Evidence of meeting #99 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 cbsa.
A video is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Thank you very much.
Mr. Desjarlais, you have the floor now for two and a half minutes, please.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I want to turn our attention to section 1.51 of the report:
We found that Public Services and Procurement Canada, as the government’s central purchasing and contracting authority, challenged the Canada Border Services Agency for proposing and using non-competitive processes for ArriveCAN and recommended various alternatives. These alternatives included running a shorter competitive process (for example, 10 days) or incorporating shorter contract periods with a non-competitive approach.
This is section 1.52 of the report:
Despite alternative options proposed by Public Services and Procurement Canada, and statements from Canada Border Services Agency officials that other vendors were capable of doing the work, the agency continued to use a non-competitive approach.
It is troubling, I think, to me and many Canadians to know that there was in fact someone who raised a red flag, and the red flag was dismissed. This is another area of serious concern for Canadians, to know that when our checks and balances are in fact present, there's an ability, even, for CBSA to have waived these requirements or waived these recommendations or however that went down. It's inappropriate that the concern was raised and that officials decided it was bad advice, or however they argued those points.
To the Auditor General, on this aspect of it, what evidence did you receive that gave you the impression that they did not take the advice of Public Services and Procurement Canada?
Auditor General, Office of the Auditor General
I might ask Mr. Hannoush to add to that, but if I can, Mr. Chair, I would just like to clarify the source of the document from the previous question that I had. We received that document directly from Mr. MacDonald during our audit and not from information from the other committee. I thought it was important to make sure that my testimony was accurate.
What we expected to see was someone making the decision and why you would go in a certain direction or not. The decision to use a non-competitive contract is an important one that should be well documented. While there were officials at CBSA who told us that there were other vendors who could potentially do this work, it was still sourced first to GC Strategies, but that documentation is very thin.
I'm going to see if Mr. Hannoush wants to add anything to it. It really was that this went forward because the contract was there.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Mr. Desjarlais, you're at your time, but I will allow for a brief answer, please, from Mr. Hannoush.
Auditor General, Office of the Auditor General
No, he had nothing further to answer.
We made the statement because the contract was awarded to GC Strategies.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Pardon me. That's fine. I misunderstood.
Mr. Desjarlais, your time was out, and I was going to allow a response.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
I appreciate that.
Mr. Brock, you now have the floor for five minutes, please.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To go back to you again, Ms. O'Gorman, are you aware that the agency is under investigation by the Information Commissioner currently? Is that a yes?
President, Canada Border Services Agency
I don't know what you're referring to.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
You would have received notification from the Information Commissioner that your agency is under investigation because of delayed requests in terms of complying with ATIP requests from Mr. MacDonald. Do you acknowledge that now?
President, Canada Border Services Agency
I didn't know that it related.... No, I wasn't aware of that.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Yes, your agency is delaying the release and has delayed the release for several months without proper explanation. That's why the Information Commissioner is investigating you.
Now, going back to another issue, pursuant to an Order Paper question brought in the House by a colleague of mine, between March 2020 and September 2022 eight executives at the Public Health Agency of Canada who worked on the “ArriveScam” app were bonused $340,000, while taxpayers—
Liberal
Brenda Shanahan Liberal Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC
Yes. It's a point of order because the proper name of the app is “ArriveCAN”.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Look, folks. Let's stay on track. It is my intention to get through another round. We'll go over by a few minutes, but I'd like to stay on track to give members another full round.
Mr. Brock, you have the floor. You have four minutes left, please.
Conservative
Larry Brock Conservative Brantford—Brant, ON
Eight executives at the Public Health Agency received commissions of $340,000 with this app that has cost taxpayers in excess of $60 million. Your agency did not release any details to that Order Paper question as to how much in bonuses was paid out to your executives. Do you have an answer as to why you didn't respond and/or which executives at the CBSA were bonused?
