Public Accounts Committee on Sept. 5th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I'm afraid that is your time, Mr. Perkins.

Ms. Bradford, you have the floor for five minutes, please.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for attending this morning.

Do you believe specific industries require private sector experience?

[Donnalyn McClymont]

Mr. Chair, generally speaking, it will depend on the individual circumstances. One thing I would say I've learned over the years with appointments is that there's not one piece of statute that has exactly the same appointment provisions. Almost every statute for appointments has very specific provisions and different provisions. For example, as I've outlined here for SDTC, there are very specific provisions that require certain aptitudes, skills, knowledge and experience in order to fulfill the role as a director. Even the Ethics Commissioner has very specific requirements.

All of that is to say that it really isn't up to us to give a view on that. It's often very clearly set out in the legislation or in other areas of responsibility that are directed or discussed by the minister or the department and that are required in order to execute on the role.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you for that.

You have mentioned before that many of the GIC appointees have previous connections to the industry. We've heard before how small the clean-tech industry is. In some of these GIC open applications, is a conflict of interest inherent, given how small the pool of industry expertise is?

[Donnalyn McClymont]

Mr. Chair, I would agree with the honourable member's question. I would note that the Auditor General herself said that the act inherently creates conflicts by requiring certain characteristics, aptitudes, skills and experience. I would say that this is a challenge across the board. At the end of the day, we don't often have a huge candidate pool. As we were speaking about previously, it's becoming—I'll be honest—more and more challenging to attract good people to serve in public positions for a variety of reasons. Conflict certainly can be one of those reasons.

I would agree with the honourable member's premise that sometimes there will be conflicts when you're looking to attract people who come from specific sectors.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Another challenge faced by the clean-tech industry, given that it's so new and innovative, is its ability to raise capital. Do you believe these sorts of funds, such as those from SDTC, are necessary to ensure the growth of Canadian-led and -run industries and businesses?

[Donnalyn McClymont]

Mr. Chair, I wouldn't really have a view on that. As I said, I'm responsible for appointments at the Privy Council Office.

At the end of the day, the government of the day—and this would have been in 2001—made a decision. I know there's been a lot of public commentary about the importance of the organization. Ultimately, from a policy perspective, it would really be the government's decision as to whether it feels this tool of a foundation is the appropriate policy response to help support a particular industry.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Over the course of the selection basis, is there an inherent problem with the conflict of interest declarations?

[Donnalyn McClymont]

Mr. Chair, I'm not 100% sure I understand the question.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

I think you mentioned earlier that you go through this process about five times. The candidates are grilled, or asked to verify or state their potential conflict of interest position. Is it sufficient? Clearly, in this particular case, it wasn't.

[Donnalyn McClymont]

Mr. Chair, we ask about it many times, as I've said, and it's written very clearly in the application. You could go on the website right now and see an application, and you would see it very clearly laid out. It says that these are the obligations under the Conflict of Interest Act. I give credit to the commissioner and his office. They have very clear information on their website for you as members of Parliament.

For our part, I don't think there was anything more we could have done to be clear about what the obligations are. I do think, in some ways, that this was a success. The individual was referred pre-appointment to the commissioner. The individual has pointed out that they spent two hours with the commissioner going over their assets and their potential conflicts. I think it was quite detailed in terms of the support that was provided from the outset of the appointment.

I think we're doing everything we can, but absolutely, we're always looking at ways to improve. We will give some consideration going forward as to what more we could potentially do.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

You can ask a brief follow-up question. Go ahead, but please keep it brief, Ms. Bradford.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

In your previous testimony, you said you felt there was perhaps a need for ongoing conflict of interest training. They declare when they get appointed, but then conflicts can occur as they're acting.

Who would provide that COI training, in your opinion? Who would be best positioned to do that?

[Donnalyn McClymont]

Mr. Chair, as I mentioned, the commissioner does a fair amount of outreach and public information sharing, so a lot of that is already happening. I think the organization in question here had its own protocols and procedures in place. As we've noted, unfortunately, they weren't consistently followed, and the commissioner has pointed that out himself.

At the end of the day, to answer your question about who is responsible, it would certainly be the commissioner in partnership with the organizations, and the organizations in partnership with departments. As I've mentioned, it is something I have raised with my deputy colleagues to be mindful of and to have a look at—in terms of the report from the commissioner—as things to be careful of when proceeding with dealing with conflicts in organizations.

[Valerie Bradford, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Thank you for that.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much. We appreciate that.

Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné, you now have the floor for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to address another important topic.

The goal of Sustainable Development Technology Canada, of course, was to encourage innovation in sustainable development technologies. CIC's mandate will consolidate the industrial research assistance program, IRAP, and the SDTC funds that will be transferred, but there is almost nothing about the sustainable development goals.

I'm turning to you, since you answered my question about transparency. Is there still the same objective when it comes to sustainable development? Will the purpose of the funds that will be transferred always be to support sustainable development and encourage the private sector to develop technologies and conduct sustainable development research?

I am asking the question because it is really not clear.

[Donnalyn McClymont]

Mr. Chair, I would just reiterate that, unfortunately, I'm not responsible in terms of governance.

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

I'm talking about appointments, Ms. McClymont.

[Donnalyn McClymont]

I'm just the appointments person. I wouldn't really be able to give a view.

From what I understand from the minister's announcement, this organization will be focused on innovation. I think there's a clear linkage there. When the organization does take on this responsibility, it will be up to them to make sure they adhere to areas of fiscal probity—

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

Ms. McClymont, I'm sorry, but your answer is unsatisfactory.

As you know, there is innovation in oil research and exploration, which has nothing to do with sustainable development. When you appoint people, will you propose experts in sustainable development technologies, in innovation specific to sustainable development, whether it be clean technology or green energy?

Various aspects of sustainable development can be applied to energy conservation. Innovation itself is not at all specific enough when it comes to sustainable development and the environmental objectives that Canada should have.

[Donnalyn McClymont]

Mr. Chair, I would say that, at the end of the day, in terms of the organization, when we're setting up the appointments for the directors and for the chair, there absolutely would be, to the member's question, a requirement to make sure there are individuals who have a clear understanding of the breadth of the responsibilities of the organization. In this case, it would include sustainable development technology. I would expect that we would look to have people with knowledge in those areas to serve as directors.

We're a bit of a way out, I would say, as the organization will be, as I understand it, stood up and transferred by 2026-27. This is something that we'll definitely keep in mind going forward.

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

If it's not—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

You will have another opportunity to ask questions, Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné.

Up next is Mr. Desjarlais.

You have two and a half minutes, please.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to return to the topic of Ms. Verschuren's appointment to SDTC. While it is a very strenuous process, I would agree, for the proper review of appointments to positions like this, in your capacity, I do believe there are still gaps. I think the Ethics Commissioner points to some of those gaps. I think your testimony, in other committees related to ongoing checks also, is more in line with what I'm hoping to get from a response.

The Ethics Commissioner noted that incorrect legal advice, as you mentioned, caused Ms. Verschuren to deviate from the standard practice, and thus led her to contravene the act. What information, at the time of your review of these persons, are they aware of in terms of the act and its requirements?

Was she aware that she was contravening the act?