Evidence of meeting #38 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 app.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
If I take $8.8 million and divide it by 70, that's about $125,000 for each one of these changes.
Can you give us a sense of an example of what one of these changes would look like?
12:35 p.m.
Vice-President, Health Security and Regional Operations Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
I can speak to some of the requirements that changed over the course of the pandemic. I believe it was in April of this year that the government decided to implement a vaccine-differentiated border. By that I mean that those individuals who were vaccinated and double-dosed were accorded certain benefits by being vaccinated, once it was proven that vaccination was an effective mechanism to protect individuals.
Those who were unvaccinated would be subject to a different regime. What I mean by that is that they would have to have the pre-arrival test, which could have been a PCR or RAT. They would have to be tested on day one and day eight. They would have been subject to quarantine or isolation, depending on the situation as well.
ArriveCAN needed to reflect those two different streams of travellers. When it came to the vaccination status, I believe Kelly would be—
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Thank you.
I only have about 45 seconds, my apologies.
Ms. O'Gorman, is it fair to say that these changes were quite complex, and that it needed to integrate a number of different platforms and functionalities?
12:35 p.m.
Liberal
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Okay.
I'll just paint the picture: We had to develop an application in less than a month. We started working with PHAC to get roughly 70 requirements to be able to do it, and we leveraged PSPC's existing standing purchase order to be able to facilitate this.
Is that a fair statement?
12:35 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Procurement Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
That is correct.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
Well done. You're only two seconds past, Mr. Jowhari.
Ms. Block, you have five minutes, please.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I just want to go back and make sure that I'm fully satisfied that I understand some of the answers that have been given here today.
Ms. O'Gorman, I'm going to start with you.
You said that there were three companies that you identified that you thought could do this work. Can you just give me their names again?
12:40 p.m.
President, Canada Border Services Agency
They were Deloitte, Apple and GC Strategies.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
I have to say that I echo Mrs. Vignola's comments regarding the questions that she had about the choice of GC Strategies, who in their own testimony confirmed that they weren't tech experts, that they weren't developers and that they brought teams together because they themselves didn't have the expertise.
Where I'm going with these questions is that you also stated that you have no information on the subcontractors. Do you know who they are?
12:40 p.m.
President, Canada Border Services Agency
No, the contract was with GC Strategies.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Okay, so you don't know who those subcontractors are.
Is there a requirement for a company like GC Strategies to also follow up with some vetting in regard to security clearance requirements for subcontractors?
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Would they be very similar to the vetting process that GC Strategies itself would have to undergo?
12:40 p.m.
President, Canada Border Services Agency
The security requirements would apply to anybody who was working on the application.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
What sort of oversight would CBSA or any other department provide to GC Strategies to ensure that they were complying with that vetting process?
12:40 p.m.
President, Canada Border Services Agency
It is a requirement of the contract. The issue was raised of whether there was an individual who may not have completed the security requirement process. I don't have that information, so we will come back in writing on the process and who makes those approvals. So I understood the question—
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
I am not asking about that specific individual. I'm wondering who provides oversight to a company like GC Strategies, and who is dealing with all subcontractors that we cannot know anything about. Who's providing oversight to ensure that they are vetting those subcontractors to the same level that they themselves are being vetted for security clearance?
12:40 p.m.
President, Canada Border Services Agency
PSPC is responsible to ensure that contractors are compliant with the requirements in the contract that they have with the government.
12:40 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Procurement Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Mr. Chair, yes, the contract would have the security requirements. We have a contract security program. GC Strategies would be required to ensure that any resources they were using met those requirements. They would bring forward the information on those individuals and they would be vetted through the contract security program of the Government of Canada.