Public Accounts Committee on Nov. 4th, 2024

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, the ecosystem stream was a pilot stream that was established out of the CEO's office. It was run primarily by our ecosystems team, not the investments team.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

You're telling me that it was Ms. Lawrence's idea, that the department's concerns were brought to her attention and that she ignored them. Is that right?

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, I don't recall. I'm not sure what kind of communications would have taken place regarding that. I refer to the report. I do know there were some concerns that were raised. I believe they were discussed, but I can't recall for sure.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Very well.

That means the vice-president who was in charge of investments didn't have a say in investments or pilot projects under SDTC's various funding streams. You are confirming, then, that you had absolutely nothing to do with it, that you never had a say in anything involving the ecosystem stream, that it emanated from the president and CEO, and that the projects under the ecosystem stream were approved despite the department's concerns that the stream didn't comply with the contribution agreement.

Are you confirming all that, Mr. Rahme?

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, this was a pilot stream that was established and directed out of the CEO's office. It was primarily, ultimately run from the ecosystems team.

I did have some minor involvement, for example, as in response to the previous questioning, around the basic process on the intake side, but that was not my primary accountability related to the pilot ecosystem stream.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Mr. Masse, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to continue with Mr. Hayes.

You have a current situation in the House where it's been involved.... I spoke about two things. There's Crown copyright. This goes back to the Afghan detainee documents—there's so much of a correlation here—that were not provided at that time. Crown copyright is one of the potential solutions for release of information and public documents that is done differently for other countries.

If the department has now moved to NRC, does that give you and your office the ability to do the same type of auditing practices as it would be in house, if it was industry Canada? These are some of the solutions I'm seeking so that we don't end up back here again.

One of my concerns is the NRC doesn't have a union under PSAC. It has an association, I think, or an affiliation. I can't remember. It's a different type of a professional association. My concern here is what we do going forward.

Will you have the same capabilities to audit this program in the future, if necessary, if it's in NRC versus audit if it was directly part of a branch of industry Canada?

[Andrew Hayes]

Our audit mandate is broad with the NRC. It's not broad when we talk about foundations that are removed from the government.

If you look at it as a hierarchy, the foundation is probably as limited an audit mandate as we have. The next one up would be a Crown corporation, and then it would be departments and agencies. The NRC would fall in that category, so we have a broad mandate there.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

That's actually good to hear. I'm still worried about the fact that some of the workers.... I wanted their capability to be able to transfer to different departments and so forth.

That's really the end of my question, Mr. Chair. I just want to make sure if, going forward, the auditor general program could do the full complement of auditing necessary, which it couldn't do, so we can have the clear distinction when we create these organizations outside the gravity of Parliament.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

You still have some time left, sir.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I'm good, thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Very good.

Up next, we have Mr. Nater.

You have the floor for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Chair, and through you, Chair, thank you to our witnesses for joining us this afternoon.

I want to begin with Mr. Rahme.

In a previous question by Mr. Masse, you were asked about whether there had been any discussions about severance or exit payments for executives. You really didn't answer it, so I'm going to give you one more opportunity. It's a fairly yes-or-no question.

Have there been discussions about severance or exit payments?

[Ziyad Rahme]

Once again, Mr. Chair, as per my previous answer, I'm very focused right now on helping the new board with its transition—

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

Sir, I'm going to stop you. It's a yes-or-no question.

Have there been discussions, yes or no?

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, that will be a decision of the board.

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

No. In our system, a refusal to answer can constitute a contempt of Parliament.

I'm going to give you one more opportunity to answer a very simple question.

Have there been conversations—yes or no—regarding severance or exit packages for executives at SDTC?

It's a yes-or-no question. You're required to answer.

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, I have clarified the terms of my employment with the new board, until the end. That is a question better directed to the new board.

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

I'm going to—

[Ziyad Rahme]

They decide on my compensation, not me.

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

Sir, you failed to answer. I'm not going to dwell on the issue, but that was a clear failure to answer a question that was duly put. It required a yes-or-no answer.

I want to go to the amended contribution agreement signed between SDTC and the Government of Canada.

Would it be possible for you to give us a line-by-line analysis of what changes were made between the previous and current contribution agreements?

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, I'll have to look into that, but I believe we can do that.

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

Okay. I look forward to receiving that.

Who within SDTC approved the changes to the updated contribution agreement?

[Ziyad Rahme]

The final approval authority, Mr. Chair, is with the new board.

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

Is that the current three-person board?