Government Operations Committee on Nov. 30th, 2023

[Anita Anand]

Thank you for the question.

I am definitely committed to providing ongoing leadership to the government's agenda. Prior to coming into government, I had 25 years as an academic in the area of economic policy, so to be able to serve in this role is consistent with my past experience.

I will be working with our government on fighting climate change, enhancing digital services, and making sure that we do whatever is necessary to eradicate discrimination and inequality in the public service. As a racialized woman myself, I take those matters extremely seriously. I look forward to implementing the goals of our government.

I would also like to provide the required support for official languages at every turn.

Thank you.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Chair, I'm not sure how much time I have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

You have one minute, Mr. Sousa.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Perfect.

Minister, you recently released the manager's guideline to help in contracting professional services. We've had this discussion quite a bit in this committee regarding subcontracting and the way we deal with consulting services. Can you speak a little bit about that guideline and how it will affect consulting services?

[Anita Anand]

Definitely. The formal name is “Manager's Guide: Key Considerations When Procuring Professional Services”. I released those guidelines very soon after coming into this role, recognizing, especially from my days at PSPC, the importance of having some hard guidelines on the ground for public servants when they're contemplating engaging with external consultants.

I also wanted to make sure that they were used in the School of Public Service, so I will say that the—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, Minister. That is our time.

Mrs. Vignola is next, please, for six minutes.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

Minister, officials, thank you for joining us today.

Today’s big headline is the Government of Canada’s final decision not to issue a call for tenders to replace the CP-140 Aurora aircraft. These aircraft have been upgraded with state-of-the-art technologies and can last until 2030, or even 2034.

The Government of Canada was asked to be more transparent. There were other options. Other companies were ready and could have delivered aircraft that met Canada’s needs by 2030 or 2034. So a call for tenders was in order.

Why was there no call for tenders?

[Anita Anand]

Thank you for the question. I’m pleased to see you again.

As President of Treasury Board and former Minister of National Defence, I know that our country’s national security is very important, especially in these times when we see the difficult security situation in the world. This, however, is a matter for the Minister of Public Services and Procurement, Mr. Duclos, so those questions can be answered by him and his department.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

We did ask questions, but they went unanswered. Mr. Duclos and his department didn’t provide any reasons for the decision to harm our own aerospace sector, which could have strengthened the country’s position as a world leader. After all, Canada ranks third in the world in aerospace.

Why did the government invest hundreds of millions of dollars in upgrades to existing aircraft, before finally opting, instead, for another plane, when it has known since 2022 that, if there were no new orders, the plant manufacturing these aircraft would close in 2025? There’s an inconsistency here.

[Anita Anand]

I’d like to correct some of the facts you mentioned.

First, every dollar Boeing receives will be reinvested in the country’s economy.

Second, this is a situation that allows the Canadian government to continue supporting the aerospace industry. For example, we know that the F-35 contract will create a lot of jobs here in Canada.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

That’s fine. What I understand above all is that the government refused to put out a call for tenders to consider all the possible aircraft with greater capacities, which could be adapted quickly and which were already being used successfully by other countries around the world. Canada refused to consider these viable options.

In fact, there is no reason why our own industry should be harmed in this way. They say this will create 3,000 jobs. That’s true, but building the aircraft here would have created 18,000. I don’t know how the government does math, but I’ve known since elementary school that 18,000 is a lot more than 3,000. I find it appalling and disturbing that anyone would decide to harm our industry in this way. It’s unacceptable.

In the case of Bombardier, for example, the planes already exist and are adaptable. This has been shown. Yet all the departments involved have turned a deaf ear. Whether it’s Public Services and Procurement Canada, the Department of National Defence or any of the others, they’ve all turned a deaf ear.

This is an $8 billion investment. Yes, according to the Industrial and Technological Benefits Policy, there’s a dollar in benefits for every dollar invested. However, that amount would have been even higher had the government even entertained the possibility of considering other options, rather than choosing to invest with their American pals. I find this quite appalling.

I have no questions on this matter, since the decision has been made. We’ve been presented with a fait accompli. The government has not agreed to be transparent and broaden its horizons. It didn’t agree to explore other options that would have been even better for the people at National Defence. It said it needed these planes now for 2030. Last time I checked, it was 2023, so we still have seven years to go. We’ve been asking for an open and transparent call for tenders for at least a year. Had the government opened the tender last year, as we requested, it would already have received responses. Instead, the government decided to turn a deaf ear and invest elsewhere. That may be fine, but, if we had at least been able to have a real choice, it would have been even better.

I’ll save my other questions for later.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, Mrs. Vignola.

Mr. Johns, go ahead, please.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Thank you, Minister, for being here. Thanks to your team, as well.

Minister, you just heard my colleague from Nunavut, in the House of Commons, talk about the infrastructure gap. She cited that it would take 58 to 141 years to fill the infrastructure gap. AFN cites that it would need $44 billion to ensure we address the infrastructure gap when it comes to indigenous housing alone. Your budget commitment is $4 billion over seven years. Where I live, in the Alberni Valley, 67% of the people who are homeless and on the streets of my community are indigenous. That's according to the latest homeless count.

I'm looking to you, Minister, to identify what your plan is. What is the timeline? I have to go back to my riding and face the 10 nations, and the people who are homeless and their families. They need answers, and so does my colleague.

[Anita Anand]

Thank you so much for the question.

I want to clarify. The supplementary estimates (B), which I tabled at the beginning of November and which I am here to discuss, contain $349.4 million for the national housing coinvestment fund, $212 million for the interim housing assistance program, and additional measures to support governmental efforts across the board, including funds for the settlement of cases with indigenous groups.

I will say that we are committed to reconciliation. We recognize that there are additional measures we should be taking to address the infrastructure gap. Minister Hajdu addressed those in the House of Commons, as this is a matter under her—

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

I'm sorry to cut you off, Minister, but time is short.

She didn't actually address that. There is $349 million, whereas there is a $44-billion gap when it comes to just housing, and everyone deserves that right, especially indigenous people. That is not addressing the gap.

I am hoping that as the President of the Treasury Board, you're actually going to be making this a priority, because you're the one who is the gatekeeper of all money spent. This really has to be your top priority.

I am going to go now to the next question, and that is on the Black Class Action Secretariat. The minister at the time, Minister Fortier, attended in May, and we're hoping you can give us some progress on that. When I brought questions to her.... I was talking to the secretariat before that, and they identified that Treasury Board had received that second tranche of funding and that it was $50 million to implement the program, but they still hadn't developed one at the time. That was the first set of funding.

That was when your government rolled out the first round of that, and the secretariat stated that there was no Black involvement in the program development. I'm hoping that's changed and you can update me. Specifically, has the Black Class Action Secretariat been involved in the development of that program?

[Anita Anand]

I want to begin by saying that I take all matters of discrimination extremely seriously, and our government does as well. Our government is working to create a diverse and inclusive public service. It includes passing legislation, creating support and development programs, and publishing disaggregated data.

In terms of the precise question, I'm going to ask Marie-Chantal if she would like to respond.

[Marie-Chantal Girard, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Employee Relations and Total Compensation, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Thank you very much for the question.

Yes, the class action is actually moving forward, and I will reserve comment on that.

However, since then, we have been moving forward to establish a restorative engagement program that has received funding to start initial analysis, gathering data—

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Is the Black Class Action Secretariat specifically going to be involved?

[Marie-Chantal Girard]

I think it's too early to establish that.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Okay. I am encouraging that. That should be a top priority when it comes to responding to this.

[Marie-Chantal Girard]

We'll note that. Thank you.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Your government spent $669,650 to hire KPMG to provide advice on cutting widespread outsourcing. You can't make this stuff up. It's unbelievable that the government has used an external company to advise government on cutting their contracts.

Tell me, did they give you some advice to cut them out?

[Anita Anand]

The contract that you're referring to was under the purview of Minister Wilkinson, I believe, in 2022. The obligation for us to undertake a spending review is for 2023, and I came into the post in July 2023, so I had no involvement in that matter.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

I'm sorry, but I'm going to say this. You can't just wash yourself of this because you're the new minister. You still have to inherit the responsibility for this.

I am hoping to get answers, especially if it was 2022. You'd think they would bring back a report, with that amount of money. It doesn't look like it's working, because outsourcing is actually going up, so their advice failed government and failed Canadian taxpayers. According to the results of their advice, we're at $21.6 billion in external outsourcing.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That's our time, Mr. Johns. Thanks very much.

Mrs. Block, it's over to you, please.