Thank you, Chair.
She can remind Canadians of what she did, but the fact of the matter remains that neither the government nor CBSA informed the Auditor General, who was then starting an investigation, that the RCMP were involved. That was an absolute embarrassment. The Auditor General confirmed that she read about it and knew about it only after reading the article in The Globe and Mail.
I was the one who asked that question, Mr. Chair. The moment I concluded my round—this was the first round of questioning to the Auditor General—the first member of the Liberal bench who had the floor moved to adjourn. I believe it was Ms. Khalid who moved to adjourn. They had the votes to adjourn the meeting, thereby wasting the ability of the Auditor General to shed light on the full parameters of this ArriveCAN audit. Now, over the course of several months—and this is the genesis of the wording in motion number 2—we have had direct evidence that two senior members of the CBSA—Mr. MacDonald, a former director general of the CBSA, and Mr. Antonio Utano, another former senior executive of the CBSA—testified, not under oath but knowing that they were there to tell the truth. They pointed fingers and identified the president, Ms. O'Gorman, and the past president, Mr. Ossowski, as well as Mr. Kristian Firth and other members of the IT companies that were associated with not only the ArriveCAN issue but also the issue involving another IT company—Botler AI—as having deliberately misled the government operations committee. They informed the committee that they had evidence to produce to the committee to confirm their findings and that it wasn't just a he-said-she-said thing, or he-said-he-said depending on the witnesses involved and the players involved. They actually had witnesses who could come to committee to support the findings of both Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Utano that our committee, this national government committee, was deliberately misled by the CBSA. That is something the Auditor General should be concerned about.
Whether that's enough for them to alter their report is an issue for another day. That could be an issue following the release of the report to Parliament. It's incumbent upon members of this committee to inform the Auditor General what has transpired. They testified on November 7, 2023. In exchange for that testimony, they both received letters from their new respective employers—Canada Revenue Agency for Mr. Utano and Health Canada for Mr. MacDonald —saying that they were now suspended due to allegations of misconduct.
Now, allegations of misconduct that Mr. Hayes would certainly be aware of were brought to the attention of the CBSA in November 2022. Ms. O'Gorman testified a number of times, Mr. Chair, at committee that she took that very seriously, so much so that she did an internal review, found that there was a prima facie case, and referred the matter to the RCMP for a full investigation in November 2022.
Interestingly enough, which goes to the heart of this motion, it would appear that the findings in support of the suspension without pay for MacDonald and Utano were made only after they testified truthfully and pointed fingers about CBSA officials lying to committee. That is a reprisal.
What sort of message are we as members allowing the federal public service, the professional federal public service...? We often hear that phrase from the Prime Minister and his cabinet and members of the Liberal bench, that they take pride in and respect the professional federal public service. That these shenanigans are happening right now with the professional federal public service is disgusting. It ought not to happen. We owe it to Canadians, we owe it to the Auditor General and we owe it to all parliamentarians to shed as much light on this as possible.
Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Utano are both on medical leave, supported by documentation from their respective doctors as to what personal health toll their coming forward has had on them—the accusations and the death threats from the Canadian public that they have received. It is concerning. They also have the spectre of being under investigation by the RCMP. Both testified very emotionally and rawly about the real impact and the effects this is having.
What about those witnesses? What about those witnesses who they said will come to committee and support and corroborate the kinds of shenanigans the CBSA has been involved in at taxpayers' expense? What kind of message does that send to the other professional federal public servants? Will they want to come forward? Can they expect a suspension letter as a result of coming forward?
These are serious concerns. Mr. Johns should be all over these serious concerns and want to vote in favour of this motion, because it strikes at the heart of his argument.
Let's talk about how unusual this is. We had the former clerk of the Privy Council, Michael Wernick, chime in. He was quoted as saying that the public finger-pointing by senior public servants is highly unusual. Given his tenure as a professional federal public servant, he said, “I cannot recall any other instance of such public disagreement. It is an outlier.” He said that suspensions without pay are also rare and went on as follows:
It is a very strong measure to suspend without pay while a process is under way and no conclusions have been reached. Usually disciplinary measures follow an investigation being completed and suspension with pay is more common in the early stages.
Lastly, because this has never been communicated to this committee, he said: “It is also a very strong measure to suspend or permanently revoke a security clearance.” That's exactly what has happened to both Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Utano. Mr. Wernick says this is “tantamount to removing someone from that job and any other job that requires that level of clearance. It is not a common occurrence.”
If my Liberal colleagues want to remember the words of the Prime Minister in 2015 about doing government differently, about sunny ways—that Canadians can expect the most open, transparent and accountable government this country has ever seen—they will vote in favour of this motion, as will I.
Thank you, Chair.