Let me just add—
Evidence of meeting #154 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 sdtc.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #154 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 sdtc.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Mr. McCauley, you're out of time, but that is a pertinent question: Whose job was it?
Why don't you answer that, Mr. Noseworthy? Then we'll move on.
As an Individual
As I was saying, I saw it as an obligation of the organization to report to the minister, consistent with the terms of the contribution agreement.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Thank you very much.
Up next is Mr. Erskine-Smith, who is joining us virtually.
You have the floor, sir, for five minutes.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Thank you very much.
Mr. Noseworthy, have you read the Auditor General's report?
Liberal
As an Individual
No, I do not. I actually think it's a well-prepared report, and I support its recommendations.
November 27th, 2024 / 5:35 p.m.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
What am I to make, then...? In your last exchange with Mr. McCauley, for example, and in the role you saw yourself occupying, that report.... I'll read from finding 6.77:
We found that [ISED] had not received records of conflicts of interest at [SDTC] other than those documented in the materials and meeting minutes of the board of directors. Since 2018, the contribution agreements required the foundation to report without delay to the department about conflicts of interest. We found that the department had not asked for or received such information and did not determine what actions it should take when informed of conflicts of interest by the foundation.
It goes on to say at paragraph 6.78:
As described in paragraph 6.52, we found several situations that may have involved conflicts of interest that the foundation did not report to the department over the audit period.
Finally, at paragraph 6.79, it says:
[ISED] should ensure that it assesses, challenges, and monitors conflict of interest at [SDTC].
If that wasn't your role, but you agree with the report's conclusions, whose role did you see it to be?
As an Individual
I accept that the department should have done more in that space, sir. I believe that there is considerably more that the department could have done in its oversight of the organization. We did what we could with the limited resources.
Liberal
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
I mean, in this particular case, you're the individual who attends the board meetings. If it's not your role, whose role in the department would it possibly be?
As an Individual
I believe it's a joint responsibility that I would have shared with the vice-president responsible for administration and finance at the department, but I'm not sure on that.
I accept the fact that we could have done more to report on conflicts of interest. Again, I saw that the specific responsibility in that space, under the contribution agreement, is with the organization reporting to us. I—
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
After the fact, you have the benefit of the Auditor General's report, which you agree with.
Do you think that how you saw your role was, in retrospect, incorrect?
As an Individual
I think the Auditor General's report actually speaks specifically to my role and the fact that there were two distinctly different views of what that role would be. I believe that in the future, if there is to be a person playing the type of role I played on whatever future organization or board exists to replace SDTC, the specific roles and responsibilities of that person need to be very clearly specified.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
With respect to the knowledge of anyone else at the department—and let's include actually those in the minister's office—you were attending these board meetings and you were seeing the conflicts. Your testimony here today is very clear that you saw people recusing themselves as a general practice. That's a little bit at odds with what we heard from the Auditor General, but that's the general practice you witnessed, as you describe it.
That being the case, did you ever have a conversation with Minister Champagne about what you were witnessing at the committee?
As an Individual
I do not believe I ever had a conversation with either Minister Bains or Minister Champagne about SDTC matters as a general principle. Briefings on SDTC would have occurred with the deputy minister's office.
Generally speaking...in fact I'm certain I never had a bilateral discussion with either of those ministers on SDTC.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Here is my last question. Ms. Lawrence raised with you the potential conflict in relation to Ms. Verschuren and her appointment.
Did you raise that with the minister at the time?
As an Individual
I had no discussion with the minister about that. The deputy minister at the time, John Knubley, and I had a discussion. We both recognized that Ms. Verschuren was speaking to the Ethics Commissioner, and we had confidence that the results of that discussion would be taken into account as part of the appointments process and the advice brought forward to the minister by PCO or the central agencies.
Liberal
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Did she never flag any other conflict to challenge to you to say, “This is going going on. I raised this first conflict. Here are other conflicts I am concerned about with respect to board members.”
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Thank you. That is the time.
We are beginning our third and last round. Again, six members will ask questions at various times.
Mr. Perkins, you'll lead us off for five minutes, please.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Noseworthy, you're clearly of a similar age to me, so you will appreciate this analogy. There appears to have been a Road Runner Acme anvil dropped on the coyote at every bloody meeting on this, and you seem to have missed it. I don't quite get it in terms of conflicts of interest.
I have spoken to a number of the past board chairs, and I've had some interesting conversations. One of them shared with me an interesting story, and I'd like to ask you a question based on that conversation.
Did you ever ask a sitting chair of SDTC for a job?