Evidence of meeting #105 for Public Accounts in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was phoenix.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Michael Ferguson  Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
Marie Lemay  Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Peter Wallace  Secretary of the Treasury Board of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
Les Linklater  Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Jean Goulet  Principal, Office of the Auditor General
Sandra Hassan  Assistant Deputy Minister, Compensation and Labour Relations Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat

5:10 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services

Marie Lemay

To reassure you, I will tell you that we have already put into practice the lessons learned from this experience. I think that, as public servants, and particularly as deputy ministers, if we think we need certain investments to carry out a project, our role is to defend that need. Phoenix's experience is unfortunate, but I think it will serve us in the future. If we don't learn from Phoenix, we won't have learned anything.

At Public Services and Procurement Canada, we are putting the necessary measures in place. We know it's important to take the time to plan investments well and not cut projects. We have already put that in place.

As I said earlier, we are transforming the organization to change the way we serve the public, to change the way we work and to green the way we work.

When it comes to cultural transformation, whatever the process, we need to create environments where people feel they have permission to report problems. I absolutely agree with the scenario you describe: I would expect my employees to tell me about it.

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Let's take the following situation.

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Please be very quick.

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Let's say that, tomorrow morning, your employees come to you to tell you that there isn't enough money to do this project and that it won't work. Would you go to the minister? What would the next step be, if you were told that it wasn't going to work?

5:10 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services

Marie Lemay

Apart from the nuances, I would say that we have no choice, and we won't do the project. We can't put the organization at risk. If we aren't able to do the project, we won't do it.

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

You wouldn't ask the minister for anything?

5:10 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services

Marie Lemay

I'm sorry, I didn't quite understand. Yes, if we needed more money, we would go to the minister, who would go to Treasury Board.

5:10 p.m.

Liberal

Darrell Samson Liberal Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS

Do we know if the minister knew he had to go to Treasury Board, but he did not?

Did he go to Treasury Board and Treasury Board refused?

Mr. Wallace, can you answer that?

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

She wasn't the minister.

5:10 p.m.

A voice

[Inaudible—Editor].

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Mr. Christopherson, please go ahead.

5:10 p.m.

NDP

David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Thank you, Chair.

With your indulgence, I want to make a brief reference to the message we will deal with on Tuesday, where it's very specific to Phoenix, to keep us focused, if you will allow me, sir.

One of the key things in public life these days—and we're all in it to one degree or another—is transparency and accountability. I know this is not easy for you. It's not supposed to be. Somebody has to be held accountable. Lest you think that we get off when we go knocking on thousands of doors and the question on the doorstep is, “How did I do?”, let me tell you, you learn about transparency and certainly about accountability.

One of the things, Chair—and I have mentioned it before—that hit me the hardest, given all my years on this committee, was that in that report, there was a message to us—and it's strictly on Phoenix—from the Auditor General posing the question about who is to blame. In the context of that, he said, “It's a difficult question to answer because it's as if the Phoenix project was set up to avoid responsibility—either by design or by accident.”

Mr. Ferguson, is there anything you want to add to that? It's pretty damning, especially even the hint of somebody in the bureaucracy deliberately setting it up so that it wasn't clear who made the decisions. An accident is a little less so, but it's still hugely problematic.

Could we have your thoughts on that, sir?

Then, Mr. Wallace, to give you fair notice, I'm going to be coming to you to ask for a commitment about what you're going to do in your challenge function going forward to assure us this won't happen again.

Mr. Auditor General.

5:15 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

I think that statement is pretty clear. Again, it comes back to the fact that we couldn't find things like documentation for who actually said, “Yes, the system is ready to go. Let's go live with it.”

There was also the number of deputy minister changes that happened. The deputy minister in place when the decision was made, even he had only been in that position for a year, a very short period. How would he have really understood everything that was going on with the system?

There was no oversight. Everything was built going through the project executives. There was no oversight. There was no clear role for the deputy minister. Later on, Treasury Board Secretariat suddenly comes in and does the Gartner report, but they don't actually have any authority within the project. The PSMAC, the group of deputies, was brought in at the very end, but they didn't have any decision authority either.

At that decision point, it seemed almost like they were reaching for different ways. They were going to PSMAC and Treasury Board Secretariat was coming in and producing the Gartner report, which essentially got it right, but then that report was going to the project executives.

The whole design of the project, as I said, did not lead to anyone being able to say, “Here's who should have been accountable and responsible for this.”

5:15 p.m.

NDP

David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON

Mr. Wallace, I gave you notice. It wasn't a gotcha question. What I'm seeking from you, sir, is an absolute assurance that in your challenge function going forward, you won't let this sort of thing happen again.

5:15 p.m.

Secretary of the Treasury Board of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

Peter Wallace

Let me be very clear. You will never get an absolute assurance from me, because life is messy. There are enormous challenges. I say that not, frankly, to duck accountability but to indicate to you that we will do everything we can to mitigate risk. However, risk is a reality. The challenge here is how we prevent small problems from becoming enormous, incomprehensible problems.

Let me go through a number of steps that we have already undertaken, and then speak to something a little more fundamental than that.

We have, of course, put in place a stronger role for the chief information officer. We have updated our information technology and management policies. We put in place much stronger governance in terms of deputy ministers' committees with clearer lines of accountability. We have ensured that Treasury Board is engaged in a much more meaningful way in two forms of the challenge function: the fiscal challenge function, and now a much stronger role for the IT challenge function as well. We have created a number of very important digital standards around interoperability, access to cloud, and a whole variety of things absolutely critical to avoiding these things and allowing for broader vendor interface as well.

We have put in place an enormous amount of work on a project management strategy under the office of the comptroller general. We have put in place a variety of multi-level governance models associated with all those things.

However, to very clear, those are all hurdles. They are all step points. They could become bureaucratic friction unless we take the core lesson seriously. The core lesson here is that these things are not there to be manoeuvred around. They are there so that we actually understand what we are doing. We take appropriate risk but not disproportionate risks with taxpayer values, with the privacy of our employees' information, with our fundamental need to pay our employees accurately and on time, or any other IT project.

We are putting all those measures in place. They will be very helpful, but what they will require is vigilance all the way through to make sure that those values, what those policies represent, are actually part of the lived experience of the organization. That will never provide you with the absolute assurance that you seek, as you will understand, but it will provide you with, and I hope to provide parliamentarians with, an understanding that we are learning these absolutely critical lessons.

We take them fantastically seriously, as you are correct that we do not enjoy this experience. We understand the absolute imperative of getting these things right on a going-forward basis.

I need to add one other piece. I do need to reiterate that accountability is fundamental and it is our belief that we can increase and augment the accountability regimes as well.

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, Mr. Wallace.

We'll now move to Mr. McCauley, please.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

Great.

Ms. Lemay, I realize you got there just before the second rollout. Was there a sign-off or a go-ahead required for the second phase?

5:20 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services

Marie Lemay

No. It was actually a default. The way it was set up, the go-live was in February. The second wave was happening unless there was a catastrophic failure, or I think that's what it was called.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

There was. We just didn't know about it.

5:20 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services

Marie Lemay

You have to know, too, that there were blackout periods before the dates. When we talk about February 24, the data transfer actually started before that, and the same thing in April. When I walked in, the blackout period was already there, so it wouldn't have been asked.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

The Treasury Board commissioned the Gartner report because word had got out, obviously, through various departments that there was an issue. It was a very damning report. No one could read the Gartner report and have any other conclusion than, “Oh, my God, the Titanic is heading for an iceberg.”

Why would Treasury Board just put it in an interoffice envelope and send it to some lower level ADMs? Why would it not have gone to the DM or the Treasury Board president to pick up the phone and call someone else?

5:20 p.m.

Secretary of the Treasury Board of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

Peter Wallace

I appreciate the question. You'll understand that I was not there at the time, so if you don't mind, I'm just going to read from the notes that I have.

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

Yes.

5:20 p.m.

Secretary of the Treasury Board of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

Peter Wallace

On January 29, 2016—

5:20 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB

Let me stop you right there.