Government Operations Committee on Nov. 14th, 2023

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

Okay.

To summarize your testimony, you were given two options. You knew that Deloitte was behind one of the options. You did not know that GC Strategies was behind the other. You chose the option that involved a company that you weren't aware of. You don't know who made the decision regarding GC Strategies. You at no point heard from or consulted with your bosses within the department. Mr. MacDonald fully fabricated significant aspects of your conversation with him.

I find that testimony quite unbelievable, frankly, but that's what you have to say.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That is our time, Mr. Genuis.

Perhaps, Mr. Doan, you can get back to us in writing on that.

Mr. Jowhari, please go ahead for six minutes.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you.

I have one question on ArriveCAN, and then I'll move on to Botler.

You talked about staff augmentation. Why wouldn't Deloitte be considered as a firm able to provide staff for your staff augmentation?

[Minh Doan]

Deloitte can provide that, and to my knowledge, in my experience with them in terms of the system they integrate, it's major projects, major deliveries—hundreds of millions of dollars. To my knowledge I do believe that's a service they offer, but that is not what they bring in terms of value. They bring a whole solution.

What we have here with GC Strategies is a task base. You have an overall contract and then I need very specific roles—I need to define a statement of work. I give Deloitte the task, and they provide the subject experts and the per diems, and they will move forward. Deloitte is more when I need an entire solution that may cost millions of dollars. They have the expertise to build the solution and maintain it.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

I want to go to Botler now. You mentioned...and there is an email dating back to November 2019 in which you had instructed Mr. MacDonald to look for a vendor and he suggested that he had found Botler. You asked for a presentation; a PowerPoint deck was sent to you, and you provided the feedback that it's slim on content and it's basically restating the problem. You instructed Mr. MacDonald to go back and work with them to beef it up. Is this true?

[Minh Doan]

Thank you for the question.

If memory serves me, Mr. MacDonald found a company, Botler AI, that was very interesting. I trusted the company because I was quite familiar with what they had to offer in terms of technology and artificial intelligence. I agreed to meet with their representatives. They gave a demonstration of their solution. I was very impressed by the demonstration of their technical tool, and by Ms. Dutt in particular.

Then I suggested that it be presented to the vice-president of human resources and to the president. Unfortunately, the pandemic hit and it took much longer than expected. When we presented the solution to the vice-president of human resources and the president, we decided that it was promising enough to launch a pilot project. As to changing the PowerPoint presentation, the only advice I gave him was to be more specific—

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you.

You mentioned that you had recommended that they go forward with the pilot. What's your definition of a pilot, sir?

[Minh Doan]

I recommended that it be presented to the president. I did not make the decision about the pilot project. I know there has been a lot of discussion about this.

I've heard a lot of exchanges in terms of feasibility study and pilot. You'll see in my material that the terms are used interchangeably. There are times it's called a pilot and times it's called a feasibility study. In terms of the nuance between the two, there is one, but it's very thin.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Based upon the deliverable that was agreed, the six deliverables, do you think it was a pilot or do you think it was a feasibility study?

[Minh Doan]

The first deliverable is a feasibility study, but eventually what you do from a feasibility study is you have a piece a technology and you say, is this a viable piece of technology? Does it work? Does it deliver? Does it meet the business requirements? Once you've generally said—and given the circumstances and other elements, it's not just a technical feasibility—and once you've decided, “Hey, this is possible,” then you move to generally what's called a pilot. Let's pick a region; let's pick users, and let's see in the real world if it works, but it's not a full production solution.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

CBSA approved deliverable one and deliverable two and paid for them. The feasibility, which was deliverable one, was approved, and whatever the scope of deliverable two was, it was also approved. Based on Botler AI, they spent almost a year working very closely with CBSA to capture all the policies to be able to put it into the application, and all of a sudden things stopped. Is that a true understanding of what we've heard in the committee?

[Minh Doan]

My understanding of events was that the clients, in this case human resources and labour relations, were dealing with the pandemic at the same time. They did not have the time to dedicate the resources to this pilot, to the feasibility study. The next step would have been a limited trial, but we did not get there, and it was not necessarily a reflection of Botler but the availability of the resources within HR to dedicate to properly engaging in this pilot.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

My understanding is that the subsequent four deliverables were prepared by Botler and were sent through GC Strategies to CBSA, but they were not deemed to be of acceptable quality. Is this a true statement or not?

[Minh Doan]

I heard that only at committee. I would refer that question back to CBSA.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Okay.

When did you become aware of, let's say, the embellishment of the résumés of the two partners at Botler AI?

[Minh Doan]

Thank you for the question.

I read that in the Globe and Mail recently. I can find the exact date, but it was when the articles started coming out.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Okay.

In your opinion, why was the project cancelled?

[Minh Doan]

Thank you for the question.

I think it was because we didn't have the time. From other testimony, I know that the product quality was not adequate. I do not have that information, however.

I wouldn't want to speculate on what the reason was, so I will refer that back to the CBSA.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, Mr. Jowhari.

Before we finish up, Mr. Doan, thanks for joining us today.

You mentioned earlier how ArriveCAN saved lives. Would you provide something in writing to us quantifying that statement? We've heard repeatedly by people at the witness stand about how it has miraculously saved lives. Could you let us know how many and quantify exactly how it saved lives, if you're making that statement? You can get back to us in writing with that, please.

Mr. Genuis, you have your hand up.

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

Yes, Mr. Chair.

I think we don't face the same resource constraints today that we maybe normally do. The witness has been fairly evasive, but has provided some somewhat more direct answers just in the last few minutes. Would it be the will of the committee to extend for another round and use the time we have while he's here? We can always call him back in the future, but I would suggest that we use the time we have now to go for another 20 minutes or so and get in another round.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Sure.

Let me just canvass the room on availability and if there's desire.

I have Mr. Jowhari.

[Majid Jowhari, Liberal, Richmond Hill, ON]

Can we take a two-minute recess?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Sure. We can suspend for a couple of moments.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Colleagues, we're back.

The witness has agreed to stay a bit longer.

Mr. Genuis, it's been agreed that we'll do five minutes for the Conservatives, five minutes for the Liberals, two and a half minutes for the NDP and two and a half minutes for the Bloc. We will finish there.

Mr. Genuis, why don't you go ahead for five minutes, please?

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

Thank you, Chair.

Mr. MacDonald also said during his testimony that, “Minh Doan made the decision to go with GC Strategies because of the fact that he had been told [that] he could not use Deloitte.”

Mr. Doan, was that statement by Mr. MacDonald accurate?