Public Accounts Committee on May 14th, 2024

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Ma'am, he said he wasn't in the meeting, and he was in the meeting. By any other definition, that's a lie.

Let's move on to the substance of the question. We won't litigate whether or not he lied. I'm asserting it; you refute it. We'll accept that.

Are you not concerned about at least the appearance of the circumstances that you created by hiring Mr. Ossowski? It seems like it was in his interest to get this offer of employment from you for the day, not in the interest of the CBSA. What was the advantage to the CBSA, if not to get the story straight, a characterization with which you take issue? If it was just so that he could access his emails, why not pay him a dollar, so that he was technically employed? Why are we giving the guy $500? It seems like a good get for him for the day.

[Erin O'Gorman]

Again, if hiring him on casual to give him access to documents to prepare for the appearance.... It's in the Crown's interest that former officials come and can testify to what they did and why they did it while they were in their jobs. That was the rationale for bringing him back.

If he did not need to come back and could have accessed the information and the documents that, again, date back to his time as president, then that's on me, and I would happily provide that access going forward without any framework of employment around it.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Can you provide to this committee a list of all of the other occurrences where similar treatment has been offered to former employees of the CBSA in relation to their testifying before parliamentary committees during your tenure as CBSA president?

[Erin O'Gorman]

There is nobody.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

It was special access, then. It seems like special treatment for Mr. Ossowski.

[Erin O'Gorman]

There haven't been retired people who are former officials invited to the committee. The other employees who have moved departments were also given the offer to access or tell the CBSA what documents they might wish to see to prepare for their own testimonies.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

He's the only one who was paid to prepare before—

[Erin O'Gorman]

It's because the others are employees.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

They're not employees of the CBSA.

[Erin O'Gorman]

No. They are employees of the federal government, the Crown.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

That is your time.

Mrs. Shanahan, you have the floor for five minutes, please.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses, especially Ms. O'Gorman, who has appeared before this committee before and who has answered all questions from members here on the very important matter of ArriveCAN, which, of course, is being addressed in a number of other committees as well.

For my part, I feel that I have really asked all the questions that I need to ask. However, we have the witnesses here today, so I would like to perhaps give Ms. O'Gorman a chance to clarify any issues, any questions, that she hasn't had a chance to, starting with this question of reimbursing former employees when they're called back in front of committee.

Ms. O'Gorman, can you tell us how that works and why this is done in this way?

[Erin O'Gorman]

I'll share my understanding of it. My understanding is that it is a practice when former officials are called to testify, as they are in litigation after they have retired and as they are at the labour relations board for grievances after they've retired. In this case, an individual was called to testify before a parliamentary committee after he had retired. It's in the Crown's interest for those individuals to come prepared. In order to prepare, sometimes they require access to documents to refresh their memory of activities and decisions that were taken—and the rationale—while they were doing the job.

I did put a formality around that employment to give him access to it. As I've said, if that wasn't necessary, that's on me. It certainly wasn't an effort to enrich Mr. Ossowski. It absolutely was not an effort to align any stories. He prepared the way he needed to prepare. I'm happy to provide a list of documents that he accessed, but as I said, you can ask him on Thursday.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Mrs. Shanahan, I've just paused the clock. Can you just move your microphone kind of out and down a little? Maybe just say a few words.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Is that better now?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

It is, yes, thank you.

You have two minutes and 40 seconds, please.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Ms. O'Gorman, thank you for that answer.

This policy is in place, in fact. When you say that it's in the interest of the Crown, it is to help parliamentarians in their work with committee. Is it a time limitation, because I understand that, for ArriveCAN, for example, the contractors and subcontractors who are being questioned have been working for the Government of Canada for 13 years, including of course, for the former government under Stephen Harper.

Is there a time limitation?

[Erin O'Gorman]

I'll just be clear that there's not a policy in terms of bringing people back. The issue that I was focused on was the access to the information that he sought to prepare. As I said, if there didn't need to be formality around that, I'll own that decision. You may wish to ask him on Thursday whether the amount he received was worth it.

Again, this will be, I think, his third time appearing, so, as I said, this relates to the provision of documents that he wanted to see.

The framework of the agreement goes until the end of June but is tied to appearances before the parliamentary committee.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

I think I'm going to have to go back to previous questions that have already been asked, but perhaps you can share an update with the committee regarding the CBSA's internal investigations into ArriveCAN procurement.

[Erin O'Gorman]

They are ongoing, and people are being interviewed, as I understand it.

There was a motion before the Federal Court to seek a stay of two of those processes, and we are waiting for the decision by the Federal Court, so we won't conclude on a couple of those until the Federal Court has ruled.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Is there anything that you could share regarding the claims of Minh Doan's missing emails?

[Erin O'Gorman]

That work remains under way.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Turning now to our third round, we have Mr. Nater for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Has Mr. Ossowski been in contact with anyone at CBSA since he was summoned to appear before this committee on Thursday?