Public Accounts Committee on March 7th, 2024

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

I'm sorry. I did not hear your last sentence. The mic might not have picked it up.

[Arianne Reza]

My apologies.

I ended by saying that there was a whole series of steps outlined in the email to CBSA, asking for further information to document the file and to satisfy PSPC's challenge function on the sole-source justification, the length of the contract and why they were not looking at different options.

In emergency situations like we saw in the pandemic, while we weren't able to run full competitions, we kept defaulting to quick competitions of five, 10 or 15 days to try to ensure that we were using competitive tools.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

How did those quick competitions go?

[Arianne Reza]

The quick competitions worked very well across a broad range of commodities in PPE and for various logistics pieces we put in place.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

What authority does PSPC have to reject a contract request from client departments?

[Arianne Reza]

I'll turn to Dominic for the technical answer to that.

[Dominic Laporte]

In terms of our authority, we have to be careful when we allow a department to use our procurement instrument, whether it's a standing offer or a supply arrangement. Our role is to play a challenge function, making sure that people abide by the rule of having open, fair and transparent procurement.

This is an interesting question you're raising: To what extent can we basically say no to the client? I think here, in the context of the pandemic, you have to remember the context for CBSA employees. It was very difficult to have them at the border stations. All these elements made it a bit more challenging to play a challenge function back then.

I have to say that in the context of regular challenge function eventualities, we will say no. We've said no to clients in the past. For example, they will not be able to leverage some of our procurement vehicles if they don't abide by the terms and conditions.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you. That is the time for that segment.

Mr. Lemire now has the floor for six minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for their contribution to this important study.

Paragraph 1.51 of the Auditor General's report reads as follows:

We found that Public Services and Procurement Canada, as the government's central purchasing and contracting authority, challenged the Canada Border Services Agency for proposing and using non-competitive processes for ArriveCAN and recommended various alternatives. These alternatives included running a shorter competitive process (for example, 10 days) or incorporating shorter contract periods with a non-competitive approach.

You confirmed that for us in your opening remarks.

We know that Public Services and Procurement Canada had challenged certain actions taken by the Canada Border Services Agency with respect to ArriveCAN, but we had no access to the emails.

At a previous committee meeting, we were told that we could have access to the emails for 30 days. However, yesterday, a representative of the Treasury Board Secretariat suggested we could have access for six months.

Can you confirm for us how long we can have access to those deleted emails for?

[Arianne Reza]

We'll need to check the document retention policy.

However, I want to point out that last night, we sent the committee clerk the emails requested of us in this regard.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

We have still not received the emails that were requested at our last committee meeting, even though the Auditor General already had them. Why is it taking so long to send us some emails?

I would remind you that elected officials play a vital role in shedding light on various issues. So it is essential that we are given access to information quickly and transparently so we can do our work.

[Arianne Reza]

We are doing our best to send them as quickly as possible. It typically takes us between 14 and 21 days to find the documents requested, have them translated and send them directly.

Would like to add something, Mr. Laporte?

[Dominic Laporte]

Yes, I would.

I can tell you that the documents in question are being translated. Some of the documents were released to the committee last night. We have been very diligent with this request. We do have to allow some time for translation. That said, the documents will be provided very soon. If not today, it will be in the coming days. It has been just two weeks since we last appeared before you. Since then, we had to locate the emails and get the necessary approvals. The documents you have not yet received should be forthcoming very soon.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you. I am glad to hear you are taking the request seriously. Seeing those emails is essential, specifically to understand what levels of authorization or access were granted so we can prevent this kind of thing from happening again.

We know there has been a lot of media coverage of the ArriveCAN file. I would be curious to know how the crisis was handled within the department. Did you create a crisis response team? If so, who was part of it? Who was in charge? That is one of the main outstanding issues regarding ArriveCAN.

[Arianne Reza]

We have given a great deal of thought to it. During the pandemic, our department did procurement work and awarded close to 16,000 contracts, for a total value of $20 billion.

That's 16,000 contracts in a two-year period for 20 billion dollars' worth of procurement on PPE, on vaccine procurements and on logistics, with a workforce of approximately a thousand employees and executives working in this field. We did our best to make sure we had records, that governance was taking place and that we were supporting a vast array of not only clients, but also, in the period of time we're talking about, the provinces and territories, which turned to us for assistance with their acquisitions for hospitals and with spooling up logistics trains. There were a lot of different pieces going on, with the same workforce trying to meet a breadth of needs that were very specific.

In terms of how we normally do things, there are many different hands working on many different contracts. It is not a one-to-one relationship. We support all of our clients, and we try to provide a level of due diligence and put in place a framework that ensure the rules are followed for transparency and openness and there is best value in the procurement process.

I will stop there. I don't know if Mr. Laporte would like to add something.

[Dominic Laporte]

I don't know if you were referring specifically to ArriveCAN when you mentioned crisis management. I have to say that our department did not have a public contract file called “ArriveCAN”. It is important to look at the context. We provided informatics services to the Canada Border Services Agency, and ArriveCAN was one of the various informatics tools and services provided to the Canada Border Services Agency.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

So you are saying that the procurement process for the ArriveCAN application could not be conducted in the usual way, given the market in Ottawa and the complex border management system.

Do you think the government gave you the necessary leeway and resources for such a project to be successful, from a technical point of view?

[Arianne Reza]

I think that is a question for the Canada Border Services Agency.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

Next up is MP Idlout.

You have the floor for up to six minutes, please.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I am shocked at what was discovered in the ArriveCAN report. I can't believe that nearly $60 million in contracts was awarded to companies and CEOs who did so little work to earn it. I am shocked at the lack of accountability measures. I am shocked that this company claimed to be an indigenous business.

The $60 million that went to profits could have made a world of difference in my riding. It could have gone toward a harvesters support grant and funding for community food programs that help to alleviate food insecurity, a condition imposed by a lack of investment for decades by successive Liberal and Conservative governments. The Liberal government is looking to sunset this important program, which supports hunters in providing for families and communities. Groceries and supplies are too costly, and most families cannot afford them.

How, I ask, is it acceptable to this government to find nearly $60 million for just a handful of CEOs and well-connected insiders?

My first question is for the deputy minister.

I cannot go to my constituents to even try to justify to them that the ArriveCAN app was worth it. I am asking you to speak to the families in my riding that cannot afford basic groceries because the programs designed to lower their costs are not working. I am asking you to explain to them why the government let some CEOs walk away with millions.

[Arianne Reza]

The issue that has been uncovered in the last week on Dalian and its use of contracting and its employment is egregious. It's wrong, and it is a terrible situation. I have picked up the phone to speak to the RCMP commissioner. It has been suspended, so action is being taken.

I empathize that the situation is not acceptable. It has come to our attention, and we have moved as swiftly as possible to do something about it.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

In yesterday's testimony, this committee was told that the Liberals and Conservatives together awarded a total value of around $107 million in contracts to GC Strategies, Dalian, Coradix and Coredal Systems. Are you of the opinion that Canadians got full value for their money out of those contracts?

[Arianne Reza]

Those contracts span many years, and many different departments have had work done by those firms. Those firms have provided a variety of services, mostly in the professional services IT staff augmentation, which is the support to in-house priorities and deliverables, and they have indicated that they have received value.

Where there is questionable value, as we've seen from the AG's report, actions are being taken to examine further measures.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I will now turn to the decision-making process around the suspensions of GC Strategies, Dalian and Coradix, which were announced yesterday.

Can you tell this committee when the decision was made to review the security credentials of these companies and what the motivations for that review were?

[Arianne Reza]

I'm going to turn to Madam Poulin.