Public Accounts Committee on Oct. 2nd, 2024

[Cassie Doyle]

Yes, I agree with you that this is a really important part of the mandate. As part of section 6.29 and the review of eligibility, one of the eligibility requirements being verified is the environmental benefit of each project.

I know there has been an improvement in the quantification of environmental benefits from projects under review. However, I can assure you that, under the eligibility review process under way now, “environmental benefits” is one of the explicit eligibility requirements that has been checked by two independent consultants.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

Up next is Mr. Nater for five minutes, please.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Through you, thank you to Ms. Doyle for joining us this afternoon.

I want to start with a request. Would you be willing to share with this committee copies of the minutes of all board meetings and investment committee meetings for the audit period from March 1, 2019, right up to today? Is that something you could provide this committee with?

[Cassie Doyle]

Yes, and I understand that those have already been provided under the production of papers request, like all of the minutes, because we're going back now to 2017, sir, but—

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, but I'm asking about directly to this committee, not—

[Cassie Doyle]

Directly...? Yes...to this committee.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Maybe you could do that within a reasonable time period, which the chair and the clerk could work out.

The second thing I wanted to follow up on—it's been mentioned a few times—is the non-disclosure agreements that current and former employees have been required to sign. Would you be willing to withdraw those NDAs and allow all current and past employees to speak freely? Is that something you as a board member would be willing to undertake?

[Cassie Doyle]

We have a very specific mandate that's been provided to us on this transition period, so I would take that under advisement. I can't make any commitment on that right now. I'm not sure that it is appropriate. Some of those NDAs were entered into because of a particular severance on the departure of employees from SDTC. That's my understanding in the past.

I would have to open up the whole thing, but I can't make that undertaking right now.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

I will leave that point for now, but I do know we have other directors who are coming. I think this is an issue that you as a board member will have to deal with, and I think it is something that would be in the interest of transparency, that those who have been eager to speak but are unable to do so because of these NDAs that SDTC have placed on them....

I will come back to that, but I think you should be strongly considering that.

I want to move on quickly to this review of the projects that is being undertaken. In response to a question from Ms. Bradford, you did say that you would provide this committee with that information, but then you made a bit of a caveat, subject to certain commercial confidentiality.

You have served as a deputy minister of a federal department, so you, I'm sure, are aware that committees can request any information without limitations. Are you aware of that?

[Cassie Doyle]

Yes, I think I do recall that.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

I just wanted to clarify, because whenever I hear stipulations being placed—subject to this, subject to that—I will note that the power of committees to send for documents is without restriction. I did want to clarify that, so we look forward to receiving that information when it is finished.

Now, I have about a couple of minutes left. I want to go back a little bit in time, because there's an interesting quirk of history. The last time you appeared before this committee it was dealing with another energy and clean energy issue when you were the deputy minister of NRCan, dealing with a period between 2003 and 2005 when the former Liberal government came under conflict of interest challenges, and that's in an AG report. It was written that:

Before signing the five contribution agreements, NRCan knew that a consultant who had provided services to the Department relating to the contribution programs would also be working for the organizations that received NRCan funding under these programs. In our view, [the AG's view] this is a conflict of interest that NRCan did not identify.

Payments totalling about $3.2 million that NRCan made under the contribution agreement with CEEA Transport were not in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement.

Now granted, you were not the deputy minister at the time that the Liberal government was undertaking this program, but you were the deputy minister when the audit came out. I'm just looking at these two AG reports, looking at these conflicts of interest.

Why is it, Ms. Doyle, that SDTC was able to operate under such terrible conflict of interest challenges when we've seen these challenges happening before with a former Liberal government? Why did this happen once again with the Liberals back in power, going back to their old ways of allowing these conflicts of interest to get back into the play of things, with money going to friends, going to those who are in conflicts of interest?

Why did this happen from your expert view?

[Cassie Doyle]

Let me just say that you have a very good memory or somebody who's a good researcher, because that is exactly the last time when I was in front of this committee. At the time, I can only say that it was very.... It was in one of the research labs. It was an individual in a research lab who didn't really have any kind of a political affiliation from what I can recall.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

We now go to our final member, Ms. Khalid.

You have the floor for five minutes, please.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you again, Ms. Doyle. You've been here for a long time, and I really appreciate your patience and your calmness in answering all of our questions. We really do appreciate it.

My understanding is that you appeared during former prime minister Stephen Harper's time. I find it quite telling that the opposition is trying to find ways to link this to a Liberal government, any Liberal government, current or in the past.

I want to talk to you about the impact of that maligning, that constant questioning, that constant needling into democratic institutions and that public trust. Can you help us understand what the impact of this has been on the industry?

After a year of frozen funding at SDTC, what exactly have you been hearing from the industry in your four months in your position?

[Cassie Doyle]

I certainly feel that what the industry would like to see is us getting back to business and getting back to the mission of advancing clean-tech innovation in Canada. The pause has had an impact on individual companies that have had their work suspended or paused because of the funding pause. I think, by and large, there is a feeling that this is a really important sector, that SDTC has been an important partner over the last 20 years in clean tech and that it has seen some significant successes come out of that.

I do think that the industry is just anxious, whether it be in SDTC or NRC, for Canada to get on with promoting and supporting the evolution of clean tech in this country.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you.

To be clear, the minister, once he identified this entire thing as an issue, took action.

As we're going through the transition process, what is the outlook for that industry to ensure that we are supporting that industry as we transition to the NRC from the SDTC?

[Cassie Doyle]

I think that the prospects are fairly strong. I've learned again or kind of gotten back into understanding the strength of the clean-tech sector in Canada. Many of our partners and recipients are making real progress in advancing the sustainability of every kind of sector across the country. It's impressive, the diversity of projects that are being funded from the agricultural sector, transportation, oil and gas and all areas. I think it is fairly strong. It's a sector that deserves public investment.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Why is that, do you think?

[Cassie Doyle]

It's to stay competitive globally. Many other countries are investing in their clean-tech sectors, and it's not only a question of strengthening sustainability. It's also the economic prospects. Yes, it's really important in terms of the economy of this century.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

I realize that you've only been in your role for four months, and that's not a very long time. I'm sure you're still trying to learn the ropes, but I want to know what your vision is, say, 10 years from now with respect to how the NRC is going to function, where you see this industry going and where it will lead Canada globally.

[Cassie Doyle]

You know, I have to say that, since taking on this role, we've had little opportunity for imagining the future, because there's a lot of work to be done in implementing the AG's report and within our mandate, but I do feel optimistic in what I've learned about the partner companies that SDTC is supporting. I feel optimistic around the level of innovation in the sector, and I see the future as fairly bright. I'm sure the NRC will serve it well.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much again, Ms. Doyle, for your time today and your expertise. We really appreciate it.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much, Ms. Khalid.

Thank you, Ms. Doyle, for your testimony and participation in relation to the study. You can send in any of the requested materials to the clerk. If you have any questions, please raise them with the clerk.

I'm going to make two points just to set things off.

I know that, at one point, Madame Sinclair-Desgagné asked for some documents, and you said that you would review that or take it under advisement or words to that effect. If you could let us know.... I always encourage as much disclosure as possible. I realize that sometimes it can be tricky. I would just remind you that this committee—as well as Parliament—does have the ability to call for documents, although we don't go from zero to 60 overnight. Should you feel that you cannot provide the documents, please provide an explanation as to why that is the case. Again, I would urge you to fall on the side of transparency and openness.

As well, we generally like to have a response back within three weeks, please, if that's possible. Again, sooner is always preferred, but we'll begin to sniff around for the documents within three weeks and begin to ask questions. I appreciate that, and I just wanted to raise that with you.

Again, thank you very much, Ms. Doyle.

I will adjourn the committee. We're out of resources. We'll see you back here on Monday. The notice is going out very soon.