Evidence of meeting #105 for Public Accounts in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cbsa.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
What are your thoughts on ministerial accountability? All I've been hearing so far is the minister is completely oblivious, there's a raging firestorm happening in the ministry and there's plausible deniability: “No one told me. I didn't bother to ask.”
How do you feel about ministerial responsibility with this particular scam?
4:45 p.m.
President, Association of Canadian Financial Officers
Ministerial responsibility is important. Even at the deputy levels, the buck stops department by department. We need someone who's accountable, but for organizations such as PSPC, ESDC and DND, we're talking about hundreds of millions or billions of dollars. This is very difficult for one person. That's why we need financial officers to do their job of due diligence, of financial stewardship, to protect these deputy ministers to allow them to do their job.
You can't have one person verifying every single transaction. Due diligence is important. Our members can help specifically with that task to ensure taxpayers' money is being not only accounted for but well spent.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Do you think it's a function of incompetence at the deputy ministerial level, or is there an active attempt by ministers to shield themselves from this raging firestorm of fleecing the taxpayer?
4:50 p.m.
President, Association of Canadian Financial Officers
I couldn't speak to that, unfortunately. I wouldn't know.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Very good. Thank you.
Mrs. Shanahan, you have the floor for five minutes.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Thank you very much, Chair.
I want to say, Mr. Richard, how much I appreciate your testimony here and your obvious dedication to and able representation of your members regarding what I would call a professional code of conduct. Can you speak to that? You mentioned the designations of some of your members. What are some of the ethical and professional standards they must adhere to?
4:50 p.m.
President, Association of Canadian Financial Officers
Generally speaking, every public servant adheres to a code of conduct. For our members, however, for those who have certain designations, the bar is a bit higher.
I'll give an example. If you see something wrong and you didn't do anything wrong, you're a witness to something. If you're performing an audit and an invoice was paid and you detect an anomaly and something doesn't pass the smell test, you have a duty to report it. The challenge with this is that even though you haven't done anything wrong—you're just doing your job—there could be consequences to you personally.
Our members are faced with this situation. They know that ethically they have to report. How do they do this without committing career suicide? How do they do the right thing that they know they're supposed to do, that they have to do? They need to manage their careers. This is why it's one of the most difficult things and one of the most difficult conversations I to have with my members.
Unfortunately, I have to let them know they've done nothing wrong and they need to report it—to their supervisor, to whoever they want. However, we need to make sure we document it, because if ever something happens and there's a scandal, we need to be able to show that they did the right thing and raised it with management. The—
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Can I ask you about that, Mr. Richard? What kind of documentation would be recommended in this case? I say that knowing, of course, that we have the Auditor General's report and the report of the Office of the Procurement Ombudsman. I would think that members of your union who were involved in the processes under study would have been interviewed, would have been met with.
What kinds of records would they have been able to provide? Indeed, why not provide them before an audit takes place? Why not channel those concerns and recommendations directly to the Auditor General's office or to the procurement ombudsman?
4:50 p.m.
President, Association of Canadian Financial Officers
It's unfortunately a matter of them not being protected.
Again, they have to do the right thing, which is flag it to the employer. If there's an anomaly, if there's a suspicion, if it doesn't pass the acid test, we need to flag it. Once they've flagged it, we always tell our members to document it because it's not about what you know; it's what you can prove.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
4:50 p.m.
President, Association of Canadian Financial Officers
It could be as simple as an email.
4:50 p.m.
President, Association of Canadian Financial Officers
I'll give an example. When a consultant has been hired, we've seen amounts completely changed and conclusions to reports that are a complete 180° and don't make any sense. We tell our members to send an email raising their concerns and to document them. This way, at least the ball is in the employer's court and you are protected.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Where is that email sent? Is it sent to a supervisor?
4:50 p.m.
President, Association of Canadian Financial Officers
It's to anyone under managerial responsibilities. It could be a director, a senior leader, a CFO or a direct supervisor.
The moment we inform the employer of our findings, it reduces the risk for our members, because they flagged what they saw and they informed their appropriate chain of command of the anomalies or discrepancies they saw.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
I'm going to ask you this. Of course, you've testified already and we know that many employees were working from home. Could there have been better oversight if employees had been working in the office? Would this have made any difference to the reporting mechanism or to the physical interactions we have in an office? “Hey, by the way, did you see that project? What's going on there?” It's that kind of thing.
4:55 p.m.
President, Association of Canadian Financial Officers
From our members' standpoint, we deal with proof and evidence. Anything that happens needs to have a paper trail. I can only speak from our members' standpoint because everything either goes through an email or is an invoice. There's always a paper or electronic trail.
It wouldn't make any difference from my members' standpoint, because we need to substantiate whatever it is in the documents or the invoices.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Coming back to the workforce, it's really critical that we have financial record-keeping happening and oversight.
I'll use the question that we had for the PSPC regarding the CAF authorizations and so on. How come somebody didn't catch that? We saw that the public service was dramatically cut back under the Harper government when Pierre Poilievre was the Minister of Employment.
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Ask your question, please, Mrs. Shanahan. You're way over your time.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Do you worry about cuts like these coming back and what they would mean for accountability and transparency?
4:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Thank you very much.
Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.