Evidence of meeting #103 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was board.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for being here today, sir.
Before I got into elected office, I worked for a few different companies, and I've seen different managerial cultures. Certainly, there a great spectrum. At times, poor management can be a result of the individuals who are there, and at other times it can be a result of the general culture or ecosystem being poor. If you don't have strong processes in place, it can allow bad people to do bad things, whereas if you have good processes in place, at least you can ensure those people are following the rules.
I did note in your opening statement that you talked about the great work that SDTC has done. You do think it's a valuable enterprise and that with some changes it should be able to continue doing that great work, but when you were talking about the toxic work culture that exists there, I'm just wondering, could you go into a little more detail on that? I'm trying to understand. Was that a result of the fact that there were bad people there, or was it bad processes, or was it bad people and bad processes that allowed this to fester?
December 11th, 2023 / 8:25 p.m.
As an Individual
It's both, and the reason for that is that the bad people don't let the processes come into existence.
Several of the HR people, who were all subsequently fired, tried to bring in processes. What happens at SDTC, which was again found in the RCGT report, was that “no processes exist”. They used to exist. Everything has gone downhill since Leah Lawrence started. It was a slow burn, but that's what happened.
When I talk about this, you know, it's sort of like you get rid of all of the executives one by one. Then you start hiring personal friends in those executive positions, and then those personal friends start hiring other personal friends into all of these different organizations and all of these different parts of that organization. It's taken a long time to get to the point we're at, but this is where it's gotten to, because there's never been any accountability for anyone at SDTC, even at the board level.
There's one thing I want to point out in terms of the gross level of corruption and governance issues that exist. Simon Kennedy came here and talked about how at the board level only seven out of the 15 appointees are GIC. The other eight, of whom a number are on the HR committees of SDTC, are appointed by what's called a “member committee” or a “member council”, which is also in the SDTC act, and which says that the public interest is represented by these member committees, which are a group of 15 people who are the ones who appoint the other eight, which is the majority of the board.
For the last four or five years, that committee is down to only two people, one of which is SDTC's own internal lawyer, Ed Vandenberg. For the last five years, two people have been appointing the majority of the board, through a basically illegal process. It's not just that there are governance issues at the bottom. It's also at the top, and the people who are being brought in, even at the board, are personal friends of the CEO and other people, because there isn't a single level of oversight across this.
Again, even this issue was brought up to ISED, and they've understood it, but they've chosen not to act, even though clearly this is someone or a group of people who are breaking the law, because how is it that you're allowing people who've illegally been appointed to the board of SDTC to then be making decisions on taxpayer dollars in the millions every single day? It's across the board.
NDP
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
Thank you for that detail.
On one of the other things—I'm here replacing my colleague Mr. Masse—you touched on this with another question, but just on protection for employees, on making sure that we have the protection of law and a safe space for people to come forward like this, can you offer any more comments to this committee on what our possible recommendations on that could be?
As an Individual
There are lots of recommendations. I think the main one has to be that the federal government needs to provide an outlet to enable all these employees to go into the federal service. That is the key thing that needs to happen, because, even to this day, with this investigation that's happening on the HR side, there are people who have been abused for so long that it's almost impossible for them to trust the situation, especially when you consider how ISED botched this right at the end.
All of the trust that existed is completely gone. Even with this McCarthy Tétrault investigation, no one really believes it's going to go anywhere, but that's the only choice everyone has. They're going to try to see if it goes anywhere, but what needs to really happen is what Brian Masse said—the federal government needs to provide employees the opportunity to leave SDTC and go somewhere else. That's where they can then provide all of the testimony that's required. That's the only way you can actually move forward, because no one feels safe, even to this day, because the ISED bureaucracy and the minister are unwilling to let them have that safety.
The government is the ultimate power in this situation. SDTC is funded by taxpayer dollars, 100% from ISED. How can they say they had no control over HR? How can they say they don't have the ability to protect employees? This is insanity.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Yes, Mr. MacGregor. Thank you very much.
Mr. Perkins, you now have the floor for five minutes.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for coming.
I want to get into some very specific things. In your opening testimony you said you worked on the financial analysis of grant proposals through all of the funds. You mentioned the Verschuren Centre, which is in Nova Scotia—Annette Verschuren being the chair of this board. You said that Annette Verschuren and the Verschuren Centre applied for funds from the ecosystem fund. Is that correct?
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
On that application, were you involved, with some of your colleagues, in analyzing it?
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
The ecosystem fund doesn't directly support green technology companies, does it?
As an Individual
No. SDTC's mandate is to directly fund clean technologies, versus the ecosystem fund, which has been designated by the board to indirectly fund companies or organizations that help clean-technology companies.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
The Verschuren Centre in Cape Breton, Nova Scotia, is not a clean-tech company. Is that correct?
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Okay.
What year did that application or process happen?
As an Individual
The application was initiated sometime in summer 2021. What I want to point out, as it relates to that application, is that the ecosystem fund is not a publicly available fund. As part of their contribution agreement, you have to provide everyone the equal opportunity to apply to funding agreements, and to apply to any of these funds. For the ecosystem fund, that never existed, so it was brought to us by the executives, who said, “We are now looking at the Verschuren Centre.”
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Did you or any of the employees have any concerns that funding a centre, an ego project of the chair, might be a conflict?
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative