Evidence of meeting #106 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

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON

Could you look to see if that information is available.

5:05 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

We'll do that.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON

The individuals who received financial awards after this was completed, were they the same individuals? Let me go back one second, were there individuals who received financial awards related to the implementation of Phoenix?

5:05 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

Again, that's not something I can speak to specifically. I think the deputy minister has mentioned some of that in the past, but that wasn't critical to the audit we did.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON

Would those individuals have been separate from the people who were providing information related to the risks associated with moving ahead with Phoenix?

June 19th, 2018 / 5:05 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

Again, that's something the department would have to tell you. It was not information that we needed to look at to get to our opinions on the audit.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON

Is it plausible there are individuals who withheld information relating to the risks of launching Phoenix, yet received financial compensation for its launch?

5:05 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

I don't know that, specifically. I think the deputy minister referred to—and you'd have to go back and double check this—the fact that that type of compensation was not given in the year of the launch of Phoenix. I'm only going by memory on that, you'd have to refer back to her testimony.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON

Okay. I'll pass it over to my friend Mr. Deltell.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Mr. Deltell please.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

For two minutes?

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

For two-and-a-half minutes.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

Mr. Ferguson, it's always a pleasure to talk to you.

I would like to come back to the issue about the factors that were not mentioned, the serious problems of which people were aware. I would also like to come back to the fact that the decision to launch Phoenix was not documented.

Mr. Ferguson, does this mean that, in February, you found nothing to indicate that a person authorized to do so signed an email or a document requesting that it be kick-started? Is that correct?

5:05 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

Yes, you're right.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

Is the fact that no one took responsibility for the green light part of the government's culture, which you seem to identify as part of the problem?

5:05 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

Once again, it's difficult for me to say whether it was related to the culture or not.

Of course, it was rather curious not to find any recommendations for implementing the system. Usually, that is one of the pieces in this type of project. However, I cannot say whether it was simply an oversight or whether there was another reason.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

It is curious because, as members of Parliament, we have to justify every dollar we spend. When I make a $100 contribution to a charity, to support its work and to advertise, I have to fill out a three-page document. That is fine, I have nothing against that. However, it is remarkable to see that we have implemented a program worth billions of dollars without anyone having to sign anything.

5:05 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

That's why we presented that finding in the audit. One of the most important aspects of this type of project is to have someone's signature to approve a project like that.

5:05 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

To your knowledge, who should have signed it? Is it the deputy minister or the minister in office?

5:10 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

It depends on the project. It is not the same person for all the projects.

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

That is why I am asking you the question. To your knowledge, who should have had the final approval? The deputy minister or the minister in office?

5:10 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

Once again, no responsibility was directly defined in the project flow chart. In my opinion, at the beginning of the project, it would have been important to decide who was responsible for approving the implementation of the project. However, there was no documentation related to that decision when the system was launched.

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, Mr. Deltell.

Just before we go to Mr. Arya, I want to mention that in your report you said, “It's as if the Phoenix project was set up to avoid responsibility”—and this is just tagging along with what Mr. Deltell said. You said that it “was set up to avoid responsibility—either by design or by accident.” And you said, “There was no documented approval by anyone that the system should be launched.”

Do you believe that it was deliberate that there was no documented approval of this?

5:10 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

Again, that's trying to impute intention to people, which is not something I can do.

We would not have seen anything that indicated it was intentional, so that's as far as I can tell you. It did not happen, and I can't point to anything that indicated it was intentional.

5:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Again, that goes to what I would think would be the culture. The culture would be that if there is no documentation, then neither minister Foote nor the DM would be aware—not even the political minister, the minister of the department, but also the DM. If the latter were not aware, then you can't expect that the minister would know. It might have been like that for a decade. Is that part of the culture?