Public Accounts Committee on Nov. 18th, 2024

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

Mr. Chair, you were supposed to be a little generous with my time.

Mr. Knubley, is the report you're referring to report 3 of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development?

If so, it was certainly not the role of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to examine how conflict of interest policies were working.

I've looked at the report a few times. The point was to ensure that sustainable development projects complied with the contribution agreement. It didn't look at conflicts of interest or management policies. It didn't look at the same things as the Auditor General at all.

How can people pat themselves on the back and say that everything is fine with the other issues, when a report has a very specific objective?

After that report came out, conflict of interest policies were violated 90 times, and that's just in the sample that the Auditor General had. Something was clearly not working, and that information was not shared with you.

[John Knubley]

Let me be clear: I agree with you. The Auditor General's report of 2017 was a performance report, so you're right in that regard. I will, however, read this, which is in the report, because I scribbled it last night: “We found that SDTC had measures in place to mitigate potential conflict of interest...in assessing and approving proposals.”

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

Now it's over to Ms. Mathyssen again for her last question round.

It's over to you, please.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I think a lot can be said about hindsight in terms of seeing where there were holes and maybe where you would have done things differently.

Mr. Knubley, if you had been given some clear indication from Mr. Noseworthy about this conflict of interest—and I'm not saying that you had or you hadn't—would you have reported that to the minister very clearly? Please answer yes or no.

[John Knubley]

No. In the case of these appointments, it's not my job as deputy minister to report to him on that. In fact, the testimony of Donnalyn McClymont would have demonstrated that. The work that the minister does is primarily done on these appointments through his staff and through the PMO as the process is unfolding.

Again, it's a long time ago, but I would not normally discuss—and I don't think I ever did discuss—these kind of matters with the minister. My primary role as a deputy is to ensure that the process is taking place and is timely.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Do you not think, though, considering what we've seen now, that this may be a problem? With your 40 years of experience, having seen what's happened now.... SDTC is moving into another reiteration with the same rules that exist in terms of conflict of interest that existed before. Do you think those changes need to be made, in addition to all the other changes you were talking to Ms. Yip about? Do you see that as a potential change that needs to be made?

[John Knubley]

My experience tells me that there are conflicts of interest everywhere. The issue isn't that there is a conflict of interest. The issue is whether these conflicts of interest are being managed.

In this new agency, which I'm hopeful will be very effective and helpful to the clean-tech sector, I expect that they, like SDTC before them in its previous incarnation, will be diligent and responsible in terms of applying, on an ongoing basis, the management of conflicts of interest.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

That's fine.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

We have two last members remaining, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Drouin.

Mr. Perkins, you have five minutes, please.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll come at it another way. As a career public servant, Mr. Knubley, you're aware that the Conflict of Interest Act for public office holders says that the public office holder, particularly a GIC appointment, cannot personally benefit from that appointment, and neither can his or her family. You're aware of that.

[John Knubley]

Yes. There is this issue of profitability and benefit specifically to the person concerned.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

That's in the Conflict of Interest Act of Parliament, but the SDTC Act is also very clear. It says that board members of SDTC, whether they're GIC or not, cannot personally benefit, and neither can their family, from being on that board and from the decisions of that board. Is that not correct? You just said that you thought the act needed lots of changes, so you must be familiar with the act.

[John Knubley]

I'm not terribly familiar with the act, and I'm not a lawyer, but what I do know.... First of all, it's not my job—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

You can't have it both ways.

[John Knubley]

—to make assessments on conflict of interest. That is the job of the Ethics Commissioner.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

In response to Ms. Yip, you said that the act needed to be revised, and that's a regret of yours, so you must be familiar with it. I'm not buying—

[John Knubley]

Okay, as deputy minister—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

—that you're not familiar with the act.

[John Knubley]

—of ISED, I was responsible for introducing legislation relating to SDTC. When I was the deputy minister, for maybe three years, the SDTC legislation was on my to-do list, but I was never convinced and I was never advised that there were significant enough changes required with that act to actually introduce it to Parliament. The only issue I was aware of was the membership issue.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I'll try another way.

By her own admission in this committee, Andrée-Lise Méthot had four companies, while you were deputy minister, that got funded while she was on the board. She was appointed in 2016. The total for the four companies is $21 million.

Do you believe, whether they go in or out of the room, that when a board member receives $21 million from the foundation she's on the board of, appointed by the government, it's a personal benefit to her when the values of those companies go up as a result of that government investment? Is that not a breach of the act?

[John Knubley]

Even as a long-standing deputy minister, that is not my role to judge. That is the Ethics Commissioner's role to judge.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

What you're saying here is that you have no responsibility for anything that went on. You're saying that you knew nothing and that you had an ADM who was your eyes and ears, but he never actually told you anything. You're saying that you saw that the act should be revised, but you didn't know what it should be revised on, when now five minutes later you said you had some ideas of how it should be revised. You're saying that when board members were voting for themselves 82% of the time, in contravention of the SDTC Act, which you were responsible to Parliament for as a deputy minister, you don't believe it was your responsibility to know what was going on there.

Who are you covering up for? Why are you saying that it's not your role as a deputy minister to inform the minister when this kind of taxpayer abuse...? I'll remind you that the Auditor General found it to be $390 million. This is not a trivial matter. You were deputy minister while this was happening.

[John Knubley]

When I was deputy minister, I received two reports that gave SDTC a clean bill of health—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

In 2016, Andrée-Lise Méthot's company received—

[John Knubley]

There was no demonstration, as far as I knew, of a conflict of interest.