Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 15th, 2024

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I'm utterly befuddled. This government has missed virtually every single target when it comes to climate. Now we have a chart here that talks about reaching zero net megatonnes in 2031, but it's predicated on the government reaching its targets, which they haven't yet reached and are nowhere near reaching. They want to plant, by my count, about five and a half times more trees than they could plant in 2022, and all of our numbers—when I say “our numbers", I mean all of the government numbers—are predicated on this.

How do we sit around this table as parliamentarians and not be disappointed?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

I share your disappointment about Canada's track record on climate change. There's no doubt about that.

[Frank Caputo, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I'm speechless.

Those are my questions. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Bradford, you have the floor for four minutes.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

This is for Mr. DeMarco.

What inconsistencies have you found in the documents and analytical frameworks used by various government stakeholders in Canada? Which were the most relevant, and which ones should Environment and Climate Change Canada use as a guide?

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

Are we talking about the second half of the report, on forest carbon accounting?

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Yes.

[Jerry V. DeMarco]

The inconsistencies are illustrated in exhibit 1.8, where we have three lines on the graph showing that depending on the year of the report—2019, 2020 or 2021—the calculation of forest carbon sink or forest carbon source varied for the same year for the same variable. We have significant inconsistencies there and a lack of transparency and utility for decision-makers on the role of forestry and forests in Canada's carbon accounting. Those areas need to be tidied up.

I should say that Canada is one of the big three forested countries in the world. We need to get this right. It is a very large responsibility that Canada has with this amount of forested land. We shouldn't be seeing, year by year, wild fluctuations as to whether the emissions in a given year were net negative or net positive. That needs to be clarified. It has a huge impact not only on our net emissions numbers, but on how we would manage the forests differently if we had better information.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

For the Department of the Environment, recommendation 1.76 is about inconsistent progress reporting. What action does the department intend to take to improve the domestic reporting documents for estimating the contribution of forests to Canada's 2030 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target?

[Derek Hermanutz]

The government is committed to annual reporting of projections and the progress toward targets. We work very closely with other departments, including NRCan, to develop the expected accounting contributions from the land sector, including forests.

As my deputy minister said, the forest sector is very complicated—more complicated than other sectors—but we work closely with NRCan on the reference level approach.

As mentioned earlier, there's a review currently going on of the accounting practices. We're looking to have that completed by the end of this calendar year.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Does the department intend to consistently include forested land in the relevant greenhouse gas indicators for frameworks, and if so, which frameworks?

[Derek Hermanutz]

I'm not sure which frameworks, but for our annual reporting, we do include the contribution of forestry to the LULUCF sector.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

I think this goes back to MNR. Do you know of any other countries that have a program similar to the two billion trees program? Is anyone else you're aware of taking this sort of approach internationally?

[Monique Frison]

We know that other countries have committed to planting incremental trees. We can provide some information on that to the committee, if you wish.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

What's the success of those particular programs?

[Monique Frison]

I think all countries would find it challenging, as we do. It's a complex, long-term program. I don't think any of them are finished yet. They're all very recent. There aren't very many, though.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you. I'm afraid that is all the time we have for questioning. I want to thank all the witnesses for coming today.

Mr. Vandergrift, I want to thank you for joining us from overseas. I'm not a great fan of Zoom and being virtual, but I do appreciate you making time to join us in this circumstance. I always encourage those who are in the national capital region to come in. You could not be in.

I know it's late where you are, so I hope you have time for dinner tonight before calling it in. There are many fine restaurants in London, as I'm sure you'll discover.

I will excuse the witnesses now.

I'm going to suspend for about 30 seconds so you can clear out, and then I'll come right back to the committee work. We're suspended.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'm going to bring this meeting back into order.

Mr. Nater, you have the floor.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will be very brief.

Obviously, what we saw this week from the Auditor General was an appalling display of incompetence and potential corruption. What we've seen is an appalling lack of documentation and a lack of forthcomingness. I think we have to address this.

I would note that today in question period, Minister Dominic LeBlanc said something to the effect that we need to make sure “that every document is available”. To that end, I would like to move a production motion. It will be circulated to the committee in both official languages.

I move:

That, given that the Auditor General was unable to properly audit subcontractors used by GC Strategies and other contractors in ArriveCan and the Procurement Ombudsman found that 76% of subcontractors used in ArriveCan did no actual work, the Committee:

a. order the Canada Border Services Agency, the Public Health Agency of Canada, Public Services and Procurement Canada and all other government departments and agencies involved in ArriveCan to provide a complete list of subcontractors that received work on ArriveCan, the service provided, and the total amount of money paid under the subcontracts within seven days of this motion being adopted;

b. order the main ArriveCan contractors, including GC Strategies, Dalian Enterprises Incorporated, Amazon Web Services, Inc., Microsoft Canada Inc., TEKsystems, Inc., Donna Cona Inc., BDO Canada LLP, MGIS Inc., 49 Solutions, Makwa Resourcing Inc./TPG Technology Consulting Limited, and Advanced Chippewa Technologies Inc. to provide a complete list of subcontractors that received work on ArriveCan, the service provided and the total amount of money paid under the subcontracts within seven days of this motion being adopted;

c. order the Auditor General to provide a complete list of the 21 “Other” contractors, that received a combined $6 million, identified in Exhibit 1.1 of the ArriveCan app, the service provided and the total amount of money paid under the contracts within seven days of this motion being adopted;

d. order GC Strategies and all relevant government departments, agencies and Crown corporations to produce a complete list of subcontractors used, the service provided and the total amount of money paid in relation to all contracts GC Strategies has received since 2015, within seven days of this motion being adopted; and

e. report this motion to the House for its information.

I think it's pretty clear that this is information we as a committee need and that the Canadian public deserves answers to.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I have a list. I have Mr. Brock, Ms. Khalid and Mr. Genuis.

Mr. Brock, you have the floor.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

I'm pretty sure I had my hand raised first. I am more than happy to entertain Mr. Nater, but I'm not understanding the order list or—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

You're next, Ms. Khalid. We'll get to you right away.

Mr. Brock, you have the floor.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

A member who has been part of this particular scandal for the better part of two months.... The need for transparency and accountability is increasingly urgent.

It was disturbing to hear the Auditor General, who has decades' worth of audit experience, proclaim to Canadians and to parliamentarians that this particular scandal was one of the worst examples of poor record-keeping and management-keeping. A number of ministries were involved in the creation of this disastrous app, and the runaway costs are disturbing on so many levels but particularly to taxpayers.

We have no idea as to the exact figure. We know that it's well in excess of $60 million now. The exact figure is completely unknown because of missing documentation—documentation that should have been available to the Auditor General. There should have been a budget; there wasn't.

The whole concept of ministerial oversight, particularly in relation to the minister responsible for public safety, the minister responsible for public health, the minister responsible for procurement and the President of the Treasury Board.... They need to accept responsibility because under their collective watch, this app has been an absolute disaster.

I wholeheartedly endorse my colleague Mr. Nater's production motion because a lot of people need to account for what they did.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you, Mr. Brock.

The bells are ringing. Is there UC to continue to the bottom of the hour?

[Some hon. members]

No.