact that you now agree to be under oath, I'm going to pose to you the same question that I posed last time you were here, but I'm going to probably edit it a bit. Mr. Clark, did you at any time exert influence in the purchase of the new building and in the divestment of the old building?

[Thomas Clark]

No, I did not.