Debates of June 12th, 2024

Question No.2596—

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

With regard to Site 06875001 – Camp Bouchard, Ex Ammo Dump, on the Federal Contaminated Sites Inventory: (a) what measures are currently underway to decontaminate the site; (b) what is the plan and timeline to decontaminate the site; and (c) what amounts have been allocated to decontaminate the site?

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, federal contaminated sites are located on land owned or leased by the federal government, or on land where the federal government has accepted responsibility for the contamination. The Government of Canada has taken action through the federal contaminated sites action plan, FCSAP, and remains committed to properly managing those contaminated sites for which it is responsible. Through the FCSAP, National Defence is investing resources to clean up historical contamination and minimize future environmental impact from military activities.

Per the annually updated federal contaminated sites Inventory, there are 4,455 active sites, of which 944 are identified as low priority for action, including Camp Bouchard. As a low priority for action site, Camp Bouchard is not a risk to human health and safety. There is currently no ongoing soil contamination at Camp Bouchard, and a timeline for remediation has not yet been determined. The site’s groundwater quality is also periodically tested, with the last tests conducted in 2020, 2021, and 2022.

Question No.2597—

[Glen Motz, Conservative, Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, AB]

With regard to the Canada Border Services Agency’s (CBSA) decision to have Employment Professionals Canada (EPC) as their permitted offload and reload service provider: (a) what are the details of the arrangement between the CBSA and EPC that requires truckers to use EPC’s services during examination, including (i) when the agreement was signed, (ii) what the terms of the agreement (financial and otherwise) are, (iii) who at the CBSA authorized the agreement; (b) is the CBSA aware of the reports alleging that EPC is engaging in price gouging and charging some truckers thousands of dollars for re-loading services that were previously available to truckers, and, if so, what was the CBSA’s reaction to these reports; (c) is the government concerned that the increased costs to truckers resulting from the use of EPC’s services will be passed on to consumers, and, if so, what action will be taken in response; (d) does EPC provide the offloading and reloading services itself in all cases, or does it subcontract these services to other parties; (e) if EPC’s services are subcontracted to other firms, why did the CBSA decide to pay a middleman rather than directly paying the vendor who provides the loading and offloading services; (f) does the CBSA pay EPC to be the provider or does EPC pay the CBSA for the right to be the exclusive supplier, and how much is being paid; (g) what measures, if any, has the CBSA put in place to ensure that truckers are not being charged more than the fair market rate for loading and offloading services; (h) prior to this arrangement with EPC, who provided these services and at what rate; (i) was there a conflict of interest analysis completed given EPC’s involvement with other businesses within the supply chain space, and, if so, what were the results of that analysis; (j) do EPC’s employees have the proper security clearance to provide these services, and who at CBSA is responsible for regularly ensuring those clearances are valid; and (k) was this a sole source contract?

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Speaker, in response to (a)(i), the current national offload agreement was signed on January 26, 2023.

In response to (a)(ii), this agreement is valid from February 1, 2024 to January 31, 2025. This is a zero-sum agreement; therefore, there are no financial impacts nor financial gains/losses for the CBSA.

For more details pertaining to the national offload agreement, please visit National Offload Services - Tender Notice.

For the CBSA’s policy on offload services for highway examinations, please visit the offload policy for highway examinations.

In response to (a)(iii), the agreement was authorized at the assistant deputy minister level by the CBSA’s finance and corporate management branch, procurement and contracting division, in collaboration with the commercial and trade branch, commercial operations division.

In response to (b), the CBSA’s current agreement with Employment Professionals Canada, EPC, was established following a competitive procurement process and utilizes set fees. Although inflation and other factors have contributed to price increases in all goods and services in recent years, the CBSA is presently working to tender a new agreement. The new agreement will incorporate a new fee structure, similar to that of the United States, U.S., which will allow for more pricing flexibility, for example, pay per pallet versus one flat fee. The new flexibilities within the fee structure are expected to alleviate many of the concerns expressed.

In response to (c), the CBSA remains mindful of impacts on internal and external stakeholders. The CBSA is working on adding new provisions in the new agreement to allow for more pricing flexibility for clients who choose to use the on-site service provider at designated commercial offices.

In response to (d), it is the sole responsibility of the carrier to present the goods for examination upon request from the CBSA within the prescribed timelines. In these cases, if the carrier avails themselves of EPC’s services, then it will be the responsibility of EPC to offload the goods, present them for examination, then reload the goods. As per the agreement, the supplier must request and receive confirmation in writing of the contracting authority, in the CBSA, before the use of any subcontractors. The CBSA has not received any request from EPC and has not issued any confirmation to EPC related to the use of subcontractors.

In response to (e), the CBSA is not aware of EPC using subcontractors in the current context of this national offload agreement.

In response to (f), the CBSA’s national offload contract is a zero-sum agreement; therefore, there are no financial obligations nor any gains/losses for the CBSA.

In response to (g), the CBSA used a competitive process to ensure fair price and open and transparent procurement. The resulting agreement utilizes the offloading rates defined within the policy for highway examinations to ensure cost remains the same regardless of where the service is being provided across Canada. If the carrier avails themselves of the service provider EPC, then all fees are charged and collected solely by EPC. Carriers are not obligated to use services provided by EPC.

In response to (h), prior to the current agreement, the CBSA ran multiple competitive bidding processes for the offload contract since 2015. EPC has been the provider since 2015. The rates have varied from agreement to agreement and were established by the service provider during the competitive bidding process.

In response to (i), this process was competitive and posted on the government tender website, Buyandsell, for any supplier to provide a bid, which included a ceiling price per service required. A conflict of interest analysis was not completed.

In response to (j), EPC resources have been validated and confirmed by the CBSA security division. Only a resource with a valid security clearance can perform work on this agreement. The service provider is responsible for initiating the security clearance process and will work with Public Services and Procurement Canada, PSPC, for the issuing of all employee security clearances. It is the responsibility of the service provider to maintain all security clearances to ensure they are valid. The CBSA is not involved in the security clearance process.

In response to (k), this process was competitive and posted on the government tender website, Buyandsell, for any supplier to provide a bid, which included a ceiling price per service required.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing]

Madam Speaker, if the government's responses to Questions Nos. 2584 to 2589, 2591 to 2595 and 2598 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately in an electronic format.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Is it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No.2584—

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

With regard to the Minister of Rural Economic Development’s announcement on improving connectivity in rural Saskatchewan made on March 17, 2023, since the announcement: (a) how much of the $37 million in announced funding has been spent to date; (b) what projects, if any, have received funding; and (c) have any of the Hanson Lake Road projects been approved for this funding, including (i) Hanson Lake Road A UBF-3500, (ii) Hanson Lake Road B UBF-3501, (iii) Hanson Lake Road C UBF-3502, (iv) Creighton UBF-3503, (v) Hanson Lake Road UBF-3506, (vi) other projects?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2585—

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

With regard to the Canada Revenue Agency, broken down by tax year since 2019: (a) how many trusts and corporations assessed and paid capital gains and what was the total amount of capital gains collected from this group; (b) how many trusts and corporations assessed and paid taxes on capital gains (i) of less than $50,000, (ii) between $50,000 and $100,000, (iii) between $100,000 and $250,000, (iv) of more than $250,000; and (c) for each group in (b), what was the total amount collected in taxes on capital gains?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2586—

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

With regard to the First Nations and Inuit Policing Program, and the Auditor General of Canada's report entitled "Report 3 - First Nations and Inuit Policing Program": (a) what is the breakdown of the $930 million in funding, referred to in paragraph 3.21 of the report, by province and territory; (b) how is the funding broken down by (i) self-administered police service agreements, (ii) Community Tripartite Agreements; (c) why, according to paragraph 3.23 of the report, didn’t Public Safety Canada disburse about $17 million of the $196 million program funds available in the 2022-23 fiscal year; and (d) why, according to paragraph 3.24 of the report, didn’t Public Safety Canada verify whether the funds transferred to the RCMP were being used for program costs, as opposed to other police services?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2587—

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

With regard to the National Trade Corridors Fund administered by Transport Canada, as of April 2024: (a) of the projects funded, how many (i) have not started, (ii) are underway, (iii) have been completed; and (b) for each project, what is the (i) timeline, (ii) objective, (iii) location?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2588—

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

With regard to government contracts with McKinsey & Company and the report from the Office of Procurement Ombud, entitled "Procurement Practice Review of Contracts Awarded to McKinsey & Company": (a) what are the details of the 25 non-competitive contracts listed on page four of the report, including, for each, (i) the date of the contract, (ii) the title, (iii) the file number, (iv) the value of each contract, (v) the department, (vi) the reason for sole sourcing, (vii) who authorized the sole sourcing, (viii) the purpose of the contract and services provided; (b) what are the details of the seven competitive contracts listed on page four of the report, including, for each, the (i) date of the contract, (ii) title, (iii) file number, (iv) value of the contract, (v) department, (vi) purpose of the contract and services provided; and (c) why did the government change their procurement strategy to allow two contracts to be awarded to McKinsey & Company when they were originally ineligible, in the instance outlined on page six, paragraph 26 of the report?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2589—

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton Mill Woods, AB]

With regard to government payments: how many recipients of (i) the Canada Pension Plan, (ii) Old Age Security, (iii) the Guaranteed Income Supplement, (iv) Canada Pension Plan disability benefits, (v) Employment Insurance benefits, (vi) the Child Tax benefit, (vii) Survivor’s Pension, received their payments, broken down by method of receival (e.g. direct deposit, physical cheque mailed by the government, etc.), by province or territory (or abroad, if applicable) and by year, since 2015?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2591—

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

With regard to the number and value of contracts awarded to GC Strategies and Coredal Systems Consulting, from January 1, 2011, to February 16, 2024, that were provided by the Treasury Board Secretariat to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates on April 16, 2024: what are the details for each deliverable associated with the contracts, including, for each, the (i) date that the deliverable was finished, (ii) title, (iii) summary of the recommendations, (iv) file number, (v) website where the deliverable is available online, if applicable?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2592—

[Richard Bragdon, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

With regard to the government's participation in the sixth session of the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA-6) in Nairobi, Kenya: (a) what are the total expenditures incurred by the government to date related to the assembly, broken down by type of expense; (b) what was the total number of attendees that the government paid for, including the (i) official title and department or organization of each individual, (ii) total expenditures incurred for each entity in (i), broken down by type of expense; (c) for the delegation’s accommodations in Kenya, (i) what hotels were used, (ii) how much was spent at each hotel, (iii) how many rooms were rented at each hotel and for how many nights, (iv) what were the room rates paid at each hotel and the number of rooms rented at each rate, (v) who stayed in each of the rooms in (iv), broken down by room rate; (d) what were the details of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change’s accommodation expenditures, including the (i) daily rate, (ii) accommodating venue; (e) what are the details of the total hospitality expenditures, broken down by (i) date, (ii) amount, (iii) location, (iv) name of any commercial establishment or vendor involved in the hospitality activity, (v) number of attendees, (vi) the description of the event, (vii) the description of goods and services purchased; (f) what are the details of all ground transportation expenditures, including, for each, the (i) date, (ii) amount, (iii) vendor, (iv) point of origin, (v) destination, (vi) make and model of each vehicle used, (vii) type of vehicle (e.g. gas, electric, hybrid), (viii) whether a chauffeur or driver was included, (ix) names and titles of the passengers or individuals who incurred the expense; and (g) what are the details of all expenditures on gifts related to the assembly, including, for each, the (i) value, (ii) description, (iii) vendor from whom it was purchased, (iv) recipient?

(Return tabled)

Question No.2593—

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

With regard to the Community Futures Program, since 2019: outside of core funding, what are the details of all additional funding which has been given to organizations which implement the program such as the Community Futures Development Corporations, including, for each instance, the (i) recipient, (ii) amount, (iii) date, (iv) purpose of the funding, (v) program under which the funding was provided?

(Return tabled)