Public Accounts Committee on April 3rd, 2008

[Don Boudria]

Obviously I would not have had a copy of an e-mail between the minister and his officials, but I do have, nonetheless, a copy of a letter from the minister dated April 15, 2002, asking whether or not it would be possible to award a lease with Place Victoria. I gave this letter to the officials, and a few days later, I was no longer there.

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

In this e-mail, it says that you did not give the go ahead and that you had asked for some advice at the time when things were to proceed. If all of the people, including the minister responsible for the agency, is telling you that they are prepared to move, why did you not sign? You stated that you would seek advice. Do you not remember whose advice you were seeking?

[Don Boudria]

I didn't seek advice before—

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

On April 2, you found out—an assistant deputy minister was informed—that Mr. Drouin, who was the minister, agreed that the move should take place. Nevertheless, on April 15, Mr. Drouin changed his mind. He sent you a letter indicating that he preferred to remain at Place Victoria, whereas on April 2, 13 days beforehand, an e-mail confirmed that Mr. Drouin agreed to move. Something happened during this 13-day period.

[Don Boudria]

I do acknowledge that Mr. Drouin sent me a letter on April 15 because I have a copy of it. However, I do not know with any certainty whether the memo dated April 2 reflected what the minister thought on April 2. How could I know that? This is pure speculation on my part. I do not know how many days previously the minister could have been informed of the matter. Was it on April 2? I don't know. It is not up to me to answer questions about what occurred between one minister and one of his officials and about an e-mail which allegedly followed such a conversation.

All I know is that I received a letter on April 15 and that, prior to this date, Minister Drouin and I had a conversation. I do not recall whether this conversation took place over the telephone or in person, at the House of Commons or in the cabinet room, because we spent many hours a day together. We therefore discussed the matter before April 15, the day on which I received a letter. The time period would be even shorter than the one indicated by the member.

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

At the very least, Mr. Boudria, it is clear that the Director General in Montreal, Mr. Normand Couture, indicates in his e-mail that you asked him to wait because you preferred to seek advice. This e-mail is dated April 2. However, in the same e-mail, it says that Mr. Drouin agreed that the move should take place.

Mr. Drouin, how is it that, on April 2, you were prepared to move and that on April 15, you no longer were? You sent a letter to the minister indicating that although you had agreed to move to Place Bonaventure, you had changed your mind and wanted to remain at Place Victoria.

[Claude Drouin]

Mr. Chairman, I do appreciate the questions. At the outset, I told you that when Deputy Minister Gladu told me that we were going to move, I asked where. I was in full agreement, because the process had been respected.

However, he told me about the negative aspects, and that's when I made a decision, but I never said to proceed with the move. After he told me about the drawbacks, I would have asked him to do some checking and try to find a solution, if he found that this was not a good idea. I told him that I was going to look into the matter.

I talked to Mr. Boudria on the telephone and I asked him whether or not it was possible, taking the rules into account, to find a solution which would eliminate the need to spend between $500,000 and $1 million for a move which apparently would be very unpleasant for the employees who were very happy where they were. He asked me to do this in writing, in a transparent fashion, which I quickly did.

I did agree with the move, except that I said—

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

Mr. Drouin, you did this on April 15th, whereas on April 2nd, the officials from Public Works had already approved the lease with Place Bonaventure.

When you wrote to the minister, you indicated that you were going to avoid moving fees. However, did you tell him that there was space at Place Bonaventure that would remain unoccupied and that this could bring about additional expenses, that the Auditor General estimated at $4.5 million? Did you provide him with that information?

[Claude Drouin]

The amount of $4.6 million is based on a leasing cost of $438 per square meter, whereas the price was $308. So you have to be careful with figures.

Moreover, I had asked that all the agreements be respected, including the lease with Place Bonaventure. We hoped to say in the same place by negotiating a price. However, if that had been impossible, we would have gone to Place Bonaventure. We were ready. We wanted to see if it was possible to avoid costs and provide better service while respecting our employees.

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

Mr. Boudria, did you ask Mr. Drouin, what would happen with the lease you'd signed at Place Bonaventure if you were to remain at Place Victoria? Did you ask what would happen?

[Don Boudria]

We didn't get that far. As I said, I received the letter on April 15th.

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

It was already agreed upon that the lease with Place Bonaventure was signed.

[Don Boudria]

Let me finish. The letter I received from my colleague at the time on April 15 stated that we were going to move March 31st of the following year. He was asking me whether I could check if it was necessary to move. I transmitted the letter to the department and I left. There was a year left before the move. I didn't have time to ask myself those kinds of questions. The department didn't even answer as to what it would cost or not if we were to move or not. I no longer held that position.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Laforest and Mr. Boudria.

Mr. Fitzpatrick.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Drouin, in your discussions with the client, the Economic Development Agency, your source of information was primarily the deputy minister, Mr. Gladu. Is that correct?

[Claude Drouin]

Yes.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Is that a yes?

[Claude Drouin]

Yes.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Thank you, sir.

In committee, when we're writing reports, the difficulty we encounter is conflicting testimony. Mr. Gladu is a retired public servant, and I think he probably has a well-respected record in this town. He's retired. He appeared before this committee. He said he disagreed with the decision you made. He said under oath that he went to see you and expressed his disappointment.

Do you not understand the difficult position that puts everybody in on this committee when trying to write a report and get the facts sorted out? Do you appreciate that, sir?

[Claude Drouin]

I understand that.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

There is a conflict here in testimony. Do you agree with that?

[Claude Drouin]

I understand what you are pointing out. Remember what I stated at the outset. When the Deputy Minister at the time, Mr. Gladu, mentioned that we were moving, I asked him where we were going. We were going to move, there was a process, we respected the process set in place by the government. It's at that time that the then deputy minister, and I don't know what he said in his testimony—

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Okay, I've heard that. That's fine.

[Claude Drouin]

I'd like to answer. The deputy minister told us what the costs would be. That's when I decided to explore a possibility. Never before, if the deputy minister hadn't told me that—

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

We've heard that. That's fine. But you do agree with us that it causes a bit of difficulty writing up reports when we have conflicting—