Public Accounts Committee on May 7th, 2007

[Dominic Crupi]

As I said, I was not a procurement specialist. We went through procurement issues, I don't know, of 40, 50, 60—Up until the last years at Public Works, I didn't manage any procurement contracts. I really started managing procurement contracts at the RCMP, and I didn't manage them, I hired somebody to manage them for me.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Deputy Commissioner Marshall, the KPMG report has a date of December 2005 on it. Were you still the commissioner at that time?

[David Marshall]

Yes.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Did you have a briefing with the minister of the day? By that time, if you received it in December, we were in the midst of an election. I assume that you would have briefed the new minister some time in January, February?

[David Marshall]

Mr. Chair, our records show that the first time we briefed the minister is April 4, 2005, and then through the period, as significant events occurred, we would have briefed the minister. For example, when we intended to take certain actions, when we wanted to consider separating out Consulting and Audit Canada, there would have been briefings at intervals with the minister's office during that time, April to October, November 2005.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Was the minister satisfied that the appropriate checks and balances had been put in place?

[David Marshall]

Yes, the minister was very concerned that the right thing be done, that this was a serious matter, and we continued to inform him of the steps we were taking. He was very supportive.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Gauvin, the review of the chapter of the AG report on the RCMP pension project describes bureaucratic favouritism, nepotism, and disregard of the rules in a very serious way. The KPMG report and the Ottawa Police report describe a system that was put in place by CAC and a number of outside contractors to circumvent government contracts and policies and NAFTA, and restrictions on the hiring of former public servants. We continue to hear all of these things. How was all of this allowed to continue under your watch? Do you not feel you were responsible?

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

As I explained in previous sessions in this committee, I am the chief financial officer. However, I am not responsible for every responsibility centre within the RCMP. As a matter of fact, we have 2,732. This was one of them. Therefore, it was not possible for me to know everything that was going on in the whole organization. And in this case, I think we've heard today a lot of evidence that there were problems within CAC. CAC has been there for many, many years—30, 40 years. Problems like this never surfaced before, that I know of. So the fact that he was going there and he was going to Public Works, and Public Works has a very good reputation in terms of contracting, we thought now they will do contracting as it should be. Unfortunately, we heard what we heard today and it wasn't so.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Crupi, the pension fund of RCMP members was bilked for millions of dollars and there were cost overruns on various projects, including over a million dollars in service charges by Consulting and Audit Canada. Do you feel at minimum that the RCMP members and their retirees deserve an apology for all of this?

[Dominic Crupi]

I don't understand the bilking. The project was done on time. The project was done as stated. The project was done within TB submission approvals. We tried to do the best we could. We certainly never tried to cheat the RCMP or its members. We tried to do the best we could.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Did you ever receive compensation? Has there been anything back? Did you ever receive anything back for sending contracts anywhere?

[Dominic Crupi]

I received nothing for sending contracts anywhere. I did take hockey tickets a couple of times. When I was advised that it was not legal, or not appropriate, I stopped doing that.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Gauvin, I have one more question. What's your current position?

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

It's the same position I had before.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Then you're still deputy commissioner, corporate management and comptrollership.

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

That is right.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

You haven't reviewed what areas of accountability you have, given all of the things that have been mentioned?

[D/Commr Paul Gauvin]

I know what my accountabilities are. I know you don't agree with me, but I cannot be responsible for every transaction that goes on in the RCMP. I will say that I have a lot of support in the RCMP, and if I get more chance I'll explain a lot of the work that I have done there. I've done a lot of excellent work and I have a lot of support. This is not a project we're proud of, but it is a project that in the end was done. While there were a lot of problems in doing it—and we certainly are not proud of that—we did a whole lot of other things that we're extremely proud of.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mrs. Sgro.

Thank you, Mr. Gauvin.

Mr. Laforest is next.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask Mr. Marshall a question.

Earlier, in answer to our questions, Mr. Brazeau twice said that he thought it was fairly common practice for retired public servants to be hired by third-party firms as a means of circumventing the rule prohibiting retirees from receiving a pension while also working for the federal government.

In your opinion, does Bill C-2 the new Accountability Act, absolutely prohibit retired public servants from working for the government? If not, is this rule stated elsewhere?

[David Marshall]

Mr. Chairman, I don't think that at any time this has been an accepted practice. I think the Treasury Board rules are clear, that if you are going to work—The values and ethics code for the public service says:

Without unduly restricting their ability to seek other employment, former public servants should undertake to minimize the possibility of real, apparent or potential conflicts—

I don't think at any time it was sanctioned. But I think people took advantage of vagueness in the rules to do this kind of thing. I don't think it was ever sanctioned by the Treasury Board. I think the new Accountability Act will certainly put more teeth into it, and make it much more clear that this is not acceptable.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Mr. Brazeau was not only talking about what happened in the past. He said that this could still happen today. Is it possible that this practice is still commonplace in a number of departments?

[David Marshall]

Yes, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Christopherson asked something similar.

It's really not possible to quantify it. But I think that certainly the Treasury Board Secretariat would be interested in sort of reinforcing or in some way perhaps even asking for a declaration from departments that it shouldn't be done, something like that, because I think it harms all public servants, this notion that there's collusion or helping each other circumvent the rules. I don't think it helps anybody. So I think it would certainly be a good thing to reinforce that issue.

Mind you, it is becoming more of an issue because of the wave of retirements and so forth. The pool of experienced people is reducing, so the risk that this will maybe continue is high, and I think it should be looked at.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

This is a major ethical problem. We should look into it in greater detail. I think that the Standing Committee on Public Accounts will perhaps have to look at this issue in greater detail.

I have another question for Mr. Brazeau. Since the beginning of this meeting, a great deal has been said about contracts that have been awarded to various firms and individuals who should not have received them. What was the nature of these contracts? What exactly were these companies being asked to do? I would like to have a general idea. Contracts were awarded to Abotech, Anthony Koziol, Casey Computing Solutions. You were the contract manager. What was the exact nature of these contracts? Why were these companies awarded contracts? What were they being asked to do?