SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 301

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 17, 2024 02:00PM
Context: House Hansard - 301 - Apr/17/24
Mr. Kristian Firth
  • Apr/17/24 3:54:47 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, again, I am not being elusive. I do not know the answer to that question.
17 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Speaker
  • Apr/17/24 3:55:03 p.m.
  • Watch
The hon. member for Beauport—Limoilou.
7 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mrs. Julie Vignola (Beauport—Limoilou, BQ)
  • Apr/17/24 3:57:05 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will begin this question period by reminding members of some of the things I said in my speech last week. Sadly, we are dealing with an historic situation caused by various issues. One of those issues is the inconsistencies in some of the information we received from the witness, as well as the inconsistencies between that information and the information we received from other sources. Then, there is the time it took to receive written responses and requested documents, which was unusual and, in some cases, took as long as 18 months. Having said that, I must point out that the responses were received, although they were delayed, and it took some time and urging. As I was saying, the purpose of my questions today will be to understand the processes, and to identify flaws in the public service, how it operates and its procedures. I am not a court, and have no intention of being one. I urge members not to become a people's court or be taken in, and focus on our role: find flaws in the system, organization and processes in order to correct those flaws. It is important to specify that these flaws have been around for a while. Several processes were put in place years ago, including by Ms. Ambrose, the Conservative minister at the time. Here is my first question: I would like to know what skills and training are needed to become a talent recruiter.
248 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kristian Firth
  • Apr/17/24 3:57:20 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I believe I understood the question. There is a series of things. There is building a network, which can be, just through years of experience, working with clients, working with resources, understanding their skill sets, understanding their availability and understanding what their per diems are. There are a lot of things that have to be put into place to understand if somebody is perfect for a role. Again, do they have the right experience? Do they have the right skill set? On top of that, as well, is understanding how they respond to RFPs. We are a small shop. I mean, I do not think that is a surprise to anybody here. Myself and my business partner, we had to understand how to look for RFPs on Buyandsell.gc.ca, how to respond to them, how to recruit for them and how to fulfill our obligations once the contracts have been awarded. Then there is invoicing and time sheets, everything that goes from a 360° desk.
169 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mrs. Julie Vignola
  • Apr/17/24 3:58:18 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is hard to make a name for oneself, to become known in the huge government machinery. I would like to know how the witness' company has managed to establish itself as a key player in recruiting talent for the Government of Canada.
45 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kristian Firth
  • Apr/17/24 3:58:41 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I understand the question. I am not sure we are recognized as a benchmark. We were in a good position to respond and help with the ArriveCAN application, with having resources already on the ground and already having them CBSA security-cleared, which, in itself, takes a long time. However, that is not typical. At that point, I believe we beat out competition from two to three other firms. Members heard in testimony recently from AWS, Microsoft and BDO that they did not have the capacity to build the app. Although I understand it may look like we are the benchmark, we are not recognized as the benchmark with the federal government.
114 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mrs. Julie Vignola
  • Apr/17/24 3:59:27 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I was talking about what happened long before ArriveCAN. I was talking about what happened at the very beginning, when GC Strategies first became a company recognized by the Government of Canada. How did that happen? How did the company make its mark?
45 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kristian Firth
  • Apr/17/24 3:59:47 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, for the first two years GC Strategies was in business, we actually were building corporate requirements. We were trying to get onto supply arrangements like TBIPS, SBIPS and ProServices, and all the mechanisms to go after business. Granted they were bluebirds, which basically means we had no idea these things were hitting the street. Then, shortly after winning the first two or three, one then starts getting corporate requirements, people start identifying the company as being good at one thing or good at the other, and then, at that point, one starts building credibility and so forth.
99 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mrs. Julie Vignola
  • Apr/17/24 4:00:34 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, so, if I understand correctly, the first contracts he received, he received them before he even knew exactly how it all worked. If I remember correctly, these first contracts were awarded back in 2015, when GC Strategies was founded. Despite not knowing exactly how it all worked, he managed to get contracts. I would like to understand that.
60 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kristian Firth
  • Apr/17/24 4:01:03 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am sorry. I understood what the process was for responding to RFPs, but, for the first two years, we were working in building our credibility through other companies, like other subs who were working with the private sector. At that point, we had built the confidence in our network and our understanding of how many resources we had access to with specific skill sets, so that we felt comfortable going after the RFPs that were being put out by the federal government.
85 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mrs. Julie Vignola
  • Apr/17/24 4:01:36 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, does the witness believe that civil servants in general, and those working on ArriveCAN in particular, followed the rules, procedures and policies related to their strategic and privileged position within the government apparatus when negotiating the contracts his company won?
42 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kristian Firth
  • Apr/17/24 4:02:01 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, can I please have that question repeated?
9 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
The Speaker
  • Apr/17/24 4:02:05 p.m.
  • Watch
I will stop the clock. The hon. member for Beauport—Limoilou.
12 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mrs. Julie Vignola
  • Apr/17/24 4:02:12 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, does the witness believe that public servants complied with the rules, procedures and policies related to their strategic and privileged position within the government apparatus in negotiating contracts for GC Strategies?
33 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kristian Firth
  • Apr/17/24 4:02:38 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, again, without sounding elusive, and that is not why I am here at all, I do not have the answer and cannot comment on that. I am not privy to every meeting that happens and every conversation that happens.
41 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mrs. Julie Vignola
  • Apr/17/24 4:02:56 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the witness is not familiar with the rules of the public service. However, did any public servant with whom he had contact tell him, at any time, that they could not do certain things that did not abide by the rules that apply to public servants?
51 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kristian Firth
  • Apr/17/24 4:03:23 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, no, they did not.
6 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mrs. Julie Vignola
  • Apr/17/24 4:03:29 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it has been noted, particularly by the Auditor General, that people from GC Strategies helped develop the criteria for a contract that they ultimately won. Does the witness believe that any company that participates in developing criteria should withdraw from a call for tenders?
46 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mr. Kristian Firth
  • Apr/17/24 4:04:01 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, from previous testimony that came from Amazon and Microsoft last week, I believe it is common practice to offer suggestions, because typically clients are not always best informed when it comes to writing RFPs or putting requirements together, whether it is cloud computing for Amazon or Microsoft. It is common for government officials or technical resources to ask for specific suggestions, understanding what skill sets and what technologies they would have to be privy with to be working on an application or working on projects.
87 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Mrs. Julie Vignola
  • Apr/17/24 4:04:51 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, based on what I understand from the answers to my last questions, the public service is currently forced, or feels obliged, to seek out the expertise of certain consultants because it cannot even identify or formulate criteria related to its own needs. That indicates a lack of expertise, and a lack of training. In particular, I would add that it makes no sense for a company that worked on selecting the criteria for a bidding process to be allowed to submit a bid. It creates the appearance of collusion, something that public servants, and companies, must absolutely avoid. That should be avoided. I recommend that the process be reviewed.
111 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border