Public Accounts Committee on March 21st, 2024

[Bill Matthews]

I think, Mr. Chair, that would depend on how you define “outsourcing”. We will get numbers on professional services for things like body shops and contractors. I would caution members to not confuse that with when we make a very large payment to purchase an airplane.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about Mr. Yeo. I wish you could be as transparent and focused on Mr. Yeo's actions as this committee is.

I understand that planes are expensive. However, contractors are also expensive, and you'd have to agree that the contractors, including Mr. Yeo, have taken far more money than the effective use of funds would have provided, according to the Auditor General.

Would you agree with that?

[Bill Matthews]

I think it depends on the contract. I've cited the example of why Mr. Yeo was turned into an employee, and I actually applaud that as an idea for when you have a contractor and you need that skill set on an enduring basis. We will provide the committee with information on our use of IT contractors so that you have the information you need.

Many IT contractors are not interested in becoming public servants, but when they are and when the skill set—

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Do you know why they're not interested in becoming public servants? Have you asked any of the IT professionals who have left the Canadian public service this question? We have.

[Bill Matthews]

Obviously, that's an individual choice, but I have some knowledge of what the driving forces are.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

What are some of the driving forces?

[Bill Matthews]

We hear about the opportunity to work on different projects as number one. We hear about compensation as number two, but there's no magic to that order I provided. Those are the two most common ones.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

You can see how in my mind and in the minds of Canadians that it's difficult to know that you applaud the decision to have IT professionals like Mr. Yeo working as a contractor for the Department of National Defence for some time, being able to get some significant contracts from it, and at the same time being able to work at the Department of National Defence, even though you knew at this time that he was a contractor.

I understand that, but why wouldn't you review the contracts before hiring him?

[Bill Matthews]

In this case, I'll need to clarify, Mr. Chair, that there was awareness that he was a full-time contractor for the Department of National Defence, and we wanted to turn that role into a public service job.

The supervisors of Mr. Yeo were not aware of his broader business dealings, or they would have asked questions. They thought he had just been turned from a contracted person who showed up every day into an employee. They were not aware of his other business activities.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

We'll turn now to the beginning of our second round. Mr. Genuis has the floor for five minutes.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We're here talking about double-dipping and the fact that Mr. Yeo was simultaneously employed as a public servant while also in charge of a company and on the board of directors of that company, by his own testimony, which was doing contracts with not only the Government of Canada but with the same department that he was a part of.

I want to highlight that this committee has passed a common-sense Conservative motion calling for all double-dipping to be banned. The laughing Liberals actually voted against that motion, so unfortunately, we don't have agreement even around this table that this practice of scandalous double-dipping should end. However, the opposition was certainly united in taking that position. I hope the Liberals will reconsider and reform their approach to this—

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I don't think that's a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

What's the point of order, Ms. Khalid?

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

It's relevance.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

That literally is the subject of this hearing, double-dipping.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Yes, Ms. Khalid, there—

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

It would be hard to be more relevant.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Anyway, Mr. Genuis, you have the floor. We go back to you, please.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Yes, I think “point of order: a guilty conscience” might have been more in order from Ms. Khalid—

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

On a point of order again, Mr. Chair, there's no need to make personal attacks against members in this committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Ms. Khalid, the slings and arrows fly from both sides, as you've witnessed before.

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

I haven't done or said anything here, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'm not saying you; you've been quiet as a church mouse in this meeting so far, but I see that is changing with two points of order that are rather thin.

Mr. Genuis, you have four minutes.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Yes, and Mr. Chair, I wouldn't consider the insinuation that the member across has a conscience as an aspersion; I would consider that an—