Public Accounts Committee on Nov. 4th, 2024

[Ziyad Rahme]

That is correct.

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

Thank you for that.

I would like to know whether any projects that were previously ineligible are now eligible under the new contribution agreement.

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, with regard to any of the projects found ineligible as part of the OAG sample, as per the recommendation, the new board has put in place a process for reviewing all projects in her sample period. The review of those particular projects is still in progress, so I don't have anything to report to you at this particular time.

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

I'm sorry. I want to back up on that a little.

The question was this: Would previously ineligible ones now be eligible, based on the changes in the contribution agreement, and vice versa? Are any of those that were eligible now ineligible?

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, I'm unable to answer that question.

There are clarifications to the contribution agreement. I am not conducting the eligibility review. The board is directing that process. They are working with independent assessors and committed to getting that process right. The work is ongoing.

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

I want to follow up on that, because we keep talking about this process.

This updated contribution agreement says very clearly, “the Foundation agrees to pursue in good faith the recovery of funding for Funded Projects in such cases.” Then it talks about the three types of things. However, you keep going back to this ongoing review.

Is SDTC making—as required by this document—a good-faith recovery of that funding? I don't want to hear about this being pushed off. We know there are a number that were ineligible. Are you making a good-faith effort to require the repayment of those funds?

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, the board of directors is looking at every project to see whether funding can be resumed, terminated or recovered. They will take action if and when required. The work is ongoing.

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

That's not quite getting to the root of the matter.

I think I have time for one final question.

Under section 20.03 and section 20.04.... Section 20.03 requires that the minister be notified and informed about any potential situation that is reasonably interpreted as either a conflict of interest or a potential conflict of interest.

I'm curious. How many times and under what circumstances has the minister been informed of these types of conflicts of interest?

[Ziyad Rahme]

Mr. Chair, I do not recall. I will have to look into that.

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

Would you be able to provide that information in writing to this committee within the timeline the chair will lay out?

[Ziyad Rahme]

I will look into that.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

Next, joining us online is Mr. Erskine-Smith.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thanks very much.

I want to start with Ms. Hogan.

We had the Ethics Commissioner before this committee. He went into some detail about his findings in the Verschuren report. He was very clear that he didn't see anything criminal. He didn't see any corruption such that he would, as he described it, per his legal obligation, refer the matter to the RCMP. This committee has been marked, though, by accusations of corruption and criminality. I would love to get to the bottom of whether that existed. I've not seen a single piece of evidence to suggest that kind of criminality.

Maybe you can provide that. You did a deep dive. You have seen documents I haven't seen. You issued a damning report, certainly, on poor record-keeping and ridiculous conflicts of interest that shouldn't have existed and that should have been better managed.

However, did you come across any evidence such that you were concerned there was criminality that should be referred to the RCMP?

[Karen Hogan]

In the course of our audit, we did not uncover anything that we felt was potentially criminal in nature. We leave that decision up to the RCMP. We would have referred a matter to them, and we did not in this case. We did talk to them subsequent to our report being made public and, as I previously testified, if they want access to it, we are happy to comply with the production order.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Yes. There's been no production order from the RCMP, so obviously they're not pursuing this as the Conservatives would like, despite the politics of that for them.

I just want to be crystal clear on this, because we've spent unending hours where allegations of criminality and corruption have been made. Individuals have been expressly defamed by my Conservative colleagues on this front.

The Ethics Commissioner said it is his legal obligation to refer the matter to the RCMP and he did not do so because he didn't see anything.

You would have the same legal obligation. You would have referred the matter if there were, and you said there was no even "potentially" criminality in your view, based on all of the documents reviewed.

[Karen Hogan]

My office does not look at intent, really. That is up to the RCMP to look at. I do know that there is an ongoing investigation, and should the RCMP want our files, we trust that they will request them in the appropriate manner.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Okay, but you've done a deep dive on those documents, so what would be the criminal case?

[Karen Hogan]

That's taking me outside of my area of expertise, but what I can tell you is that I stop at what the foundation has.... I do not go audit individuals or extend beyond what the foundation might have, going into other organizations. The RCMP has broader powers, investigative powers—

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

I understand that.

[Karen Hogan]

—so I don't know—

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

I completely understand that, but we're here sitting as parliamentarians concerned about criminality and corruption. You've reviewed these documents in great detail. I understand that it's the RCMP's remit to say that we're going to pursue criminality, but you've done a deep dive on documents in a way that I haven't.

Can you list a single instance where I, as a member of Parliament for Beaches—East York, should be concerned about criminality?

[Karen Hogan]

If I were concerned about criminality, I would have referred a matter to the RCMP, and I have not.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Okay.

We have the witness from SDTC here today, who has said, as other witnesses have, because, by the way, we hear from them individually instead of as a group, which is mind-boggling from our time perspective, but regardless.... We have this witness attend alongside other witnesses over the course of the last number of weeks who have said that they have so far implemented and are pursuing 10 of your 11 recommendations.

When you look at the state of affairs, at where SDTC was—the poor record-keeping, the mismanagement of conflicts of interest—to the actions the government has taken subsequently—ultimately winding down SDTC to move it over to the NRC, the actions to adopt your recommendations—are you satisfied with the action that the government and SDTC are taking or do you think it's delayed? Do you think it's inadequate?

Do you think it's frustrating to your recommendations or do you think it's consistent with your recommendations?

[Karen Hogan]

I think I said this when I released this report: I was pleased to see that there was quick action taken by the government, and I believe that with the funding being moved into the public service there will be increased transparency and, hopefully, less opportunities for conflicts of interest.

I believe that anyone who works in the public service has to be held to really the highest standard of behaviour when it comes to conflicts of interest so that they can maintain the public trust, and I hope that will happen when the funds are moved into the public service.

[Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Do you have any criticisms for how the government has reacted and responded to your recommendations?