Evidence of meeting #86 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 macdonald.
A video is available from Parliament.
2:05 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
I was never told not to use Deloitte.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Okay. Did you imply in conversation with Mr. MacDonald that you had been told not to use Deloitte?
2:05 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
I did not imply not to use Deloitte. What I asked and what the concern was about was the outsource solution....
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Okay.
You were presented with two options. You came back and said, “Well, I prefer the partial option,” in effect.
Did you ask any questions? Did you say, hey, could you explain what companies might be behind it? Did you have any inkling of what companies might be behind it? Did you make any inquiries along those lines?
2:05 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
Thank you for the question.
You will see in the documents that I will provide that those decisions were made in 24, 48 or 72 hours. The decision was not about choosing a company. It was a question of determining whether we had the internal capacity to do it by increasing staff.
I preferred an approach that gave us more control and flexibility. The other decision was not a decision against Deloitte. I want to be very clear about that. It was a decision against completely subcontracting such a critical solution, which would have deprived us of the flexibility needed to make all the changes that were anticipated.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Okay. Thank you, sir. I'll jump in there. I think I understand what your testimony is in this regard. Effectively, you are pointing the finger at.... The implication of what you're saying is that Mr. MacDonald repeatedly lied to this committee and, whole hog, fabricated events.
You worked with Mr. MacDonald a lot. Are you surprised by that? What's your response to having discovered that, in your view, he has presented testimony that isn't accurate?
2:10 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
I had a lot of trust in Mr. MacDonald. He got a lot done over many years, and he helped to put us on a path that allowed us to do ArriveCAN. I was very disappointed, hurt and personally affected, and my career has been affected by some of the testimony that was provided.
There was a lot said over the two-hour period when Mr. MacDonald was here. I can't opine on every single statement, but some of them that were directed at me have personally affected me and my mental health since that time. I've been disappointed by it. I was surprised by it. That was not the Cameron MacDonald, or Mr. MacDonald, who I worked with over many years. He was somebody who worked hard, as you will see from the emails. He would work until 11 p.m. and would start again at 7 a.m., so I was disappointed and upset by that testimony—
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Did you have a relationship with Mr. Firth at all?
2:10 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
I did not.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
2:10 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
Yes, I have.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Have you met him outside the office?
2:10 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
I have not met him outside the office. He was present at the Botler demo in November. I don't remember if he was virtual, but I believe it was so because of the pandemic. He was also present at the meeting where the demo was provided to the president.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
Okay, thank you, Chair.
Chair, we clearly have a significant conflict in terms of testimony between senior public servants, and I find that dynamic very disturbing.
I'd like the committee to request that phone records and text message records of conversations between Mr. Firth and Mr. MacDonald, and any records that may exist between Mr. Firth and Mr. Doan dating back for the last five years—phone and text message records between Mr. Doan and Mr. Firth, and between Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Firth—be provided to the committee within two weeks by the individuals on both ends of those exchanges.
I hope I have agreement from the committee to make those requests.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
Thank you, Mr. Genuis.
I see thumbs-up around the room. Wonderful. Our clerk has it all written down, and he will follow up with the appropriate departments. Thanks very much.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB
I'm sorry, Chair. It was not departments, but individuals. Thank you.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
Yes, that too.
Mr. Powlowski, go ahead for five minutes, please.
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Mr. Doan, can you hear me okay? I understand there hasn't been a sound check done on me. Is there a problem?
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Okay.
Mr. Doan, you've been asked to provide evidence that ArriveCAN saved lives. Having studied public health, I would think that finding that kind of evidence is going to be very difficult. Always, when you have a policy intervention on a macro level like that, finding proof that it actually affected outcomes is going to be difficult, but I would suggest that is particularly so during a pandemic, when there are all kinds of policy interventions taking place at the same time. To say what caused what is practically impossible.
Let me ask you, Mr. Doan, do you think that evidence is available to you to pass on to the committee?
2:10 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
No, I do not believe that evidence is available to me.
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Mr. Doan, Mr. Genuis entered into his question the testimony of Mr. MacDonald about what happened when there was a discussion between you and Mr. MacDonald as to who decided to choose GC Strategies. In that, it was specifically mentioned...something about somebody's “head on a platter”, Mr. Mendicino, and who was going to take the fall for that.
You've said some of that isn't true, but you had that conversation. Could you tell me the contents of that conversation? I'm not sure how, many months later, you're going to recall all the specifics as to who said what, but can you let us know, in general, what that conversation was about?
November 14th, 2023 / 2:15 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
I reached out and called Mr. MacDonald and asked him for more facts and data in a period of time that was fairly poorly documented. We exchanged, and I asked him the question, “Do you know?” He said, “No.”
We did have a conversation where he proposed what I'm talking about today, which was, “Minh, you chose a strategic direction that led to GC Strategies”—I've had the same conversation here at committee—and I said, “Well, that's not a direct decision to choose GC Strategies.”
We couldn't come to an agreement on this very important difference. I said, “If you can provide anything that you can, this is the situation that we face.”
I did say that if we couldn't come to a point where some more factual information and documentation was made available, I might have to refer him to the committee, and that is also a fact. That was it.
2:15 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
From what you said, the point of contention in that meeting was who chose GC Strategies. When you actually talked, neither of you could decide who actually made that decision.
2:15 p.m.
Chief Technology Officer of the Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
His point of view is that because I picked a direction, I made the decision. After that he wrote a note, and in that note, which was meant for me to say, it says I was not aware of the GC Strategies company and I was not part of the decision. That was in his handwriting—pardon me, I mean his personal—