Veterans Affairs Committee on Nov. 7th, 2023

[Jean-Pierre Chupin]

Without wanting to dramatize, I'm not sure there was deceit, but I am sure this amounts to interference. It's interference because the government replaced a well-established procedure that, for your information, has been around for thousands of years. Yes, competitions have been organized for thousands of years. This was a well-established procedure the result of which was cancelled and replaced with a voting procedure. As far as I know, this is unprecedented.

I have checked it with my international colleagues, who have been questioning me on the subject for some time now. They ask me what the point is of replacing an expert jury decision with a vote. We haven't found a precedent, at least not in the advanced democracies.

I've been working with Public Services and Procurement Canada and the Parliamentary Precinct for five or six years. I obviously can't speak on their behalf, but I can attest to the fact that the concern is there. I think this will really disrupt people's understanding as to whether the rigorous manner in which these contracts are awarded should be maintained.

There will be disruption. There will be consequences for contract culture. This is a historic precedent.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chupin.

In an interview this morning, Louise Arbour, former judge of the Supreme Court of Canada, said that this decision was outrageous and called for the decision to be reversed to protect the integrity of the procurement process.

Mr. Le Moine, as a specialist lawyer, what can you tell me about the remarks made by Ms. Arbour, a former Supreme Court judge and an authority known to all of us here?

[François Le Moine]

Basically, the ministers concerned, and the Department of Canadian Heritage in particular, misunderstood their role in the competition.

There's actually a text, amendment number 2 to the first request for proposals, which explains exactly what the role of the Department of Canadian Heritage should have been. That text was included in the contract documents and thus guided the department's behaviour. It states, “An expert jury is being assembled for this competition.” Then it continues as follows, “The Minister of Canadian Heritage, as minister responsible for commemorative monuments on federal lands in Canada's Capital Region, and the Minister of Veterans Affairs, will be jointly responsible for endorsing the jury's selection of the winning design.”

That was the role of the Department of Canadian Heritage. It wasn't to second-guess the jury or to challenge what it did, but rather to endorse its decision to ensure the project was properly carried out.

I can yield the floor to Francyne Lord because I believe that's what normally happens for public art experts.

[Francyne Lord]

In the competitions that I've been involved in, either because I was responsible for the Montreal competition or was a member of the jury for another body, the person responsible for the competition received the jury's recommendation and forwarded it to the authorities concerned with awarding the contract.

During that time, between the jury's decision and the awarding of the contract, there is no action, interference or interface. There is nothing. The jury's decision is merely transmitted to the authorities that award the contract.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you very much.

I'd like to invite MP Miao.

Please go ahead.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for being here today.

Excuse my French. I will have to ask my questions in English.

I'd like to also take this opportunity to share with all of us that this week is also Veterans Week and that this Saturday is Remembrance Day. I'd like to take this opportunity to share our tributes to all those have sacrificed and served our nation.

Through you, Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask Team Daoust a question.

I understand where the situation is now. Maybe you can share with this committee some insight into what leads your team to participate in the submission of the national monument to Canada's mission in Afghanistan competition.

[Renée Daoust]

I'm sorry; I'm not sure I understood the question.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

What leads your team to participate in this kind of contest?

[Renée Daoust]

Do you mean what type of work we have to do when we participate in that type of competition?

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Basically, what makes you want to...?

[Renée Daoust]

Oh, it's what makes us want to.

Well, in this particular instance, what was quite interesting in terms of the competition was, first of all, the topic itself. It's a very serious topic, the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, and to us that was a very interesting topic.

Second of all, it's an important public commission. It's more than $3 million, let's say, for the the artwork.

There is also the location. It's an exceptional location, on Parliament Hill between Parliament and the War Museum. All of these elements were really interesting to us, so this is why we decided to participate. The topic was so important that we, as a team, because that was the interest of this competition.... It's a multi-disciplinary team that had to participate, meaning architects, landscape architects and the artist, Luca.

Also, because the topic is so sensitive, we connected with Madame Arbour, because of course she understands the mission and so on. Whenever we do a competition, we always want to make sure that we understand the history or the significance. These are civic gestures and they're important gestures, and they will last for a lot of years to come, so we take this very seriously.

The site is exceptional, so we do think as a team that we have a civic duty associated to that, and this is why we were so interested in participating in that competition.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

Thank you very much for sharing that with us.

I understand there was a change in location as well, prior to having this finalized, for the purpose of the contest. Understanding that the servicewomen and servicemen who sacrificed in Afghanistan are the reason we're doing this to commemorate the work they have done for all Canadians, would you feel it's important to also include the opinions of our veterans who served in that mission as part of this design selection? Reading through the requirements, we don't see too much of the veterans' voices in the selection process.

[Renée Daoust]

To refer to the competition, first of all, the site was a selected one. When we got the documents, when we started the competition, the site had been selected.

We just want to connect with something. It's very clear in the documents that this monument is to celebrate the Canadian mission in Afghanistan, which was composed of veterans, of course, and of civil society. This is what we really understood through Madame Arbour's participation: It's not only the veterans, of course; it's the veterans and civil society.

To respond to your question, because we did hear Madame Petitpas Taylor talking about the veterans and so on, we want to make sure everybody understands what happened at the beginning of this process, which is that the veterans were consulted. Prior to the elaboration of documents, the public and the veterans were consulted, and because they participated, it was built into the competition documents. When we received the documents, their opinion was already integrated within these documents. We want to make sure everybody understands that. It was very clear in all the documents we received. Their opinion was considered, because they built that into the documents. That was the first step.

For the second step, there was supposed to be a public hearing or a public consultation, which is usually how they do it with these types of monuments. We participated in the LeBreton Flats competition and so on, and there was a public consultation, which we always agree with, because there we get the opportunity to present our projects and to explain the subtleties we cannot explain when you only present a document or a video and so on.

This did not happen. Mind you, it was in the rules of the competition.

Instead, the government decided to do a survey, and of course they got responses back. The survey was not dedicated solely to veterans; the public had the opportunity to answer, and the members of the jury did look at the result of that survey, which was integrated in their conclusion when they selected us as the winning team.

[Wilson Miao, Liberal, Richmond Centre, BC]

I guess I'm out of time.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Miao and Ms. Daoust.

I invite Mr. Desilets to take the floor for the next six minutes.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Greetings, colleagues.

Thanks to our guests for being here. Your testimony is important in helping us draw a conclusion and in moving this somewhat unusual matter forward.

Mr. Chupin, earlier you suggested that competitions have been around since time immemorial. I'd like you to tell me a little more about that. Why were the mechanics of competitions established?

[Jean-Pierre Chupin]

Mr. Chair, competitions exist because sometimes it's very hard to judge, understand or grasp the complexity of the situation.

Historical competitions are organized whenever something symbolic is involved, as is the case of this monument, but that can also be true of the Dome of Florence Cathedral, the Parthenon and major civic monuments and buildings, as I said. The Parliament of Canada was designed by competition. Competitions were systematic practices in England in the 19t century.

Consequently, competitions are organized every time a situation is complex, involves many issues or elicits contradictory expectations. In the present instance, the veterans must obviously be considered, but also Canadians as a whole and thus, as it were, everyone. As I said, competitions are also organized when budgets are an issue and, in some instances, as a result of technical and siting issues.

So it's all very complex, and opinion poll procedures simply can't provide a clear picture of those complexities by gathering a few “likes”. You could almost say that, in the history of dictatorships, leaders organized competitions to prevent situations from escalating. There are some quite surprising stories of that point of view. It's as though the competition process was the only way to—

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Pardon me for interrupting, Mr. Chupin, but I sense you could go on about this for hours.

[Jean-Pierre Chupin]

That's quite all right.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I read somewhere—and these are not your words—that competitions are organized in order to prevent political interference, among other reasons.

Is that true or false?

[Jean-Pierre Chupin]

It's absolutely true.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

That's what we're experiencing in the case of this competition. A department has simply decided to meddle in the matter and not to abide by the jury's decision.

Do you think that decision can really undermine Canada's international reputation?

[Jean-Pierre Chupin]

It already has, in a way.

As I said, some of my colleagues have contacted me. The database, which is a kind of national resource, is being consulted by many thousands of people around the world.

When one of my colleagues, an expert on competitions in Quebec, and I learned about this decision, we were flabbergasted and published an opinion piece about it.

So I can tell you that Canada's reputation is already somewhat tainted—

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Are you talking about one country or many countries?

[Jean-Pierre Chupin]

I'm talking about many countries. Generally speaking, the advanced democracies are watching what's happening—