Public Accounts Committee on April 3rd, 2024

[Jonathan Moor]

No, but I know that we ceased paying them in June 2023.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

That's nearly a year after concerns had been brought to the attention of the CBSA through the work of Conservatives at standing committees of Parliament.

I have more questions for later.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Next up is Ms. Yip.

You have the floor for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you.

Thank you for coming today.

My question is for either Mr. Moor or Mr. Vleeming.

For the benefit of Canadians watching, can you explain what staff augmentation is?

[Jonathan Moor]

I'd be happy to start, and then maybe Darryl can take over.

Staff augmentation is what an organization does when it decides to build something in-house but doesn't have all of the skills required to do that. It involves bringing in contractors, often on a daily rate or, sometimes, on a rate for fixed product. Staff augmentation is widespread throughout the Government of Canada.

If I go back to what the deputy minister of DND testified to this committee, he identified that staff augmentation was actually necessary because sometimes it's not very easy for individual contractors to get contracts with the Government of Canada. It requires an awful lot of work to actually secure those contracts, so going through a staff augmentation specialist does add value for those individuals and small and medium-sized enterprises.

Also, hiring in the public service is not very easy, particularly for positions like technical architects and cloud architects. There are not enough in the Government of Canada. I think the previous CIO talked about a 25% or 30% shortfall in the number of people who are in-house. We are trying to increase the number of people in-house, but it is not easy to do. Also, the skill set may not be value for money for the public sector. We may not have sufficient work for a very technical specialist to do over a long period of time, but for short-term assignments and projects, they are very important.

Staff augmentation has its purpose. I think PSPC gave evidence that there are more than 600 different companies providing staff augmentation. The issue here is how we used it. We definitely agree that we used it too much, and we used it for too long.

I'll hand it over to Mr. Vleeming now to talk about what we're trying to do to reduce the requirement.

[Darryl Vleeming]

We certainly have drastically reduced the number of contractors. In the 11 months I've been here, the number has gone down by over 25% and we're on target to drop that down probably another 25% by the end of the next fiscal year.

To Mr. Moor's point, staff augmentation is well used in government and in the private sector, but it has to be used in the right way. It needs to be used for surge capacity when you don't have the staff. It shouldn't be the case that contractors are around for years and years. There are other methods that should be used, like training your existing staff so you don't become reliant on those contractors.

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

Thank you.

Can you give me an example of what types of contractors you were using that provided value for money?

[Darryl Vleeming]

Typically, it's around cutting-edge technology, including what ArriveCAN was built on. If you think about modern cloud applications that are using cutting-edge tools, the in-house staff often doesn't have those skills. Contractors should be brought in for a specific initiative on those skill sets, but they should also be used to cross-train your existing staff to allow them to take over, going forward, so you don't become reliant on those contractors.

Our approach going forward will be to create that sort of scenario, which is how we'll be able to reduce our long-term reliance on those contractors.

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

Could you tell me a bit about the executive procurement review committee? What are its responsibilities? What is this committee all about?

[Jonathan Moor]

I established the executive procurement review committee last October to address many of the findings in the OAG report and also in the current ombudsman's report.

This is to deal with the second line of defence, which was clearly lacking for us during the COVID period. Now, the executive procurement review committee looks at every single contract and every single task authorization above $40,000. We have about 1,500 contracts across the CBSA, so that's a significant requirement. This is about ensuring that we make this change stick and making sure that this applies across the agency as a whole. Maybe in time, if we start to see performance improving, we can raise those limits.

We have had over a dozen meetings; the committee meets, on average, at least once a week. We go through all of the different proposals. In the case of Mr. Vleeming's branch, a presentation will be made to the committee to say what we aim to do, and questions will be asked about whether that is compliant with the procurement controls and measures. We will ask the procurement directorate to give us assurance that it is completely compliant. It's there as a second line of defence to ensure this never happens again.

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

Is this committee permanent or temporary?

[Jonathan Moor]

It has been established as a permanent committee of the executive committee. In an ideal world, if we became absolutely perfect at procurement, then we wouldn't need this committee. However, I think that, even in an ideal world, providing that level of additional oversight is always going to be valuable to the agency.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

That is your time, Ms. Yip.

Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné, over to you for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to turn to Mr. Vleeming.

Mr. Vleeming, you've been in your position for almost 11 months. Is that correct?

[Darryl Vleeming]

Yes.

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

Do you perform duties for private companies, apart from the position of chief information officer, or CIO, which is very time-consuming on its own?

[Darryl Vleeming]

I'm sorry. I don't understand the question.

Did I play what role?

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

Do you have any other roles, aside from your role as CIO right now?

[Darryl Vleeming]

I sit on a charity board and another board. That's all.

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

The other board of directors you sit on is for a private company called Pillar 9. Is that correct?

[Darryl Vleeming]

Yes.

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

How much time do you devote to your duties of providing advice on the board of directors of a private company?

[Darryl Vleeming]

It's a very small commitment: probably, on average, five hours per month.

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

Do you feel you have the time, given that you occupy a very important position and that there is a lot of cleanup to do at the Canada Border Services Agency?

[Darryl Vleeming]

Yes, I'm comfortable that I'm able to do both.