Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 26th, 2008

[Ross Nicholls]

Absolutely. In accordance with our mandate and our working arrangement with the department, Defence Construction has always taken responsibility for industrial security on defence projects once those security requirements have been identified. The instant the department identifies the requirements, we safeguard the sensitive information—

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

If I could interrupt, I'm quoting the Auditor General here: “However, we noted that as a Crown corporation, DCC is not subject to the Government Security Policy unless it enters into an agreement with the Treasury Board”. And you haven't done that. So is this something voluntary that you've just taken upon yourself to do?

[Ross Nicholls]

No. We have now signed an agreement with—

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Now, after 56 years, you have the agreement in place.

[Ross Nicholls]

Since 1986, when the policy was around. However—

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Do you have this agreement with the Treasury Board, or do you not?

[Ross Nicholls]

Yes, we do.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Madam Fraser.

[Sheila Fraser]

At the time of the audit, we did not find an agreement.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Mr. Nicholls.

[Ross Nicholls]

To clarify, we've entered into the formal agreement with Treasury Board since the audit. Prior to that time, we always implemented the measures required by the government security—

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

I still quote an arrangement that seems to have been saying, we'll look at it, don't worry. Is that right? Nothing formal, but we'll do it.

[Ross Nicholls]

Sir, I suggest that you look back, and you will not find a situation where we have not complied.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

That wasn't my question, Mr. Nicholls. I said you had no formal agreement with the Treasury Board to accept the responsibility for security on these buildings—

[Ross Nicholls]

Right.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

—after 56 years, yet in your opening statement you said you had a great deal of experience.

I see in your letter to Pierre Boucher, dated January 16, 2008—I presume this has been tabled before the committee, Mr. Chairman—you're talking about your having to address two objectives. The first is to fully integrate the requirements of security into the processes that you use to execute your role as a contracting authority, and the second is to operate the company in accordance with the DCC security policy.

Again, with 56 years, you say you have a great deal of experience, and it takes an Auditor General's report to say, hmm, since we do all these security buildings, maybe we should think about it. Why has it taken this report to wake you up to say, we should do something?

[Ross Nicholls]

The Auditor General quite rightly pointed out that our policies and processes were not documented or formalized in the way that they should be. By the end of March, they will be.

Once again, as suggested, our practices were in compliance. However, she quite rightly points out that they should have been more formal.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

Okay, well, I hope your next 56 years of experience will be a little more formal than the past.

Looking at paragraph 1.74, we're back to this above-ground NORAD building. Again, quoting the Auditor General, “This building was designed to house very sensitive and highly classified material”.

I have heard evidence around the table saying that you built the building, and then somebody decided to change the use of it, so you had to go back to check the security of it. Was the building designed for highly sensitive information and highly classified information, or was this an afterthought, and now that we've built it, we'll use it for that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Go ahead, sir.

[MGen Glynne Hines]

The building was designed as a NORAD control centre, and it was built as a NORAD control centre, and it is currently being used for that intended purpose.

[John Williams, Conservative, Edmonton—St. Albert, AB]

That is avoiding my question, Mr. Chairman. My question was quite specific.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Williams, we have had that question three or four times during the meeting. There's an unanswered question here on this NORAD thing, and we've had the dialogue with the Auditor General, and I don't think we're going to get to the bottom of that.

Okay. That, ladies and gentlemen, concludes the questions. I want to thank all members of the committee. I want to thank all witnesses.

What I propose now is to go in camera and very briefly deal with the minutes of the steering committee. But perhaps before that, I will ask if there are any closing remarks.

Ms. Fraser, have you any comments before we do that?

[Sheila Fraser]

I'd just like to thank the committee for its interest in this work and say that we are very pleased with the response from the departments. They have agreed with the recommendations. They have developed action plans. And in fact, in many cases they have already taken action on the issues that have been raised.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Okay, does anyone else have any closing remarks?

Go ahead, Mr. Guimont.

[François Guimont]

Briefly, Mr. Chairman, we are working hard on an action plan, on a way-forward basis, on the so-called 3,000 contracts. In my remarks I committed to keeping the committee informed of what we find. I know there is interest in this, so we will be doing that.