Evidence of meeting #14 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 program.
A video is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
As I've reported, we believe that some expenses—
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Jean Yip
Thank you.
We'll now turn to Mr. Desjarlais for two and a half minutes.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I want to again thank all of the witnesses. I know this has been a difficult study. It was a difficult time that we as a country had to endure, so I thank you all for your service.
It's incumbent upon our committee and us as elected officials to make sure that the taxpayer and regular Canadians understand how this process works and where this money is going.
I want to address paragraphs 14.49 and 14.50, which I believe contain probably the most problematic and largest issues facing this program. I'll read one out: “In our samples, we found the following examples where funding was provided, but the applications should have been rejected because they did not satisfy the program’s eligibility criteria....”
I want to thank Ms. Hogan for very clearly outlining the problem here. There were clear criteria and there was a failure by the organizations to apply those criteria. We expect the regional development organizations to follow through with understanding the impact of this.
When we look at the findings under 14.50, there is “repayment of shareholder loans”. That's what this money was used for. Taxpayer dollars went to shareholder loans. There is also “financial support to family members” and “purchase of a new vehicle”. These are ineligible expenses, but they're massive expenses. This is a glaring failure of the program, which I hope we can remedy.
In some instances, businesses had no employees but were still allowed in this program. There were also cases of applicants that had not previously applied to other organizations, and “cases of applicants that were not in operation before March 2020”. That is extreme.
I really want to make sure we understand Ms. Hogan's report on this and how important it is to truly satisfy the application of fair criteria, so it doesn't end up that taxpayer dollars are going to the repayment of shareholder loans. We can understand how that's a difficult thing for Canadians to understand.
Will the regional development organizations remedy this issue, or are we simply going to allow the shareholders to have their money?
Interim President, Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario
If I may, the shareholder issue is not a case that I'm aware of, but it reminded me that in those instances, the loans are repayable. We'll recoup the money. On the issue of—
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Are taxpayers getting interest on this? We're giving it for shareholder loans.
Interim President, Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario
On the issue of no jobs, I think it was at the early stage, and it was the issue of a full-time employee versus a part-time employee. That situation was remedied.
As for a business that was not in operation, there had been, to my knowledge, a change in ownership and the business was seasonal. It started the new season with new ownership. Those were issues on which we disagreed with the Auditor General on how to look at those cases.
Liberal
The Vice-Chair Liberal Jean Yip
Thank you, Madame Brassard.
I would like to thank all of the witnesses for appearing today.
Is it the will of the committee to adjourn the meeting?
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Thank you for your diligence, Madam Chair.
I also want to thank the technicians and interpreters.
Liberal