SoVote

Ms. Christine Normandin (Saint-Jean, BQ)

Jun/6/24 11:41:43 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is always difficult to follow my colleague from Terrebonne, but I will do my best to address the day's topic, the production of documents following the three rather explosive reports just made public by the Auditor General of Canada. I will quickly address the Conservatives' motion because I may have a few proposals to make at the end of my speech. The Conservatives' motion essentially asks that the House order the government and Sustainable Development Technology Canada, or SDTC, to produce several documents within 14 days following the potential adoption of the motion. They want all files, documents, briefing notes, memoranda, emails or any other correspondence exchanged among government officials regarding SDTC; contribution and funding agreements to which SDTC is a party; records detailing financial information of SDTC; SDTC conflict of interest declarations, which we will be talking about in detail; briefing notes and so on. They also want these documents to be provided to the RCMP for its independent determination of whether to investigate potential offences under the Criminal Code. I will circle back to that later as well. In short, this motion relates to the performance audit of SDTC submitted by the Auditor General of Canada two days ago, on June 4. The Auditor General looked into the organization's activities between April 1, 2017, and December 31, 2023, and her findings were as numerous as they were damning. Let me name a few. She revealed that SDTC “did not always manage public funds in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contribution agreements for the Sustainable Development Technology Fund”. That was the basis for her findings. She also revealed that “the foundation had not established targets or clear guidance for assessing eligibility criteria” of the projects it was going to fund. Despite the eligibility criteria, when it finally arrived at the conclusion that a project was ineligible, in some cases, the foundation gave the projects funding even if they did not support the development or demonstration of a new technology, or if “their projected environmental benefits” had been exaggerated. The foundation did not inform Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada of funding that needed to be recovered. The foundation poorly managed its conflicts of interest in several respects. Its records show that “the conflict-of-interest policies were not followed in 90 cases”. The foundation's conflict-of-interest policies simply did not comply with its enabling legislation. It did not even have an “effective system to maintain records over disclosures of conflicts of interest and related mitigating actions.” SDTC's conflicts of interest were linked to approval decisions representing nearly $76 million in funding awarded to projects. This is no small matter. The foundation did not declare its conflicts of interest to the department. The board of directors failed “to oversee the foundation's compliance with key legal requirements.” Right from the start, the board was not set up correctly, since the number of directors did not comply with the enabling legislation. There were only two, rather than the 15 who were supposed to sit on the board. Nevertheless, SDTC should not take all the blame. The minister did not provide sufficient oversight of the foundation's use of public funds. That, my friends, is another problem. Despite whistle-blowers having sounded the alarm a long time ago, nothing was done. As one of my colleagues, the member for Mirabel, mentioned in his question to a Conservative member, former minister Navdeep Bains could have requested audits but did not. As the saying goes, the longer we wait the worse things get. In this case, the wait was long indeed, and things went from bad to worse. In short, what the Auditor General of Canada did two days ago was to finally confirm what we have suspected for months. She tabled three reports the same day and with the same ultimate finding, which is especially striking: The Liberals have completely lost control of the machinery of government. If we needed another blatant example of this, we got one today. As my colleague from Terrebonne mentioned yesterday during a question, Ottawa should get its own house in order instead of trying to manage the provinces. It should begin by doing its own job before trying to do everyone else's. This shows there are systemic problems within the machinery of government. The widespread trend to contract out and create increasing distance between the government and the projects it manages leads to an absence of accountability and transparency. This doubles and even triples the number of intermediaries, causing us to lose the thread concerning who does what. We are unable to follow the money, and we lose track of everything. This is probably something the government can at last understand. It truly tends to be incapable of following up on programs because they have been outsourced to third parties. If the government were asked to do an eight-piece puzzle, it would probably not be above making sure the puzzle was manufactured by a Liberal and creating a non-government agency specializing in solving puzzles. It might even hire a consulting firm to get engineering advice about puzzles, but it would certainly not be able to determine how much it ended up costing them to finish the stupid puzzle. It might not even be able to finish it because one of the pieces was lost in the sofa cushions. That is how the current government is running things, and here we have a clear example of that. Essentially, the problem is that we need to support the development of sustainable technologies. At a time when climate change is likely to cause not only health problems, but economic problems as well, we need to deal with it and develop technologies that can help mitigate it. The problem is that, by suspending funding activities for SDTC because it was so rotten, they also suspended the funding needed to develop these technologies. In the meantime, we are continuing to fund oil companies and engage in greenwashing by asking the same oil companies to develop their own sustainable technologies. Ultimately, it probably suits the Conservatives to be able to blame the government for its poor management inasmuch as we know they are climate change deniers, but we still need to tackle the underlying problem and fund the development of green technologies. That being said, there are interesting things in the Conservatives' motion. My colleague alluded to them. Asking for the rapid production of numerous documents may help us prevent a few of them from getting lost in the sofa cushions. They are sending the message that members of Parliament intend to look into the matter, which is not bad in itself. We need to shed light on this issue to make the government stop constantly delegating its authority and its project management to other entities. Let us not forget the importance of transparency in the government's management of different projects and the subsidies it grants. However, there are two things in this motion that bother us, and we need to point them out. They are asking that the documents be produced within 14 days of the adoption of the motion. The Conservatives appear to have forgotten that there are two official languages and that the Bloc Québécois works in French. Fourteen days will not be sufficient to have all of the requested documents translated. It might be a good idea to show a little flexibility in this respect without going overboard. Furthermore, regarding involving the RCMP, as worded, the motion seems to be giving the RCMP instructions rather than simply allowing it to access documents, which it would be more than capable of obtaining through warrants, anyway. In short, we are open to talking with the Conservatives about minor amendments to their proposal. We invite them to come talk to us. We will be in the House fairly late this evening anyway. Properly managing the Liberals' legislative agenda means we will be working for quite a while. The Conservatives should not hesitate to come see us to discuss proposals and amendments. We are always open to discussion.

1379 words

Context: House Hansard - 326 - Jun/6/24

Mrs. Jenica Atwin (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services, Lib.)

Jun/6/24 4:32:41 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Newmarket—Aurora. I am pleased to rise to speak to today's opposition motion with the hopes of addressing the findings and finding a path forward. The Government of Canada is committed to supporting the growth of the clean-technology sector. Our clean-technology sector is a powerful engine for economic growth. In recent years, Canadian companies have generated revenues and achieved accolades on the global stage. Encouraging innovation in the sector not only drives the creation of new businesses but also attracts significant international investments. On Tuesday, the Auditor General released her report on the audit of Sustainable Development Technology Canada. The audit's objective was to determine whether funds were managed in accordance with the contribution agreement between SDTC and Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada and with proper oversight. The report identified issues around project eligibility and conflict of interest at SDTC. The report recommended enhanced oversight by ISED to ensure SDTC's full compliance with its contribution agreement and the proper allocation of funds. The Auditor General did not report evidence of criminal behaviour. The Auditor General's findings and recommendations are in alignment with the results of the independent fact-finding exercise undertaken at the request of the government by Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton. That exercise resulted in significant actions being taken at SDTC to enhance accountability and transparency. Following allegations of a toxic workplace and inappropriate practices at SDTC, the government appointed a third party law firm to undertake a fact-finding review of alleged breaches of labour and employment practices and policies at SDTC. It conducted voluntary interviews with current and former employees, and the report concluded that SDTC's leadership did not engage in the type of repetitive, vexatious or major-incident conduct that would constitute harassment, bullying or workplace violence under applicable standards. Those are three reviews conducted by independent, impartial experts in their respective fields. The very same documents requested in the motion before us would have already been examined. I would ask what the members of the party opposite think would be uncovered in the duplicative exercise that is being proposed. The government took action. The Auditor General took action. We appreciate and accept her findings. Neither the Auditor General's audit nor any of the other fact-finding reviews found evidence of fraudulent or other criminal activities by any officer, director, member or employee of SDTC. While some of the reviews concluded that there were lapses in SDTC's governance, including its management of a conflict of interest, these findings did not include suspicion or evidence of fraud or other criminal activity that would warrant a referral to the RCMP. The government has taken steps to directly address the lapses that were identified, and it is ultimately moving the programming to within the National Research Council to ensure the future stewardship of the programs. Leadership has been stabilized with the appointment of a new board chair and two new directors. The new appointees have been chosen for their expertise in governance and organizational transformation. This reflects the mandate to transition the programming and personnel to the NRC. Furthermore, ISED, through its contribution agreement with SDTC, has put in place measures to strengthen the conflict-of-interest processes and capacity as part of its enhanced oversight, which will continue. Consistent with the responsibilities established in SDTC's enabling statute enacted by Parliament, SDTC is an arm's-length organization that is responsible for the selection and management of projects and the associated agreements. The Government of Canada does not have any evidence of willful misconduct or deliberate unethical behaviour in the establishment of contribution agreements between SDTC and the funding recipients. The government has taken significant steps to ensure transparency and accountability through increased oversight of SDTC's operations, and following the findings on conflict-of-interest, ISED has implemented enhanced standards for disclosure, documentation and management of conflict of interest, as it should. Furthermore, active reporting requirements have been established to track conflict of interest, disclosures and recusals. This includes measures specific to SDTC employees, external consultants, senior management and the board. These measures will increase accountability, ensuring that any potential conflicts are managed effectively. The government is committed to ensuring that public investments continue to advance the commercialization of clean technologies in support of Canada's climate change priorities. Efforts have begun to ensure a smooth transition of SDTC programming to the National Research Council under new leadership. Work over the past year has rightly involved a lot of attention on fact finding, due diligence, governance and renewal. My hope is that this can now allow us to move forward and have the House ensure ongoing support for clean tech in Canada as we face down the climate crisis. Other countries are not waiting to accelerate the growth of their clean technology industries. Whether we look at the United States, Europe, Asia or beyond, governments are enhancing their efforts to position their clean technology companies for success. With the announcement this week, the government is putting the focus back on serving Canadian clean technology innovators and positioning homegrown technologies to compete and win in the global marketplace.

873 words

Context: House Hansard - 326 - Jun/6/24

Mrs. Jenica Atwin

Jun/6/24 4:39:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the various reviews conducted, including the Auditor General's report, have revealed the serious lapses in the SDTC's governance. This prompted a new delivery approach to the government support for the clean-tech sector. On June 4 of this year, the minister announced a new governance approach that will strengthen oversight and accountability to meet today's expectations of stewardship. As soon as the allegations were brought forward, the government acted swiftly to address the situation. Funds were frozen, and there was new funding for the SDTC. We initiated two separate independent reviews to thoroughly examine the claims and invited the Auditor General to conduct the audit. I do accept the findings, and I certainly stand for transparency, for accountability and for upholding the highest standards of integrity for the House.

134 words

Context: House Hansard - 326 - Jun/6/24

Mr. Jean-Denis Garon (Mirabel, BQ)

Jun/6/24 4:40:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my colleague made a good speech and underlined the fact that Sustainable Development Technology Canada, or SDTC, was necessary for the development of many technological innovations. I want to remind her that that is why the Liberals should not have scrapped the foundation by allowing wrongdoing and putting up with it for so long. The government cannot dissociate itself from what happened at SDTC for a very simple reason. Under the law, Minister Bains had the power at the time to request specific audits every year to verify whether the funding agreements and the rules were being followed. During all those years, that Liberal minister never once got up in the morning and decided to request an audit and check for himself. How is it that this Liberal minister of innovation, science and industry at the time did nothing when he could have done something? How is it that with this government it always takes a report by the Auditor General for it to finally rise in the House and say that something was mismanaged?

177 words

Context: House Hansard - 326 - Jun/6/24

Mr. Tony Van Bynen (Newmarket—Aurora, Lib.)

Jun/6/24 4:43:48 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to the motion. On Tuesday, the government announced that it would be transferring Sustainable Development Technology Canada's programming to be based within the National Research Council of Canada. I will speak more about this in a minute. However, I would first like to highlight the events and the independent reviews that have led us to this decision. The government expects organizations that receive public funds to be held to the highest standards. When allegations of mismanagement at SDTC first came to light, the government took immediate action to undertake the proper due diligence to understand the facts. These were serious allegations, and they warranted a careful assessment of all the evidence. It is only with the facts that we can take the appropriate steps to return to the business of supporting our Canadian clean technology sector. As the first step, the government engaged an impartial third party, Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton, or RCGT, to undertake a fact-finding exercise. This focused on organizational policies, procedures, program governance and project approval processes. At its conclusion, the fact-finding exercise did not reveal any clear evidence of wrongdoing or misconduct at SDTC. However, RCGT did make a number of observations that showed that SDTC was not in full compliance with the terms and the conditions of its contribution agreements. These findings warranted a deeper examination, and again, the government took action. Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, ISED, worked collaboratively with the Office of the Auditor General in support of a full audit. Just as the government has high standards for the use of public funds, it also expects employees to benefit from a healthy and a respectful work environment. Given this, in addition to the RCGT fact-finding exercise, the government took action to address allegations that related to human resources practices. ISED requested the Department of Justice to appoint a law firm, McCarthy Tétrault, to undertake a fact-finding review of alleged breaches of the labour and employment practices and the policies at SDTC. Current and former employees were permitted to speak freely to the law firm without violating any applicable settlement agreements or non-disclosure agreements. The fact-finding review, which is publicly available, concluded that SDTC's leadership did not engage in the type of repetitive, vexatious or major incident conduct that would constitute harassment, bullying or workplace violence under the applicable standards. Turning now to the Auditor General's audit, as mentioned, the government welcomed the Auditor General's decision to undertake the audit and fully co-operated with the auditors. Evidence collected from all of these independent reviews have revealed lapses in SDTC's governance model. We are taking definitive action anchored in facts, as established by independent parties, most notably the Auditor General. To be clear, the Auditor General did not report evidence or suspicion of criminal behaviour. The government is confident in the rigour and the expertise the Auditor General and her office brought to this issue, and we accept her findings and recommendations. Measures have been established for stronger governance and oversight at SDTC. These measures, which will remain in place, ensure increased transparency and accountability. With the changes in leadership, the government will maintain that confidence as the programming transitions into the next phase. While SDTC has been instrumental in developing a successful clean technology sector in Canada over the years, a new delivery approach to support this vital sector of our economy is now needed. That is why the government took decisive action by announcing a new delivery approach that includes transitioning SDTC and its employees to the NRC. In addition to its proven track record of providing tailored support to Canada's innovative small and medium-sized businesses, the NRC is a Government of Canada organization, and it is subject to rigorous and stringent oversight of its personnel and finances. This move will help rebuild the public trust while increasing accountability and transparency in program delivery. The decision to transfer the programming is not just about sound government, it is about people and the clean-technology industry. Canada's clean-technology sector is world-renowned for developing innovative, clean-technology solutions. In 2024, there were 13 Canadian companies named to the Global Cleantech 100 list. This is a clear testament to Canada's innovative ecosystem and the clean-technology sector's ability to compete against leading innovative countries, such as the United States and Germany. The Government of Canada also recognizes the importance of retaining subject matter experts. These employees have a wealth of experience and knowledge, and have been integral in helping Canada's clean-tech companies move from seed to start-up to scale-up. Their transition to the NRC will help ensure Canada's clean-tech companies will be at the forefront of efforts to address climate change, continuing much-needed federal support for businesses to innovate, grow and create well-paying sustainable jobs. This support will continue. SDTC is resuming funding for all new eligible projects in a sector vital to our country's economy and clean-tech growth. In line with the Auditor General's findings, ISED will enhance the oversight and monitoring of funding through this transitionary period. We know that clean-tech companies have felt the impacts of the funding pause as the government took the time it needed to uncover the evidence and to put in place a robust governance solution. We have done what we set out to do, and we thank the clean-tech sector for its resilience and patience as we shaped a new way forward. The government has done its due diligence, and neither the OAG nor any other independent review found any evidence of fraudulent or criminal activities by an officer, director, member or employee of SDTC. While some of these investigations concluded there were lapses in governance, including their management of conflict of interest, these conclusions did not identify fraud or criminal activity. We are focused on restoring governance at SDTC and getting back to the business of supporting our Canadian innovators. I encourage all members to support the government's actions to advance homegrown clean-tech solutions and achieve Canada's climate goals.

1041 words

Context: House Hansard - 326 - Jun/6/24

Mrs. Kelly Block (Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, CPC)

Jun/6/24 4:57:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to stand in this place today to speak to the Conservative opposition day motion introduced in the House, which calls for the following: That the House order the government, Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC) and the Auditor General of Canada each to deposit with the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, within 14 days [although I understand an amendment has been made] of the adoption of this order, the following documents, created or dated since January 1, 2017, which are in its or her possession, custody or control: The motion goes on to detail the nature of the documents and the process for obtaining them and ultimately the submission of these documents to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for “its independent determination of whether to investigate potential offences under the Criminal Code or any other act of Parliament.” Before I go any further, I will note I am splitting my time with my colleague, the MP for St. Albert—Edmonton. Earlier this week, the Auditor General of Canada tabled three damning reports in the House of Commons, including “Report 6—Sustainable Development Technology Canada.” Under the scandal-ridden Liberal government, the SDTC has become plagued by conflicts of interest as the corrupt nature of the government has taken hold of this organization. Let us take a look at the “At a Glance” page of her report, which reads, “Overall, we found significant lapses in Sustainable Development Technology Canada’s governance and stewardship of public funds.” As well, “Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada did not sufficiently monitor the compliance with the contribution agreements between the foundation and the Government of Canada.” The Auditor General found that SDTC had awarded funding to projects that were ineligible, even though “they did not meet key requirements” and where conflicts of interest existed. In total, 123 million dollars' worth of contracts were found to have been given inappropriately, with $59 million being given to projects that never should have been awarded any money at all. On top of this, the Auditor General discovered that conflicts of interest were connected to approval decisions. Because of this, nearly $76 million of funding was awarded to projects where there was a connection to the Liberal friends appointed to roles within SDTC, while $12 million of funding was given to projects that were both ineligible and had a conflict of interest. In fact, the Auditor General discovered that long-established conflict of interest policies were not followed in 90 cases. That must be a record for a single organization managing hundreds of millions of dollars. In one instance, the Prime Minister's hand-picked SDTC chair siphoned off $217,000 to her own company. At a time when Canadians are struggling to pay their mortgages, put gas in their vehicles to go to work or feed their families, the Liberal government is doing what Liberals do best, which is wasting taxpayers' dollars. They make a big show of creating the appearance of doing something while blatantly disregarding the policies and rules in order to funnel money into the pockets of Liberal insiders. The Auditor General made it clear the blame for this scandal lies directly at the feet of the Prime Minister's industry minister, who did not sufficiently monitor the contracts that were being awarded to Liberal insiders. The minister utterly failed in his duty to protect the Canadian taxpayer. The Auditor General also released a damning report into the taxpayer-funded contracts that the Prime Minister awarded to his well-connected friends at McKinsey. The AG discovered that over the past few years, McKinsey has been awarded almost $200 million in contracts and that 90% of the contracts awarded to McKinsey were given without following the appropriate guidelines. Are we seeing a pattern here? In many cases, it was unclear what the purpose of the contract was or if the desired outcome was even achieved. It gets better, or should I say, it gets worse? In one case, the Canada Border Services Agency saw that McKinsey did not qualify for a contract. Can members guess what it did? It revised the statement of work so that McKinsey could qualify. That is not all. The Liberal government often sole-sourced these contracts directly to McKinsey and never even bothered to explain why a non-competitive process was justified. Can members imagine that? This is a multinational, billion-dollar company. This is absolutely concerning. About 70% of all contracts awarded to McKinsey were non-competitive. Worse still, in 13 out of 17, or 77%, of the contracts involving sensitive data given to McKinsey, the Liberal government allowed McKinsey to operate without the necessary security clearances. What is going on here? Why did the government go to such great lengths to break the rules? At that time, McKinsey was led by Dominic Barton. That might explain it. He was a close friend and adviser of the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister. I guess it should come as no surprise that the Liberals gave McKinsey hundreds of millions of dollars. Barton was the key figure in the Liberals' Advisory Council on Economic Growth and their Indo-Pacific Advisory Committee. It was also Barton's idea to create the failed, scandal-plagued Canada Infrastructure Bank. It was Barton and McKinsey that had to pay nearly $600 million in damages for helping create the opioid crisis. Despite this, the Prime Minister appointed Barton as Canada's ambassador to China. We cannot forget arrive scam and the damning Auditor General's report that came out in February of this year. It is a report that resulted from a motion put forward by Conservatives that called on the Auditor General to conduct a performance audit, including the payments, contracts and subcontracts for all aspects of the ArriveCAN app, and to prioritize this investigation. What did the Auditor General find? Members guessed it. She found a glaring disregard for management practices and an inability to assess the true cost of this app given the lack of information available to do a proper audit. It is an app that should have cost Canadians $80,000, but it ballooned to $60 million, and probably more. The outrageous spending habits of the government have put the futures of Canadians at risk. It has created a cost of living crisis, making it difficult for Canadians to put food on the table and a roof over their heads. It has failed to deliver for Canadians on every level. A record two million Canadians are visiting food banks in a single month. Housing costs have doubled. Mortgages have doubled. Over 50% of Canadians are $200, or less, away from going broke, yet the government continues to refuse to take any responsibility for its failed nine years of governance. After nine years of the Prime Minister, life has never been more difficult for Canadians. For well-connected Liberal friends, life has never been so good. The Prime Minister turned Sustainable Development Technology Canada into a slush fund for Liberal insiders. This was made clear through a secret recording of a senior civil servant who slammed the outright incompetence of the Liberal government, calling the SDTC's actions “a sponsorship-scandal level kind of giveaway.” The Prime Minister is not worth the cost and is not worth the corruption. It is incumbent on the House to shine light on the failures of the government and its corruption, and to deliver answers for Canadians. That is why I hope all members in the House will vote in favour of this motion, which would deliver more transparency for Canadians. When we get elected, common-sense Conservatives would end the corruption and fix the budget by firing the high-priced consultants.

1308 words