Industry Committee on June 5th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

In any event.... Please, members, this is not question period in the House of Commons. There is no heckling at this committee, and there is no interrupting other members when they have the floor and start to respond to witnesses.

I'll ask you to stay put and respectful while witnesses are speaking.

Mr. Garon, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's always intimidating to speak after my colleague Mr. Turnbull, who's part of a government that's going to invest $85 billion in the oil industry by 2035, that just bought itself a pipeline, and is offering tax credits to the oil industry. In addition, Mr. Turnbull's party has invested, over a period of about eight years, $1 billion in clean technologies versus $85 billion in the oil industry. This money was allocated to a foundation, which is now being blamed for dozens and dozens of lapses. The Auditor General says so, not the Bloc Québécois. One third of approximately 420 projects may contain irregularities.

I'll put my colleague Mr. Turnbull's question to Ms. Dubé‑Côté.

If there hadn't been all this misconduct and if the minister hadn't had to suspend funding, how many clean tech projects wouldn't be frozen, today?

[Isabelle Dubé-Côté]

I can't answer that question, because I don't have all the information—

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Would you be able to provide a written response to the committee clerk later? Would you be willing to verify this information for us?

[Isabelle Dubé-Côté]

I can do some research, because I don't have the information right now.

What I can tell you is that I'm not here necessarily to comment on the processes that have been put in place. I'm here to paint a picture of a very promising industry for Canada. I'm here to represent—

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Please allow me to interrupt you, because I only have two minutes left.

The situation is clear: There was misconduct, and Minister Champagne was obliged to suspend, to freeze the funding. You're all here today to tell us that funding for projects that will create 34,700 jobs for the future in Canada is linked to projects that may have been frozen because of misconduct. That's the picture. You don't have to paint it for us. We appreciate your industry.

What I'm saying is that it's absolutely disturbing to see a Liberal defending such inadequate management of a fund, implying that we in the opposition are putting environmental companies on trial. Yet the processes weren't followed, so in your enterprises for the industry of the future, you've lost your venture capital funding, when that's exactly what's needed for the industry of the future.

That's why I'm asking if it's possible to verify the number of job losses caused by the funding freeze and to forward this information in writing to the

clerk of the committee. I would find it extremely interesting to have this information, because it would allow us to eventually recommend that this money, that is, Quebec's share, be paid to Quebec City, to a real legislative authority, one that really fights climate change, so that Quebec's Ministère de l'Économie, de l'Innovation et de l'Énergie, which for the moment, at least, is not burdened by scandals like these, can create projects that meet the aspirations of Quebeckers.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you very much, Mr. Garon.

Mr. Masse, you have the floor.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you.

One of the reasons the Auditor General noted that she would look into this is that sustainable development technology can be entirely funded through public money, and with that comes an expectation that it holds the highest standards for ethical practices. Meanwhile, when you talk to the workers who came forward, what we found out was that they often had to move provinces. They faced sexism and racism, and a bunch were fired at different times. There was special persecution in the eyes of them, a minority group in Quebec, who faced some of the worst of the practices.

Mr. McArthur, I go back to you. With regard to the culture and the workers right now, what due diligence is your sector going to do for those workers who have now moved to another department to ensure that the proper decisions are made? Some of those people fought for the people who got some of the funding that you're here asking more of, which is entirely public money, because they saw the corruption and the mismanagement, and they saw others who were doing improper practices get money that would have gone to more of your clients who were doing the right thing.

What do you say about that situation? How fast do we turn this on at the expense of the culture and, more importantly, the families who still live with this legacy?

[Peter McArthur]

Thank you, Mr. Masse.

We're here representing the clean-tech sector. We're not here representing SDTC.

We're empathetic to the situation that those employees suffered and we feel for them. All I can say is that we're here to say that the clean-tech sector needs funding if we want to see it continue to flourish as it has.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

There's nothing you can say to offer that....

I think this is rather unfortunate because I know that you've mentioned a number of times projects in our ridings, which is a code word up here for basically saying that it's always your interest as a member of Parliament in the district you have.

I can tell you that my district wants fair, ethical practices for the workers who actually make the decisions for the people that you're supposed to be representing right here. That would be the first thing for accountability.

This is why, quite frankly, Mr. Chair, as I conclude my remarks here, this is rather appalling. Until we fix the culture that was left over from SDTC, good decision-making will never take place.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joël Lightbound]

Thank you, Mr. Masse.

Mr. Perkins, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to try another route here.

Mr. Noseworthy, you are the former assistant deputy minister that attended, during your time, all of the board meetings as the observer from the industry department on behalf of the Minister of Industry.

The former CEO of the green slush fund, Leah Lawrence, testified to this committee that she expressed her concern about the appointment of the conflicted Annette Verschuren to you and asked you to convey that up the line before the appointment was made.

Did you convey that concern to anyone?

[Andrew Noseworthy]

My understanding, sir, is that the potential conflict with Ms. Verschuren was well known as part of the process. My understanding is she disclosed [Inaudible—Editor]—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Here we go again. You did this the last time you appeared before the committee: You had severe amnesia and you also obfuscated.

It's a simple question. Whom did you tell, up the line, that the CEO of the green slush fund had a concern? Did you tell anyone, yes or no?

[Andrew Noseworthy]

Mr. Chair, I had regular discussions with my deputy minister about the overall processes of SDTC—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Did you tell the deputy that the CEO of the green slush fund was objecting to the appointment of that chair?

[Andrew Noseworthy]

I am aware that the deputy minister was aware of the potential conflict with Ms. Verschuren.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

You're aware that he's aware and he became aware through you.

What did the deputy do with that?

[Andrew Noseworthy]

I can't comment. I can tell you that—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Did you ever speak to the minister's office with regard to it?

[Andrew Noseworthy]

I did not have any discussion with former minister Bains or his staff about that.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Ms. Bhullar, the CEO of the green slush fund also testified that she asked you to convey to the staff in the minister's office the concerns about the conflict.

Who did you talk to in the minister's office?

[Veena Bhullar]

It would not have been my role or responsibility to comment or provide advice on appointments. The CEO did ask me—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

You were the government relations person. The CEO reported in this committee that, as your boss, she asked you to speak to the minister's office.

Did you defy your boss and not do what she asked?

[Veena Bhullar]

To clarify, my role was communications, not government relations.

Yes, the CEO did ask me to convey the potential for a conflict, which I would have done at the time.