Evidence of meeting #92 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 program.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Sinclair-Desgagné, the floor is yours for two and a half minutes.
12:30 p.m.
Bloc
Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné Bloc Terrebonne, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Luelo, we have to avoid investing more billions of dollars in the Phoenix pay system. I think you had a comment to add about the strategy adopted and the next steps.
I would also like to ask you another question. What has the government learned from the setbacks that have beset the Phoenix system?
How can you make sure, for example by signing a better contract, that the product will generate a return?
It is important that taxpayers feel their money is being used to acquire something useful.
12:30 p.m.
Deputy Minister and Chief Information Officer of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
Maybe I will start off on the question around strategy and spend control. I think it is a more structured prioritization of work that will include, in my opinion, turning some things off on the pay side of things. I really do believe that we need to have a new operating model for how we're going to run HR in the government. It now continues to be very decentralized, including the operations of systems. We need to evaluate that coming in centrally.
I think that from a Phoenix perspective in terms of lessons learned I may pass this on to my ESDC colleagues around BDM, but we took many of the things from the Goss Gilroy report and pointed to them as part of this strategic assessment we did to support BDM. I'm pleased to see that many of those things have been implemented. It's a good example of where we have taken past things that have not gone well and we are applying them into programs to allow them to go better.
Perhaps I'll pass this on to my colleagues.
12:30 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister and Business Lead, Benefits Delivery Modernization, Department of Employment and Social Development
Thank you.
How can we make sure that Canadians receiving old age security do not suffer the same problems as we had with Phoenix? That is a question I am asked once a week. We have taken a number of steps in this regard.
First, we have put a new governance structure in place to meet the challenge associated with the overall oversight of the benefits delivery modernization program. Employment and Social Development Canada is managing the project, but we are not alone. Senior officials at Treasury Board Secretariat, Supply and Services Canada and Shared Services Canada are working together to provide overall oversight of the program.
Second, we are not counting on the anticipated efficiency gains before they have been achieved. That was one of the big problems in the case of the Phoenix pay system. We had changed the staffing levels for processing applications based on our projections. Then we did not have enough employees to process the applications. We will not be doing that for the benefits delivery modernization program. We are going to make sure that we always have enough employees to process the applications.
Third, we have implemented a process for bringing the system online gradually rather than doing it for all clients at the same time. As Mr. Thompson said, 600,000 client files have already been onboarded to the new system in the initial operation. It is working well at present.
And last, we have also put a pilot project in place to test all of the new system's processes before deploying it for new clients.
This means that we have learned lessons from the experience involved with the Phoenix system in order to avoid reproducing the same failures in the case of the benefits delivery modernization program.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Thank you.
Mr. Desjarlais, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Thank you very much.
I want to thank Ms. Luelo for her service and advice today. I think it's important advice. I hope to include many of her comments within our final report. If she can table any recommendations and information related to the recommendations, that would be very helpful.
I want to follow up on two questions. I'll start with the question I ended on the last time with regard to the profits of the companies IBM, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Accenture, CGI Information Systems, Deloitte and Fujitsu Consulting. They're all contracts that are currently in operation, I understand, and they're contracts that generate profit for their shareholders. For Canadians to understand the risk that these face, it's important that we have transparency on what kinds of profits these companies making off public services.
Again, I will ask—and this is for the final time—what are the profits of these companies? I only want the numbers. If you don't have them, will you supply them to this committee please?
12:35 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
I think this has been studied many times in terms of procurement. When a procurement is competitive, the market—
12:35 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
We don't collect the numbers, because we go by the methodology of the price, and it's competitive.
12:35 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Price is looked at in terms of the contract award, as well as the technical piece. It is not separated out when it's a competitive contract by what is a markup and what is not a markup.
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Canadians need to know for fairness and transparency. I've given you the opportunity to explain that.
How much, even as a percentage, are they making off these contracts for their shareholders? These are private companies. Their job isn't to do the work of the public service and get the best outcome for Canadians. Their job is to generate profits for their boards.
I want to know how much money these board members are making. I see Mr. Ostrander flinched at that, because he seems to be upset. Maybe he'll have an opportunity to answer that question.
How much money are they making?
12:35 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Before I turn the floor over, I'll just note that all of the contract award values are proactively disclosed, and that is the amount we work from on a competitive basis.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
12:35 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
How much money is in these contracts that goes to profits of these boards?
12:35 p.m.
John Ostrander Technical Lead, Benefits Delivery Modernization, Department of Employment and Social Development
The only way to find the answer to that question is to look at the annual reports of those companies where you will see their consolidated profits. That will represent all of the business they do in all the jurisdictions they do it in.
However, it would be very unusual for a private firm like IBM, Accenture or Deloitte to disclose their profit on a contract basis.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Thank you.
Mr. McCauley, you have the floor for five minutes.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Thanks.
Ms. Luelo, I think you're the only one here from TBS. In June 2022, we had an Order Paper question come back saying that Treasury Board spent $214,000 for the benefits delivery review.
Who did we pay that money to? Was that for internal costs, or was that for an outside contractor?
12:40 p.m.
Deputy Minister and Chief Information Officer of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
It was a combination of both. We used a firm to help with some of the analysis.
12:40 p.m.
Deputy Minister and Chief Information Officer of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
It was BDO.
Most of that work was actually powered by my office, though. Just to be clear, we wrote the final report.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
To PSPC, I note that Deloitte was given a contract as part of this system's integration.
Deloitte was banned by CBSA from bidding on the ArriveCAN app, because of problems with its assessment and revenue management initiative, so how can it be banned by CBSA, but given contracts for this important program?
12:40 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Deloitte was not banned from its work at CBSA.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Very clearly, we were told in the operations committee, as part of the ArriveCAN study, that GC Strategies was given a sole-source contract, because Deloitte was banned.
This gets to my next issue. This comes out of a time when our friend, Mr. John Ossowski, who was head of CBSA, did this. Mr. Ossowski is now managing director of PwC, which is heavily involved in this program, as well.
Do you have any concerns of this issue going around? We have CBSA testifying that it banned Deloitte, and gave a sole-source contract to GC Strategies. The gentleman involved, who actually lied in committee about another thing left to GC Strategies, is now the managing director of PwC, which has its hooks into the government for this program.
12:40 p.m.
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
I have a point of order.
I am questioning the relevance of this line of questioning with the witness.