Evidence of meeting #139 for Public Accounts in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was sdtc.
A video is available from Parliament.
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Thank you very much for confirming that.
My second point in this discussion is related to the actual work of employees. In your time there, did you bear witness to or know of employees who were directed by executives to change or manipulate aspects of an application that had already been denied?
NDP
As an Individual
If an employee said no, it would be moved around to a different employee. That's how the culture worked. There were, obviously, people brave enough to say no to certain things. In a lot of those situations, executives would then move those projects to, let's say, an employee who was more agreeable to the executive. How did those employees benefit? Well, they were the ones who got higher bonuses. They were the ones who would get promotions. This is where, even at the employee level, you were benefiting from being more agreeable.
When I talk about the culture of fear.... Prior to my being there, there was a major firing spree that effectively got rid of the majority of senior employees, especially those who focused on financial compliance and all of those different key aspects, which they were noting to be more and more problematic. Even prior to my being there, there were already changes and things that effectively created an environment that would protect all of these issues, because anyone who spoke would know what was going to happen to them, like—
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Sorry, did you just say that environment already existed?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
We're well over. We'll come back to you.
Mr. Barrett, you have the floor for five minutes, please.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
I'm going to ask you a set of questions. Please be brief in your replies, if you could, so we can get through them. You'll note the rounds of questioning are shorter now, sir.
What funding streams violated the contribution agreement between Sustainable Development Technology Canada and the government?
As an Individual
All of them. The seed funding stream, the ecosystem funding stream, the start-up funding stream, and the skill funding stream. I would mention that every single one of the seed funding projects did not meet any of the requirements, and neither did any of the ecosystem projects.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
How much money passed through those streams?
As an Individual
I think it was over $50 million at least, but I think from the major findings it has to be over $100 million.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Were many of the companies getting funding through these ineligible streams conflicted and connected to political appointees, Liberal-appointed board members?
As an Individual
I would assume so. I think anyone who would be appointed through the GIC process would effectively be appointed by the Liberal Party.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Are you aware of any new contribution agreements being made since the Auditor General's report came out?
As an Individual
There has been an updated contribution agreement, which now, effectively, goes back and retroactively allows for the majority of those ineligible projects to be considered eligible.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
So companies that were in conflicts before, or ineligible, have been retroactively made eligible.
As an Individual
Through the update to the contribution agreement, yes, they would be considered eligible.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
That seems highly inappropriate, to say the least.
Which of the Liberal-appointed board members benefited the most from what we know to be 330 million tax dollars given out in identified conflicts of interest?
As an Individual
I would say the one who was most benefiting was Andrée-Lise Méthot. She worked at Cycle Capital, and she had multiple companies within the SDTC portfolio. For her, it wasn't a simple one-company situation like for Annette Verschuren. Andrée-Lise was very friendly with the CEO at SDTC, and there were multiple instances where it wasn't just that she got preferential treatment for projects; she was getting funding two or three times, where a project gets funding and it's technically graduated, and then it would come back into the fund and get an additional round of funding, and it might happen a third time.
SDTC was, effectively, subsidizing companies for certain board members for years and years.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Has the board of SDTC met to approve more money being given out?
As an Individual
I believe there has been a project review committee meeting with the new board, which approved a new slate of projects to be funded last week.
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Are any of them conflicted?
Conservative
Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON
Trudeau's minister, Minister Champagne, likes to exclaim quite loudly that he took action the very moment he heard about the problems at Sustainable Development Technology Canada. Is that true?