Public Accounts Committee on March 5th, 2024

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

You also made this statement in your article: “The staffing system as it currently exists rewards and prioritizes those who know how to work the system, not those who are most qualified and capable.” Can you explain what you mean by “work the system”?

[Dany Richard]

Yes, certainly.

I don't think it's any secret. Generally speaking, if you work with numbers, you tend to not necessarily be a people person. You might be an introvert. I say this because we have members who do fantastic work. However, they're not necessarily the most popular when it comes to being sociable, interacting with their coworkers, going out or making a name for themselves. Often what happens is that people who get promoted.... Who is liked? Who is someone I get along with? Often, maybe you don't get along with an accountant who's asking you some questions.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Right. Thank you.

In testimony before the OGGO committee, Botler AI raised the issue of kickbacks, and then again this week, on CTV, alleged there have been bribes. Do you have any concerns about this or about any potential criminality?

[Dany Richard]

I've never witnessed kickbacks. I haven't heard any members raise kickbacks, so I can't speak to that. However, it's always a possibility.

Again, that's why you have a code of ethics, that's why you have internal rules and that's why you monitor transactions to the best of your abilities. You can never eliminate risk, but you can reduce the risk, you can mitigate the risk and you can ensure that proper controls are put in place to reduce the probabilities of things like this happening.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

You have a minute.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Okay.

You responded to one of my colleagues that one way of ensuring the door is not open to fraud is by having the proper controls in place. Do you believe that the CFO at the CBSA did his or her job in ensuring that public funds were spent appropriately on the ArriveCAN application?

[Dany Richard]

I couldn't comment about the CFO. I can tell you someone did not. I don't know who that person was, but someone did not do their job.

There's accountability. Normally, if you follow the money and the paper trail, you'll find out who that is, but when there is no paper trail or electronic documents, it makes it very difficult to find out where the crack was in the armour.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Next is Ms. Sidhu.

You have the floor for four minutes, please.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Richard, for your testimony.

Mr. Richard, you talked about someone needing to be accountable, but what new protections for whistle-blowers would you recommend that do not already exist? You already gave some recommendations, but which ones do you think should be there?

[Dany Richard]

There's already a task force working on this right now, and we have someone on the committee. There's a report from OGGO in 2017.

There are multiple measures we can take, but I think the most important is one that I mentioned. A whistle-blower needs to know that when they speak up, they will be protected, because you cannot jeopardize your career and your livelihood. Imagine the stress you're being put through when you did the right thing. You spoke up and all of a sudden everyone is attacking you. You ask yourself, “Should I have done this?” You might regret this decision for the rest of your life.

The most important of all the recommendations is to find a way to protect the whistle-blower.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Ms. Sidhu, just hold on. I'm going to suspend for a few seconds. I'll be right back.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'll bring the meeting back to order.

Ms. Sidhu, you have three minutes, please.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I know that during the pandemic, a lot of employees were working from home instead of at the office. Do you think they were better off-site than they were working in the office?

[Dany Richard]

The levels of productivity, I have no doubt, have increased, but there are intangibles that happen when you're working in the office. That's why I always tell my members that going into the office every once in a while makes sense.

We're in the game of information, so you might walk into someone who says they're working on a project, and my members might say they weren't consulted on this or didn't know they were working on that. It allows my members, through an unofficial function, to sometimes overhear information they then can ask questions about—not in a bad way. You could be an executive and just forget to consult with your financial adviser. Having these conversations, these water cooler talks, can help our members do this.

I genuinely believe—I can't speak for all of the public service here—our members have definitely shown that working remotely not only works but works well. I would argue it increases employee morale because we're able to do what we do best, which is work with numbers. We love it.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

I also want to ask about some consulting companies. When we're talking about taking advantage of the procurement system, how can the system be changed to be more resilient? Are there any solutions you can recommend?

[Dany Richard]

Our members don't deal directly with procurement. They're not procurement officers. They'll do some costing and they'll do some analysis.

I can't speak specifically to procurement, but I will tell you that when it comes to consulting firms—I won't name names—there are bigger firms out there. When our members know a firm is coming in, the general sentiment is to ask why, and we'll look at the task we've asked them to perform and say that we could have done it internally. Why is this being outsourced? That makes no sense to us.

It's even more insulting when our members are then asked, “By the way, can you help out the consultant with their analysis and do the forecast?” Well, here you are, with someone at a thousand dollars a day, whereas our members don't cost that much. I would argue that with our members you will get better quality and it will get done faster and at a cheaper price.

I've seen this happen time and time again.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much. That is the time.

We're moving now to Madam Sinclair-Desgagné.

You have the floor for two minutes

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

To pick up on what you were saying, Mr. Richard, many financial officers must feel insulted, in this case. The number of consultants hired has been increasing since 2016. The number of public service employees has increased too, but most of the new hires are people in operational roles to manage the consultants. A huge machine is used to manage the consultants, even though the necessary expertise is already there. I must add that this dependence on outside expertise is partly the result of the cuts that the Conservatives made to the public service when they were in power.

I'll refer to the ArriveCAN case and the testimony that you recently received. If the people who spoke to you anonymously were listened to and their advice taken seriously, would it have made a difference, or would they have been bypassed? How could they have helped to avoid this situation?

[Dany Richard]

I can assure you that, if our members had been not only listened to, but also consulted, none of this would have happened. When it comes to finance, we must be consulted and listened to.

I'll use the example of the doctor again. If I go to see my doctor because I'm a few pounds overweight and not in the best shape, he'll tell me to watch my diet and exercise more. He'll give me a check‑up and make recommendations. Our members do the same thing. Give us the information, and we'll verify compliance with standards and make recommendations.

However, ultimately, we aren't the ones making the decisions. Even if the doctor tells you to stop eating donuts in the morning, you can continue to do so. In a similar fashion, even if our members point out the risk of failing to apply internal controls, in the end, they don't make the decision. They make recommendations, but they don't act as police.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Mr. Julian, you have the floor for two minutes, please.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Richard, you mentioned the management consultant who was getting a thousand dollars a day. I'm reminded of the Harper government's contract for $90,000 a day with a consulting firm. It was $90,000 a day to trim federal spending. It is unbelievable, I think, to Canadians watching that any government would spend $90,000 a day to save money. Of course, the result was the debacle that we now know as Phoenix, at $2.5 billion, which started under the Conservative government. We've seen the Liberal government with ArriveCAN and the $60 million that obviously has not gone to the public good.

I have to come back to the point you just made in French with Madam Sinclair-Desgagné. If the Harper government or the current government had sat down and consulted with your members, would we be saving far more in financial resources and be more effective with federal programs? We've seen the Harper government splurging on Phoenix and ETS, and with the current government, there are many examples as well, including ArriveCAN, where money has simply been wasted.

[Dany Richard]

Absolutely. When you're looking to save pennies and dollars, how about a talk with the people who are managing, who see the dollars going in and going out, who take care of the budgets and the forecasts and who see the expenditures? I'm not saying we have a secret recipe here, but I can tell you from speaking to a lot of my members that it's often insulting when you don't consult with the people at the ground level who see all the ins and outs.

We can definitely make recommendations on where we can save money and where can we add value for Canadians. Our members see every penny that goes in and every penny that goes out. This is where we should start. Increasing the number of financial officers, of auditors, we have is a return on investment. It's not an expenditure. It's a return on investment that's worth the investment.