Yes.
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.
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.
As an Individual
In terms of these COVID relief payments, it's not just a conflict of interest. They could have approved this payment, and that would have just provided more of the funding that was already pre-approved. All you were doing was adding in 5% that was already provided.
For these COVID payments, they added an additional 5%. This is where they went above and beyond the logic of what they should have been doing. Even if the companies had a problem, they could have just provided them more of what was provided already, but instead they chose to add additional components of funding that never met any eligibility.
Conservative
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Let me just clarify if you would agree. Essentially, board members voted to improperly funnel money out the door, including into their own companies, so they could then turn around and pad their pockets with even more money in the way of bonuses. Is that a fair characterization of what happened?
As an Individual
In the case of Annette Verschuren's NRStor, in the same few days when she received that second COVID payment, her company was already in the process of getting over $200,000 as part of the regular SDTC process. So, again, this is a question of knowing better, not just illegally approving funding.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
At committee, Annette Verschuren attempted to justify these improper and conflict-ridden payments on the basis that companies within SDTC's portfolio were badly struggling during COVID and needed emergency funding to survive, but that's not accurate, is it?
As an Individual
SDTC actually did a complete survey of the whole portfolio, which showed that the majority of companies didn't require additional funding, including the majority of the board members' companies, which is why they then went ahead and approved it for everyone. Had they done a more effective job, it wouldn't have given the majority of SDTC's companies and the board members' companies any money.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Okay.
I just want to turn very quickly to Ed Vandenberg. He provided counsel to the SDTC board, notwithstanding the fact that he was a member of the council. Is that correct?
Conservative
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
That would be in violation of the SDTC act. Is that correct?
Conservative
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
What about assistant deputy minister Noseworthy?
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Also, presumably, Minister Champagne would have known of it as well.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Thank you, Mr. Cooper.
Finally, Ms. Bradford, you have the floor for five minutes, please.
Liberal
Valerie Bradford Liberal Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
You've stated that McCarthy corrupted the review process. Can you please provide any records, emails or communication on ISED or McCarthy impeding employees, formerly or currently employed at SDTC, from participating in the McCarthy review?