Public Accounts Committee on May 9th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I now call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 120 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

Before we begin, I would like to remind all members and other participants in the room of the following important preventive measures.

To prevent disruptive and potentially harmful audio feedback incidents that cause injuries, all in-person participants are reminded to keep their earpieces away from all microphones at all times.

As you're aware, the following measures have been taken to help prevent audio feedback incidents. We're now using black earpieces that are of higher quality. Please use those. By default, all unused earpieces will be unplugged at the start of a meeting.

When you're not using your earpiece, please place it face down in the middle of the sticker for this purpose, which is generally on your right on the table. Please consult the cards on your table for guidelines to prevent audio feedback incidents.

The room layout has been adjusted to increase the distance between microphones and to reduce the chance of feedback from the ambient earpiece.

These measures, of course, are in place so that we can conduct our business without interruption and protect the health and safety of all participants, with a special attention to our interpreters.

I thank you all for your consideration.

The committee is meeting today to discuss committee business.

As some of you are aware, I'll start with ArriveCAN.

For our study on ArriveCAN, the following witnesses have declined our invitation: Harriet Solloway, from the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada; John Ossowski; Paul Girard; and the RCMP.

I think correspondence has been sent to you on at least three of these four. We'll send you the fourth one as well, once that is translated.

The Ethics Commissioner has not declined, but has indicated that they're not available until June. Of course, I'm prepared to work with that.

I'm going to move into a discussion.

Mr. Nater, I'll recognize you first.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Chair. I appreciate the update from you.

I'll make my remarks very brief, and I do have a motion.

I think it's unfortunate when witnesses decline—

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

There is a point of order, Mr. Nater.

Go ahead, Ms. Khalid.

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

Thanks, Chair.

My apologies if I haven't kept up with the notes here. I realize that in our notice of meeting we're supposed to be in camera, but I notice that we're not in camera. Can you explain that quickly?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'll have the clerk explain that.

I believe the line is in camera for the in camera business. Perhaps I'll have the clerk speak to that, because I don't have the notice right in front of me.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Hilary Smyth]

The notice was redistributed this afternoon and published to the website. The top header indicates that it's webcast for the first portion. We'll be moving in camera for the second portion.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Mr. Nater, you have the floor.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Again, just briefly, I think it's unfortunate when witnesses decline. Obviously, an invitation means an invitation, but I think, as you've mentioned, it's slightly stronger than a simple invitation. The two individuals that I'm most concerned about are John Ossowski, who was the president of the CBSA during the time period of ArriveCAN, and Paul Girard, who was mentioned very clearly in the testimony of Mr. Firth at the bar.

I think those two individuals in particular are very key to our study, so I would like to move a motion:

That John Ossowski and Paul Girard be summoned to appear before the committee on Thursday, May 16, 2024, in relation to the study on “Report 1—ArriveCAN, of the 2024 Reports of the Auditor General of Canada”.

I believe the clerk has that motion in both English and French and can distribute it.

Very simply, I'll just say a couple of sentences on it.

I think that when we have key witnesses who are refusing to come, who have key testimony related to this study, their attendance ought to be required. I would have hoped, frankly, that Mr. Firth's testimony at the bar might be a cautionary tale to those who would rather decline the authority of Parliament, but I think that at this point we have to move to a summons for those two individuals.

I will leave my comments there, Chair, because I don't want to eat up any more time of this committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

I've checked my email, and I see that the motion has been sent out.

I'm going to say a couple things off the top.

Mr. Nater, I do note in your motion you're giving it one week. That is fine.

Just so folks don't begin to go down the path and debate the timing, it is my intention to have a meeting next Thursday anyway with this committee, with witnesses who have already been agreed to by the committee. Regardless of what happens to this motion, we will be meeting next Thursday, at 10 in the morning, with witnesses.

That notice will be sent to you once the witnesses are confirmed and I have the paperwork in. We're working on that right now.

Without further ado, Ms. Shanahan, you have the floor.

Mr. Desjarlais, I do see your hand up, and I'll go to you next.

Go ahead, Ms. Shanahan.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

In your opening remarks, you mentioned the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner, and I think you gave some information around ethics.

Could you go into the responses of each one of these witnesses and where they sit?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I will summarize them briefly.

The Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada—and, again, you have the correspondence and you have the full letter—is currently doing an investigation of ArriveCAN and felt that it would be best not to appear. I will let you dive into the letter to see the details.

Concerning Mr. Ossowski, again, there's correspondence on that. I don't want to prejudice, but he feels he does not need to appear.

Mr. Girard is similar, and he claims that he has a medical issue that he is dealing with. I've already pre-emptively asked for information on that.

As for the RCMP, you have correspondence on that as well.

Mr. Desjarlais, you have the floor.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank our Conservative colleagues for bringing this motion forward. I will, of course, accept this motion.

However, Chair, I'm getting more concerned about the cost to taxpayers that these surprise meetings are having. I know that we've had many of these meetings that send MPs from their home riding. We're all going home on Friday on flights, and the taxpayer pays for all of the Conservative members and everybody to go home, and then they pay for those flights again just to sit for two hours.

I think it's a concern to taxpayers that in a Conservative-controlled committee, we're continuously piling on these costs to taxpayers over and over. I'm fully in favour of the motion, but I think we can do this work during regular times when we have resources and MPs are gathered. I appreciate Mr. Nater's comment and his motion, but I don't appreciate the tax burden, the cost to taxpayers, that these extra meetings continue to put on everybody.

I would ask the Conservatives to think about that, about the impact on taxpayers. We're in an affordability crisis right now. It's a very important issue, and we're talking about the cost to taxpayers, but how can the Conservatives continue to justify these extreme expenses? We're talking thousands and thousands of dollars to host these meetings for two days, to fly Conservatives into Ottawa, have all the interpreters and have all this work—thousands of dollars. We must be approaching hundreds of thousands of dollars on extra meetings that could be done during regular business hours because of the Conservatives here.

Chair, I think I find it appropriate that we should start documenting these extra associated costs, so I would like to amend Mr. Nater's motion to include a cost analysis of that meeting to Canadian taxpayers, and I'll give you notice that in any other surprise meetings that are going to burden the taxpayer, I will be asking for a cost breakdown and analysis for these costs, because I want to be able to make sure that we're being reasonable with the money we're spending on behalf of Canadians.

We have a meeting all day today when we could be talking about this. We could be talking about it a week from now. We have two more meetings scheduled. I just want to make sure that we're getting the best value for Canadians here.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Mr. Desjarlais, could I get some language in? You would like to make an addition that says what? Would you like the analyst, the clerk or the chair to provide an estimate of the meeting cost?

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Yes, there are the extra meeting costs and whether or not members will be attending in person or virtually, because for some members, it's thousands of dollars extra to fly all the way over here. We're talking about $50,000 or $100,000 if we start flying everybody back from their constituencies when it's not a sitting week.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Sure. Then you would like the amendment—

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Canadians are concerned about it.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

The amendment is to provide a cost estimate—

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

It's to provide a cost breakdown. It could also be, maybe not a motion, but I just want the chair to take into consideration my concern about extra costs like this and the impact to our budgets.

Also, could you please tell us before we vote on these extra meetings how much they are costing the taxpayer? That would give me and Canadians a fair estimation as to why we continue to have extra meetings, because I think we have to balance the cost of these things. I know this work is important and I support the motion, but I'm getting nervous about these costs. We're doing studies on cost of living and we're doing studies on affordability, and I agree with those things, but we're also impacting the taxpayer here. I think the Conservatives, of most people, should take this into better consideration.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Mr. Desjarlais, I need to be clear, because I think you said to maybe deal with a budget afterwards, so is there an amendment, and what is the amendment? Is it to provide this committee with a summary of the cost of the meeting?

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

It's for the cost of extra meetings, yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Well, let's just deal with this meeting. I mean, unless you—

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

You called the meeting, Chair, and there are costs associated with it.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

You can either add it on to this motion or you can come back with a fresh motion, I suppose, that is universal, but it seems that right now you're asking for the cost of this Thursday meeting. Is that right?

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

It's for all the meetings that are not regularly scheduled. This is a regularly scheduled meeting. Mr. Nater of the Conservative Party is asking to spend more money.