Public Accounts Committee on June 12th, 2023

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 70 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Monday, April 24, 2023, the committee resumes its study of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation.

Before I welcome our witnesses, I have Madame Sinclair-Desgagné.

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair. I'm looking for some confirmation from you and the clerks regarding this excerpt from the House of Commons Procedure and Practice:

Under normal circumstances, witnesses before House committees are not sworn in. It is generally accepted that witnesses have a duty to speak the truth regardless of whether or not their testimony is given under oath.... Although the testimony of a witness before a parliamentary committee is protected by parliamentary privilege, if a committee determines that a witness has wilfully lied or misled it, the matter could be reported to the House. If the House finds that the witness has deliberately misled the committee, the witness could be found in contempt of the House whether the witness is under oath or not.

Is that correct?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

The clerks are confirming that it is correct, Ms. Sinclair‑Desgagné.

Thank you.

I'd like to welcome five witnesses today.

Anita Biguzs is a retired federal public servant. Graham Flack is currently secretary of the Treasury Board of Canada and a former deputy minister of Canadian Heritage. Daniel Jean is a former deputy minister. John Knubley is joining us by video conference and is a former deputy minister. Morris Rosenberg is a retired deputy minister.

Thank you all for coming.

I believe I'm expecting opening statements from two individuals, Mr. Knubley and Mr. Rosenberg. If others have opening statements, please let me know, and I'll be happy to include you. Please limit your opening remarks to five minutes, although you'll find I'm a flexible chair, so if you do go over, I won't bang the gavel, because I don't like to cut off witnesses.

I'm going to begin with Mr. Knubley for five minutes, please.

[John Knubley, As an Individual]

Thank you for having me today. I was advised in advance of this meeting that I needed opening remarks; however, I will be brief.

My name's John Knubley, and I am a former deputy minister of industry in ISED. I served in that role from 2012-19. Of course, I'm speaking as an individual today, not as a representative of a department or government. I will do my best to assist the committee, based on my recollection of the facts.

The Trudeau Foundation is an agency that was, and I believe continues to be, part of the ministry's broad portfolio of organizations. During my time, the responsibility of monitoring its activities fell to the science sector, or branch, in the department, and I believe it still does. I believe I was always briefed that the foundation was designed at the outset in 2001 to be an independent, stand-alone agency, consistent with the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act.

The board, therefore, has responsibility for oversight of its own operations, with a fiduciary responsibility. The science sector at ISED, or Industry, derived its mandate for monitoring the Trudeau Foundation from its role in supporting excellence in universities, scholars and research activities across the country.

I understand the committee has questions about a meeting of deputy ministers and Trudeau Foundation scholars at the Privy Council Office in 2016. What I recall—and this is based on my memory—is that I was invited to the meeting; however, I also remember that I chose not to attend as other priorities arose.

I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Rosenberg, the floor is now yours, please.

[Morris Rosenberg, As an Individual]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I served under both Conservative and Liberal governments for 15 years as deputy minister variously of justice, health and foreign affairs. Since retiring from the public service, I've served as president of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, as an adviser on policy and on various boards.

I wish to first address my presence, when I was president of the foundation, at a meeting with public servants that occurred in April 2016 in what was then the Langevin Block. One of the reasons I agreed to serve at the foundation is my belief that there's a public interest in strengthening exchanges between academic researchers and policy-makers. Academic research should be known to policy-makers, and as a deputy minister I often reached out to and met with academics. It's equally important that academics be exposed to the practical realities of policy-making.

At the foundation, one of our fellows and one of our mentors had begun a project in early 2016 to determine whether there were economic benefits to diversity. I knew that diversity and pluralism were priorities for the government at the time, and I suggested to a deputy secretary at the Privy Council Office that a meeting with officials would provide an opportunity to share perspectives on this issue.

That's the genesis of the meeting that was reported on in the media. The PCO invited the relevant officials. The media reports emphasized the fact that the meeting took place in the Langevin Block, which they thought was unusual because the Prime Minister's Office is located there.

That building not only serves as the Prime Minister's Office but also houses the Privy Council Office, a part of the public service, and is a central downtown location for public servants and others to meet. Inviting people from outside government to meetings in this building is not unusual. Accordingly, there was nothing at all unusual about the April 2016 meeting in the Langevin Block.

Next I want to address two points that have been raised in relation to the 2016 donation issue. It's been alleged that the company to whom the tax receipt was issued, Millennium Golden Eagle (Canada) Inc., is a shell company. I've had a look at the Quebec government's Régistre des entreprises, and it points out that the company is a going concern in the business of hotels, inns and real property investment. I can provide you with that document.

Second, I wanted to provide some additional context to support the view expressed by Alexandre Trudeau at the access to information committee, by Ted Johnson and by me, that the donation has to be assessed from the perspective of relations with China in an era that's much different from the very negative one we're in today. In the mid-2010s, Canadian universities, businesses and governments all saw it as being in their interest to strengthen ties with China. I think Prime Minister Harper captured the spirit of the time well in 2013, when he welcomed two Chinese pandas to Toronto. He said:

Over the coming years these pandas will help us learn more about one another while serving as a reminder of our deepening relationship, a relationship based on mutual respect and growing collaboration.

It was a different time.

There's been much concern expressed by some committee members that one of the two donors was president of the China Cultural Industry Association, due to its association with the Chinese government. This was well understood at the time the donation was being negotiated. When the China Cultural Industry Association was established in 2013, Canada's ambassador to China wrote a congratulatory letter to the chairman and members of that organization. I have copies of that letter that I can provide to the committee, but I'd like to cite three brief excerpts first:

It is fortuitous that, in many respects, your objectives and efforts align well with ours at the Canadian Embassy in China. In fact, last year, when Prime Minister Harper visited here, Canada and China agreed to hold a series of cultural activities in each other's countries in 2013 and 2014, in an effort to raise our bilateral engagement to a new level.

The second quote is as follows:

I'd like to note our deep gratitude for the CCIA's generous endowment to the University of Toronto's Faculty of Medicine via the establishment of the Bethune Fund.

Finally:

Given your strong commitment to cultural cooperation and exchange, the CCIA will certainly serve as a leading platform for expanded Canada-China cultural collaboration. We look forward to working closely with your association over the coming months and years.

We have confidence that our government's representative in China had Canada's interests at heart when he wrote this letter. The China Cultural Industry Association was viewed as a positive collaborator by the Harper government. These were, indeed, very different times.

Within this context of warming relations, we believe that the donors were motivated by a genuine desire to pay tribute to Pierre Elliott Trudeau's legacy and their willingness to support the foundation's program of policy conferences.

Conferences on the implications of the rise of China were consistent with our core themes of Canada and the world and human rights. The donors had no say on the content of these conferences, an important consideration for the foundation.

We never thought that a $200,000 donation for conferences could or would influence any government. At no time did donors ask the foundation to connect them with government officials or anything else. The foundation never coordinated its activities with elected officials, either prior to or after the 2015 election.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much, Mr. Rosenberg.

I'll now turn to our first round of questioning.

Mr. Brock, you have the floor for six minutes, please.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to all the witnesses for your appearance today.

Largely, Mr. Rosenberg, you're going to be the beneficiary of my questions today.

On May 2 you appeared before the ethics committee, and you were asked by a Liberal member of that committee at that time whether or not there had been any interference by the government and the Prime Minister in connection with the donation we're talking about.

Your response was:

I am not aware of any communication with the Prime Minister, his office, or other bodies within the government regarding this matter.

Further on, that same Liberal member.... Actually, it wasn't a Liberal member. It was an NDP member. Mr. Green asked you this question: “Ms. Fournier stated that she remembers reviewing emails between the executive director, Elise Comtois, and the PMO. Were you aware of these emails?”

Your response was:

I don't recall, but I will say, just to go back, that if there were emails and there were documents that raised questions about this stuff, why didn't the foundation management call me to at least get my view on it so I could see the stuff...

I just want to ask you a few questions regarding those statements, because personally I find it incredible that you would say to the committee that you weren't aware of any sort of communication between the foundation and the Prime Minister's Office, the PMO, specifically when Pascale Fournier had indicated that there were numerous emails going on between the foundation and the PMO.

Now, in terms of the organization chart, Ms. Elise Comtois was the executive director, and she reported directly to you as president of the foundation. Is that correct?

[Morris Rosenberg]

That is correct.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Right, so I'm looking at one of those emails, dated November 24, 2016, from Elise Comtois directly to Zita Astravaz, an executive member of the Prime Minister's Office, and it starts off as follows:

Hi Zita,

As requested—

That means requested by the PMO.

—please find below the key facts that we have been providing to the media who have contacted us regarding the $200,000 donation from Bin Zhang and Niu Gensheng:

You were saying to us, to the committee, then, as you're probably going to say to me now, that you were absolutely not aware of that particular piece of communication.

[Morris Rosenberg]

I don't believe that piece of communication was in the package—the access package. Certainly, I was not aware of it at the time that I gave this testimony. I think I said it was possible that there was communication, asking—

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

I'm sorry. With all due respect, you didn't say it was possible. You said you weren't aware and that you were shocked and wondered why, if there was communication, it wasn't brought to your attention, so I'm asking the obvious question that everyone has here: Really, what is going on at the foundation that a person with the title of executive director, who has to report directly to you, is communicating directly with the PMO?

Let's remember: The Prime Minister is on record, as is his government, numerous times, stating in the House that there was a firewall at all times between him and the government and the foundation. This strikes definitely against that particular narrative.

Why was that happening, and why were you not aware?

[Morris Rosenberg]

First of all, this happened eight years ago.

Second of all, part of my answer was, if there were records at the foundation that demonstrated this, why, in the weeks leading up to the resignations, did nobody contact me?

Madame Fournier was not at the foundation while these events happened. I was, but I had no idea what was going on at the foundation, and I would have—

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

That is negligence, sir, pure and simple. That's absolutely—

[Morris Rosenberg]

Well, that is your view, and I disagree with it.

I was at the foundation. Rather than deciding to resign—I don't know why they resigned—I think it would have been helpful if someone had called me and asked me to come in and talk about this, because I think there is a very innocent set of explanations for everything that went on in relation to this donation.

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Okay, sir, I have to move on. Thank you.

Pascale Fournier testified at the ethics committee. She said that her predecessor, Morris Rosenberg, told the National Post in December 2016 that the foundation didn't consider the donation to be foreign money, because it was made by a company incorporated in Canada.

She told MPs that this was actually a statement “in the annual report...when in fact the tax receipt itself mentions China.” She said, “I think this is something that is misleading to Canadians.”

Now, with respect to the documentation that this committee or other committees have received from the foundation, I was privy to a business banking statement from the foundation. This is from the Bank of Montreal in regard to the first installment that was received on July 25, 2016, and I would well imagine that your response is going to be, “Well, I'm the president. I didn't see these statements, so I took it at face value that this was a Canadian donation,” when in fact it's clearly spelled out, Mr. Rosenberg, that on July 25 this was an international donation. It's clearly stated in black and white that it's an international donation credit to the credit of the foundation at the Bank of Montreal for $70,000.

You're not aware of this particular banking statement. Is that correct, sir?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I'm not aware of this particular banking statement. I don't believe it was part of the package. There was an allegation of a discrepancy between the name on the tax receipt and the name that was put into the annual report, and I was basically accused of misleading Canadians in this regard. What's the nature of the deception?

We acknowledged that two wealthy Chinese businessmen, instead of a corporate vehicle, through which they made the payment, actually were instrumental in this. I think we did this in a way that was more transparent than if we had put the name of the Millennium corporation into the report. The annual report is very forthright about the fact that there are Chinese donors behind the donation—

[Larry Brock, Conservative, Brantford—Brant, ON]

Did you share this document with CRA?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Mr. Brock, I'm afraid that is your time.

Mr. Rosenberg, I think we're going to pick this up again. I appreciate it.

We're going to turn now to Mr. Sidhu.

Mr. Sidhu, you are joining us virtually. It's good to see you, sir. You have the floor for six minutes, please.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to our witnesses for taking the time to be with us here this morning.

Mr. Rosenberg, I'd like to start off by thanking you for your service to Canada. For those watching these proceedings at home, it's important to note that Mr. Rosenberg has served in very senior positions, as deputy minister and in other senior positions in both Conservative and Liberal-led governments, including as deputy minister of foreign affairs.

Mr. Rosenberg also received the Order of Canada in 2015 for his commitment to our country, and I know many members on this committee are grateful for his service.

Mr. Rosenberg, my question is directed to you. As someone who has been involved with the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation for a number of years, would you be able to provide a summary of the foundation's mandate and how its mandate and operations have evolved over the years? I think it's important for those listening to know this.

[Morris Rosenberg]

The foundation has been in operation since the early 2000s. I believe that Mr. Johnson was at this committee the other day and said it has spent over $90 million supporting Ph.D. scholars and academic fellows. It's a unique program that brings together some of the most brilliant scholars in the humanities and social sciences, senior academics, as well as people from outside of the academic world, so that you have a kind of intergenerational, intersectoral and interdisciplinary approach.

The way the foundation evolved...at least when I was there, I thought it was very important that while we gave out very generous scholarships that enabled these Ph.D. candidates to do well with respect to their studies, the value-add of the foundation would be their exposure to people from different walks of life and their exposure to Canada.

We made a very significant effort every year to get people out to remote places in the country to meet people who were not academics, to meet ordinary Canadians, business people, students. We had a program whereby we had scholars and fellows going into high schools, talking to students about their research in a way that they could understand and also as a way of getting some people to dream a little about what they themselves might accomplish.

A lot of our scholars came from very disadvantaged backgrounds. We had one who was homeless and almost landed in prison. He pulled his life together and became a Ph.D. student at the University of Toronto. I believe he was mentioned at another committee—Jesse Thistle.

There's another one whose family came from Ghana when he was eight years old and was very, very poor. He was living in social housing in Toronto. When he grew up, he ended up with a Ph.D. in history from Yale, taught at Harvard, is now teaching at McGill and has just won an award for the best teacher.

There are some really inspiring stories coming out of the foundation. I think it has done stellar work.

One of the other things we wanted to do was to ensure that the scholars we had understood how government worked. We had the opportunity to meet with public servants and with people in the Library of Parliament to learn how to engage with Parliament, for example, and to provide a rounding experience for them.

I hope that answers your question.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

Thank you for that, and thanks for the details in your response.

You spoke about people from all walks of life. Now, when scholars are vetted by the foundation, are they vetted according to their partisan or ideological leanings? Is that taken into account?

[Morris Rosenberg]

Not at all.

[Maninder Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton East, ON]

That's good to know.

How many students have been supported by this foundation and the wonderful work that the foundation does?

[Morris Rosenberg]

I am not 100% sure. Mr. Johnson had the number at his fingertips last week. I think it is something like 290, but I'm not sure.