Evidence of meeting #140 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 ouimet.
A video is available from Parliament.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Ouimet.
I understand that these topics are sensitive to each of you in your professional and personal lives, but you have to understand that this is a far greater concern. You're largely challenging whether or not the Auditor General is telling the truth in fullness, and that is a problem for me as a member of this committee.
If that's not what you're saying, then why not accept the findings of the Auditor General?
As an Individual
I'm not challenging the Auditor General or saying that she's lying, whatsoever. In fact, the Auditor General, on several occasions in the report that I saw, gave credit to the way we dealt with the whistle-blower in the special committee and advised that the board was not advised of things at certain times.
Yes, I accept the report for what it is, but I also believe that facts and context matter. To the point that Mr. Ouimet brought up earlier, some of the numbers are presented in a way that suggests that there was arguably a more systemic problem than there may have been. However, I accept the report and take it on its face.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
It's certainly a systemic issue, by a large margin, because it's been going on for a long time.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Mr. Desjarlais, let me just interrupt. Do you want to hear from Mr. Ouimet again? Without any commentary from you, I'll allow a response from him, if you would like.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Yes, please, if you have anything of importance to the report, Mr. Ouimet, go ahead.
Corporate Director, As an Individual
The facts were presented to us. We had an opportunity to comment on them and discuss them with the Auditor General, and management had an opportunity to respond. We have to agree. We can't challenge the Auditor General's report once it's tabled, but we can put some things in context. That's what we're doing here today because, with all due respect, an auditor doesn't pay much attention to the nuances.
For example, an auditor may say that there's a mistake in the minutes because they don't clearly state that a person has recused themself. Even if that person really did recuse themself and said so, the auditor will say there's a mistake if it's not recorded in the minutes. That person may have only an indirect connection to a company and no interest in it, but the auditor will still say there's a mistake. If that's a conflict of interest, does it count as fraud or a violation of some kind? No, it's an administrative error.
Conservative
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Kukucha, in your opening statement, with respect to the improper COVID payments, of which 38.5 million tax dollars improperly went out the door, according to the Auditor General, not to mention 63 conflicts of interest involving board members, in which millions were funnelled into companies that board members had interest in, you said that you relied in good faith on legal advice. Was the legal advice that you received, as a member of the board, from one Mr. Ed Vandenberg?
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
The same Ed Vandenberg sat on the two-person SDTC member council. Is that correct?
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
You're a lawyer, Mr. Kukucha. Do you not see a conflict in Mr. Vandenberg sitting on the member council, while at the same time providing legal advice to the board and being remunerated for such service?
As an Individual
There were discussions at the board about the structure of the member council and the challenges with it. My understanding was that management was trying to work with the government to find a way forward with that, but yes, it—
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Mr. Vandenberg had been providing legal advice to the board on other matters as well. It wasn't just with respect to the improper and unlawful COVID relief payments. Is that right?
As an Individual
I keep getting muted. I apologize.
Yes, he was providing advice. I recall one—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Mr. Cooper, give me just one second. I'm sorry.
I think what's happening is that when a witness is done speaking and we return to a member, you're being muted. Both witnesses, if you could, unmute yourself when you speak. That's what's happening. It doesn't always happen. Anyway, for today, that's what has to be done.
Mr. Cooper, you have three minutes and 15 seconds. The floor is yours again.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
Mr. Kukucha, have you read SDTC's enabling legislation, the Canada Foundation for Sustainable Development Technology Act? I presume you have.
As an Individual
I have not read the entire act. I have read the policies related to SDTC—
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
As a board member, surely you were familiar with the enabling legislation. I find it incredible that you weren't. That's a big problem in and of itself.
As an Individual
I have a general overview of the legislation, but I have not read it in detail.
Conservative
Michael Cooper Conservative St. Albert—Edmonton, AB
It sure isn't a very big piece of legislation. It would take all of 15 minutes to go through it.
If you had bothered to read the act, you would have known that subsection 16(2) states, “no member shall profit or gain any income or acquire any property from the Foundation or its activities.” That's precisely what was happening in the case of Mr. Vandenberg. Not only was he in a conflict of interest in providing legal advice, but he was breaking the law.
Isn't that right?