Evidence of meeting #83 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 work.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
What was confidential that you had to sign? I don't understand.
5:05 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
It was all the electronic communications that went back and forth between myself and Botler: text messages, documents that had any of our names on them, anything that had any presentational material, two-pagers—anything that essentially mentioned the word “Botler” and involved me or the federal government.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Charles Sousa Liberal Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON
Why would Botler not want that divulged? Obviously, they are now making allegations and complaining that they weren't paid. You're saying that, in fact, they didn't do the work required.
5:05 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
They were paid in full for the two deliverables that were accepted. Because CBSA deemed the remaining four substandard, they were never paid.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
I'm sorry. That is our five minutes. You might have another opportunity in the next round.
Mr. Genuis, go ahead for five minutes, please.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Briefly, I'll go back to the résumés.
I think I understand your process. You said you receive résumés and make them compliant before sending them, but you check in with resources to make sure your edits are okay.
Is that how you described the process?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Okay.
I'm a potential subcontractor. I send you a résumé. It says I have four months of IT experience. The contract requires four years of IT experience, so you change “four months” to “four years” to make it compliant. Then you check in with me and say, “Hey, is it okay that I made this change?” before sending it.
Is that right?
5:05 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
It's more a case of me identifying whether they can even pass the grid.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Can you just answer the question?
You said you make it compliant. Then you check with the resource—that it's okay with them.
You change the four months to four years. You check in with me. You see whether it's okay. Then, if it's okay with me, you send it on the basis, presumably, that I have signed off on it.
5:05 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
I check in with you. At this point, we're going to identify whether it's even feasible to be in this category, which is why you do the version.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
You do the revised version by changing the numbers to make it compliant; then you check in with the resource; then you send it in. Is that right?
5:05 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
It's also an exercise for myself, to see how far a stretch it is. That's important, though.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Okay. However, that exercise involves changing the numbers.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
That's excellent. Well, it's not excellent, actually, but thank you for clarifying.
In the case of Botler, though, you were working so quickly that you missed a step. You intentionally changed the numbers, but you didn't have time to check in with them. You just sent in the résumés without checking with them.
That doesn't sound to me like a mistake. That sounds to me like cooking the numbers.
5:05 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
No. To me, it was an honest mistake and I have apologized in public.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
It's a mistake in a moral sense, but I don't think it's a practical mistake. You described a process in which you change the numbers as a matter of routine.
5:05 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
If given more time, and not executing in haste, I would have identified that this resource could not have met this grid. Therefore, I would have gone back to Dalian and Coradix and asked for a different category.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
It's obviously a problem that you change the numbers, then go back and ask for permission. It's great that Botler did the right thing here and blew the whistle. However, in many cases, if you're routinely changing the numbers, people may shrug and say it's okay, based on you telling them that it's okay when, obviously, it's not.
I have some additional questions, though, sir, that I want to ask you.
You said, in response to a previous question.... You were asked whether you'd ever met Marc Brouillard, former CTO of Canada, in a hotel. You said no, at the time.
Do you have any interest in correcting that answer?
5:05 p.m.
Partner, GC Strategies
No. I said that I didn't recollect. I cannot remember every meeting I have had with everybody in the last 12 years. I'm sorry. I can go back into my Outlook and give you the answer quickly.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
That's a different answer from the one you gave.
We could check in ATIP. You submitted to find out whether you'd met with him in a hotel, sir. It is ATIP A201800247. Ironically, the ATIP came from you.
We have gone back and forth about this cottage versus chalet issue.
Have you ever been to this infamous cottage or chalet owned by Mr. MacDonald?
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Okay.
I think there will be some follow-up on that point, sir. It feels a bit like we're on The Maury Show here.
Going back to October 20—your appearance before the committee last year—you said, “We are not in any conversations for budgeting or cost controls. We have quality control. If a resource isn't performing, we will then work with the government to replace that.” You're not involved in conversations on budgeting or cost control. You told the committee that a year ago.
Sir, was it true, what you told the committee at that time?