Sébastien Lemire
Abitibi—Témiscamingue, Quebec · Bloc Québécois · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, I find it ironic that the member from downtown Toronto gave a speech on the challenge of access to housing and housing construction, because I get the impression that, for the last 30 years, the federal government has been doing nothing but building housing in downtown Toronto.”
“Mr. Speaker, five years ago, I rose in the House to note that my son, Léon, was finishing elementary school. Naturally, five years later, it is time for his high school graduation ceremony, which he will be attending on Saturday.”
“That is, of course, provided that it does not take two years to sign the agreements, meaning that inflation eats up the lion's share of the funds allocated to Quebec. The Canada housing infrastructure fund agreement was finally signed after two years.”
“As a result, it has to ask CMHC—or perhaps I should say “the agency formerly known as CMHC”—to do what it used to do: review applications. Who suffers as a result? The projects and the organizations themselves. For my region, the upshot of this is that we will often miss the construction season.”
“It is rather ironic that the Auditor General of Canada issued a report on child care services. As members know, this policy resulted in an unconditional transfer being made to Quebec. That is because, in 1997, Quebec had already created the network of early childhood centres to provide affordable child care for everyone.”
“Mr. Speaker, I wish I were wrong, but the record of the last 10 years in this Parliament shows that I am not wrong and that funding does not reach Quebec, or if it does, it is only after several years' delay. Obviously, this means there is less money in current dollars available for the construction of these homes.”
The complete record
Every one of 447 lines we hold for Sébastien Lemire, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 9.
“Mr. Speaker, like Quebeckers generally, I am a bit fed up with the centralist, exclusive vision of elite sports that Canada constantly displays. My colleague alluded to this in his speech when he said he was proud to see investments of $750 million. In the meantime, families, young people and seniors are not getting any help even though they need access to physical activity too. Where is the federal government when the time comes to build infrastructure like gyms, pools and arenas? The need in Abitibi—Témiscamingue is desperate. I want to point out that Rouyn‑Noranda was forced to build a pool with only six lanes and that a project in Témiscamingue was cut back to the bare bones, with an investment of $18.6 million. We could search in vain to find a cheaper project in Canada. That is the bare minimum.”
“The victorious Victoire. Is there a finer or more natural role model for all those young girls who dream of taking to the ice themselves? I want to thank the team for their dedication to their sport. Well done. Long live the Victoire.”
“Mr. Speaker, I can hardly contain my excitement over the Montreal Victoire winning their very first Walter Cup. Our champions defeated the Ottawa Charge by a score of 4 to 0. This is the first time in the short history of the Professional Women's Hockey League that the cup has been won by a team north of the U.S. border. All Quebeckers are celebrating alongside our captain, the GOAT and playoff MVP Marie‑Philip Poulin, and Laura Stacey. All Quebeckers were on the edge of their seats, cheering on Ann-Renée Desbiens for her shutout and Catherine Dubois, Alexandra Labelle and Erin Ambrose for their hard work. All Quebeckers jumped for joy when Abby Roque scored two goals. Fortunately, the story does not end here. We will have another chance to applaud Danièle Sauvageau's team during Saturday's victory parade for the Victoire in Montreal.”
“Mr. Speaker, cost overruns are a Liberal hallmark. First there was Cúram, which is now costing taxpayers $7 billion following yet another cost overrun according the economic update. Everyone has heard about ArriveCAN and Phoenix, and now there is PrescribeIT, a software designed by the federal government to meddle in health care and prescribe medication. It cost $300 million, almost eight times more than expected, and that $300 million is a complete waste because nobody is using this software and the Liberals are pulling the plug. Why is our money going up in smoke yet again?”
“Mr. Speaker, Alto has confirmed that the section of high-speed rail between Montreal and Ottawa will go through 1,700 properties. With no input from the owners, 500 of our best pieces of farmland will be cut in half. When the Alto people tell us that they are consulting towns and farmers, it is all for show, because they already know exactly where they want to go and what land they want to expropriate. Alto is steamrolling our farmers. Will the Prime Minister finally ask it to get the farmers' consent, instead of running roughshod over them?”
“Rouyn-Noranda is the copper capital and self-proclaimed cultural capital of Quebec. It is also the capital of endless possibilities. I would like to take this opportunity to highlight the incredible journey of our hockey team, the Huskies, who truly reflect who we are: often overlooked but hard-working, proud people with heart and soul who never give up. I would like to welcome everyone to join us in the celebrations.”
“Mr. Speaker, perhaps this is nothing more than a tall tale that started in Rouyn, but in the early part of the last century, two Anishinabe hunters, the Mackimoot brothers, returned to their community with a glittering stone from Conia Asini. Then, a prospector from Nova Scotia, Edmund Horne, took his canoe to the township of Rouyn. Once there, potentially as a result of contact with the Anishinabe, he discovered a huge copper deposit. Shortly thereafter buildings began to spring up, including Jos Dumulon's famous general store, the Osisko Hotel, the Horne mine and smelter, and the house that belonged to my great-grandfather Eugène Lemire. On May 5, exactly 100 years ago today, Rouyn became a town, a few weeks after Norcanda, which is what we would still be calling it today had it not been for a distracted printer.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Cambridge for her concern because she began and ended her speech by talking about those who served, those who came away with trauma or physical effects, those who need help. We heard from some of these individuals in committee. I would like my colleague to tell me whether she thinks that there will be political repercussions for the government because the Liberals have ignored the voices of those who were represented in committee by members of the opposition. Some of the opposition members' proposals were even adopted by the government only to be rejected in the end. What message does this send to the people who have served the country?”
“Mr. Speaker, I have been following the bill's progress. There is something shocking about how Liberal arrogance is what is driving the decision to revisit committee discussions when there were amendments that responded to the justice's report and acknowledged her work. In particular, there was a Bloc Québécois amendment that addressed timely trials. However, the new majority got this amendment rejected, along with many others. I want to hear my colleague's thoughts on that. How does she feel about the arrogance that is being shown in this new context, which the people did not vote for but which is the result of floor crossers being bought off by the Liberal government?”
“Mr. Speaker, that is why the program has gone over budget five times already. The Liberals have had a majority in committee for seven days now. Already, they have killed an investigation into the Cúram cost overruns, which now total $7 billion. They decided that the investigation into Driver Inc. should be in camera, as though they care more about protecting dangerous truckers than the lives of Quebeckers. They have also shut down investigations into health care, veterans' services, the aerospace sector, and more. A culture of secrecy has taken hold in Ottawa. When will the Prime Minister step in and stop this abuse of power?”
“Mr. Speaker, the Liberals are abusing their majority to cover up the Cúram software scandal. After spending months denying that any problem related to OAS or any cost overruns even existed, the government has added $451 million for Cúram and the Canada Revenue Agency to its economic update. That means another cost overrun where none was supposed to exist, to fix problems where no problems were supposed to exist either. We will never know why, because the Liberals either resorted to filibustering or used their majority in committee to kill an investigation into Cúram. Why are they hiding this information from Quebeckers?”
“These were strangers who I had no previous encounters with who insisted I tie my tubes. The medical team took advantage of me in a vulnerable state....No one asked me what I wanted. No one explained to me why I apparently needed this done, and I didn't sign any forms. I still have no real idea what the options were and why they said it was best for them to sterilize me. I know now that the sterilization can't be reversed. My colleague talked about reconciliation and systemic issues. I would like to hear his thoughts on what we can do to ensure real reconciliation.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes for his concern, which we can feel, and for his commitment to this issue. These are deeply troubling issues that are difficult to address, but I think that he is doing so with great dignity. The fact that the bill is now at third reading is also a testament to his strong leadership. We just quickly completed report stage, but I think it is important to talk about the testimony that we heard from victims in committee. For example, Nicole Rabbit was scheduled for a C-section at the University of Saskatoon on September 11, 2001. We are talking about something that happened less than 30 years ago. She said: I trusted the medical team but knew something wasn't right when I smelled the burning flesh.”
“Mr. Speaker, what do they have to hide? The Liberals have just proven that a public inquiry is absolutely necessary. They know that Cúram is causing problems with the processing of OAS pensions because they are spending an additional $451 million to fix the problem. They know that there have been cost overruns. They have just added to them. In short, they have proven that the two problems are real and that they have been aware of them for years, even when former prime minister Justin Trudeau was in office. However, as recently as Monday, the Liberals were still filibustering at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts to hide information. What do they have to hide? When will they hold an independent public inquiry?”
“Mr. Speaker, for months now, the Liberals have been insisting that there are no issues with Cúram. They keep saying that it is not true that pensioners are having trouble receiving their OAS. They are saying that it is not true that there are cost overruns and, above all, that there is no need for an inquiry or to hand over documents. In a dramatic turn of events, the government announced in the economic update that it is giving $451 million to Cúram and the Canada Revenue Agency to “ensure seniors receive their benefits accurately and on time”. If there are no issues with Cúram, what is this money for?”
“Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear my colleague's opinion about the risk of mistakes or of any issues that this might raise for gender-diverse individuals. Does she have any concerns about abuses by authorities?”
“Let us not forget Jakub Dobes, who is having a better rookie season than even Carey Price or Patrick Roy did. It will not be easy against the Tampa Bay Lightning, but our young guns are ready to fight, and it feels like the cup is within reach.”
“Mr. Speaker, go Habs, go! Spring is well and truly here because our Canadiens are in the playoffs. It has been a long time since their nickname, “Les Glorieux”, the glorious ones, has been so well-deserved. That is because, this year, the Canadiens have a new Maurice Richard in Cole Caufield, our first 50-goal scorer since Stéphane Richer in 1989–1990. I was five years old back then. This year, the Canadiens also have a 100-point scorer: our captain, Nick Suzuki. He is only the fifth in over a century of hockey in Montreal. What can we say about Juraj Slafkovský, who has just broken the 30-goal mark? I bet that is just the beginning for this powerhouse. Did I mention that Lane Hutson is having the third-best season in the history of the Habs for a defenceman?”
“Mr. Speaker, a Quebecker is once again proving that Quebec produces the best basketball talent. Cassandre Prosper is the first player from Quebec to be drafted to the WNBA in nearly two decades. The Washington Mystics selected the young 20-year-old guard 19th overall last night at the annual draft in New York. The Rosemère-born athlete will be able to help her new team make the playoffs. I certainly would not bet against the captain who led the University of Notre Dame's team to the quarter-finals of the U.S. college tournament known as March Madness. Quebec is becoming a global basketball powerhouse, and Cassandre Prosper is our new icon. On behalf of the Bloc Québécois, I want to congratulate Ms. Prosper and wish her a long and successful career. May she win many WNBA championships.”
“We need to remember that, nearly every year, the auditors general questioned whether the government was taking this seriously and indicated that the departments and agencies were all doing things their own way without any real coordination. Is the mess we are in with the old age security system a consequence of that? I would also like to remind the House of the government's dependence on firms like Deloitte, which was telling the IT group how to do things; IBM, which was making programming errors and lining its own pockets; and McKinsey, which carried out the comparative analysis of services to the public. It is clear that there have been problems. I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.”
“Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Shefford for her being so compassionate, for providing accurate information regarding the 85,000 affected seniors and for calling for answers and accountability from this government. Speaking of government accountability, this morning, at a meeting of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, we were told something that we have heard many times before: The government received warnings as early as 2010 that the system was facing a critical threat and that it needed to be reformed. Why then, did the government wait until 2025-26 to roll out a new system?”
“Now, under a new Prime Minister and after 10 years of Liberal government, computer glitches and non-existent monitoring and forecasting, the current Prime Minister is reappointing the same minister and giving her the same responsibility, namely Employment and Social Development Canada. Who is responsible for Cúram? Should there be an independent public inquiry to get to the truth?”
“Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her very insightful remarks. It is refreshing to hear someone talk about transparency and accountability in the House. The Cúram software was known to have glitches. Five countries have adopted the Cúram system and experienced significant glitches. Australia has been dealing with Cúram glitches for 20 years. The same goes for Ontario. In 2015, a report by the Auditor General of Ontario said that Cúram was flawed. In 2017, the government decided to implement Cúram anyway. Who was the minister at the time? I wonder. I am just throwing that out there because we cannot name names.”
“Here is the motion: That the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities ask the Department of Jobs and Families, the Department of Government Transformation, Public Works and Procurement, the Privy Council Office and the Office of the Prime Minister to forward to the committee clerk, within 30 days of the adoption of this motion, all reports, correspondence, emails and documents related to the management of the benefits delivery modernization program since January 1, 2017, and that the departments and offices tasked with producing the documents apply redactions as per legal obligations under the Privacy Act and Access to Information Act. Will the Liberals be consistent and transparent?”
“However, the parliamentary secretary just said that he agrees that parliamentarians should look into the matter further. This morning, a motion was moved at the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. My question is very simple. My colleague will support that motion if he stands by his words and if his vote aligns with those of his Liberal colleagues.”
“Madam Speaker, honestly, as I listen to what the member for Winnipeg North is saying, I get the impression that everyone is to blame except the Liberals. It is the fault of seniors that they are not receiving their benefits. It is the civil servants’ fault for not implementing the program properly, because the instructions were so clear. To me, there is a problem. I heard something interesting in my colleague’s response: Parliamentarians are not doing all they can right now and they should be the ones looking into this issue. We can have a debate to determine whether an independent public inquiry is the best approach. I sincerely believe that it is, because it would move this debate outside the parliamentary sphere, and experts could examine the issue in depth.”
“By “unanimous”, I mean that the motion also had the support of the Liberal members. Does the member for Winnipeg North agree that we need to move forward? Will he be voting in favour of today's motion for an independent public inquiry into the cost of this system? The $6.6-billion price tag for the system is equivalent to five times the budget for Grand Theft Auto , which cost $1.4 billion to make and is considered the most technically complex game ever made. It is equivalent to 13,200 build Canada homes programs, 21 F-35As and 3 Champlain Bridges. That is the scale of what this cost represents. That is why an independent public inquiry is necessary. I could also mention CARM, Dayforce, Phoenix and all the other examples. That is why the system needs to be changed. Will my colleague fall in with this proposal?”
“Madam Speaker, to be honest, I suspect that the government still thinks it can pull a fast one on us. With that in mind, I think that the parliamentary secretary is once again putting himself in the minister's shoes and saying that Cúram is worth celebrating. The problem is clear: The federal government does not have the necessary expertise. According to an article in La Presse, a public servant costs an average of $162,000 a year, including benefits and retirement. The $6.6 billion that Cúram is costing could pay for 3,133 federal employees for 13 years. These employees could then ensure that every person receives their old age security benefits. The reason we are here today is not complicated. The Standing Committee on Public Accounts passed a unanimous motion.”
“Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Richmond—Arthabaska for his wise words. This member has special expertise because he served in the Quebec National Assembly, where IT cost overruns are taken seriously. When there were cost overruns of $500 million for SAAQclic, an inquiry was conducted. The Quebec government took that situation seriously. Heads rolled and the Government of Quebec learned from its mistakes. Why? It was so that it would not make those same mistakes again. The Quebec National Assembly adopted a unanimous motion calling on the federal government to conduct an independent inquiry. That is the subject of this debate. Will my colleague support this motion to hold an independent public inquiry? Can he tell us why it is so important to do so?”
“We need an impartial judge who can conduct a thorough investigation, ask questions, ensure accountability and pass on clear documentation in order to get to the bottom of this situation. We need to put political games and partisanship aside so that we, as taxpayers, pay less for dealings with IT firms.”
“Madam Speaker, my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean put his finger on something absolutely crucial. How was this managed internally? What instructions were public servants given? Were they given proper training in a timely manner? Were they given clear and accurate information? There were cost overruns. The deputy minister told us today that about 5% of cases had errors. What is happening with the additional data on people who received overpayments? Oddly enough, no one seems to be talking about that. Where are the data on that? Is there transparency? That is precisely the purpose of an independent public inquiry. Political games are being played here, which is why we need to shed light on this.”
“Madam Speaker, I want to sincerely thank the member for Richmond—Arthabaska for his leadership on this issue. He has been raising it in the House for weeks and giving specific examples from his riding. Let us talk numbers. The government is bragging about the fact that there were 85,000 cases but now there are 69,000 or even 63,000. That is the number we were given this morning. Should we be commending the government for that, as though it did a good job of managing this situation? Behind these numbers, there are real people who are suffering. Why? The reason is that the software was poorly designed, and there were glitches and errors. With gas prices being what they are nowadays, imagine if someone budgeted for $2 a litre but the gas ended up costing only $1.80 a litre. Should they be commended? No. Every delay is unacceptable.”
“Madam Speaker, I did so right off the top. Once again, the member for Winnipeg North is being selective about what parts of this debate he listens to. The issue is the federal government's ongoing difficulty determining up-front costs. There are cost overruns. I could point to other software systems, such as the Canada Border Services Agency's assessment and revenue management system, or CARM. The portal was supposed to cost $400 million, but it had already gone up to $700 million in July 2025. The Auditor General will be auditing it. There is also ArriveCAN, which was supposed to cost $80,000 but ended up costing $60 million. This happens with every program. I honestly believe the government does not know how to assess its program costs and that taxpayers always end up footing the increasingly hefty bill.”
“Combined with Dayforce, which is scheduled to launch in 2031, the government will have spent $9.2 billion, almost $1 billion per year. The Auditor General noted that Public Services and Procurement Canada did not even calculate the difference between the operating costs for Phoenix and Dayforce. Nobody even knows if it will save us money. This is essentially why we are calling for an independent public inquiry.”
“This past Monday, in a report on modernizing the pay system, the Auditor General of Canada noted that Phoenix 2.0, known as Dayforce, was going to cost $4.2 billion and that the estimate was not yet detailed and did not include the cost of transitioning all departments to the new system. The Department of Public Works and Government Services announced in June 2025 that it was moving forward with a $350.6-million contract with Dayforce. However, the Auditor General's report says it emerged in December 2025 that the cost of the contract had already nearly doubled to $565.9 million, an increase of nearly $200 million. Phoenix, a project that was supposed to cost $309 million, ended up burning through $5 billion of taxpayer money.”
“We are moving toward a world where technologies play a key role in management, but this government constantly wants to outsource that to private companies. In her memo to the Prime Minister in May 2022, the Clerk of the Privy Council, Janice Charette, wrote that institutional knowledge about custom system design, function and interdependencies have not been captured and communicated over time, meaning the Government of Canada is critically low in the expertise needed for legacy IT maintenance and replacement. That is why we want an independent public inquiry.”
“Quebec's unique characteristics must be taken into account, and we seriously doubt that this was done in the configuration of Cúram. The public servants' report clearly states that the French-language interfaces displayed instructions in English, and their solution was to use Google Translate. A Radio-Canada article from June 2025 reported that, after encountering an error involving a missing form, a francophone public servant was presented with an error message so badly translated that it was unintelligible. The government unequivocally states that developing a solution in-house would have been too risky, but public servants and the government are in the best position to identify organizations and needs, especially for systems like these. They need internal expertise to develop them.”
“The government is dependent on them. I should add that government programs always require adjustments and customization. We saw these kinds of problems with the Phoenix pay system: IBM was surprised that it had to provide a French version of the software, since the government is required to be bilingual because there are two official languages. The same thing happened with Cúram. According to the officials' report, the translations were not done properly. We know that Canada has more than just one jurisdiction. This may be news to Deloitte and company, but in Quebec, we speak French. In Quebec, we also have our own tax return. We have the Public Curator and we have benefits from the Commission des normes, de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité du travail, or CNESST.”
“There is also the $3.5 billion that will go to private firms. Right now, nearly $1 billion has already been allocated to the program. The Cúram program was previously deployed in Ontario and led to huge problems. Who knew about the issues with Cúram? The member for Markham—Stouffville was well aware of what Ontario went through. She is well aware of the report from the Auditor General of Ontario. She was an Ontario MPP at the time. The findings are damning: IBM missed data conversion deadlines, and the data contained errors. IBM did not provide adequate expertise. The Ontario ministry relied on the IBM project manager to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the Cúram consultants. In short, these findings raise questions about the data. When the government uses consultants from private firms, it risks becoming dependent on them.”
“In fact, the civil servant who provided the technical briefing was quoted in in La Presse as saying, “As for future costs, five or six years from now when the program is completed, I don’t have any specific figures.” He confirmed that there would be recurring costs to run the program. (1010) According to experts consulted by La Presse, these costs, which include software licences, training, hosting and adjustments, should account for between 10% and 15% of the initial development costs. They will be at least $600 million per year for this program, which is insane. Why are these costs not known? Why is this not part of the contract analysis? Why is the person in charge of this program unable to answer questions about that? This clearly shows that the government does not have the expertise needed to evaluate these IT contracts.”
“It never questioned whether this amount would cover every phase of the benefits delivery modernization program. Even the Clerk of the Privy Council mentioned this to then-prime minister Justin Trudeau in a memo dated May 27, 2022. She wrote that there were concerns about Employment and Social Development Canada’s ability to deliver the program on time and on budget, and that was before the Auditor General’s report on the project was tabled in 2023. When journalists questioned officials last week as to why there were nearly $5 billion in cost overruns, they did not receive an answer. What is even more concerning is that no one knows the system’s operating costs.”
“The Prime Minister and the departments justified the ballooning costs by saying that the benefits delivery modernization program was only delayed for old age security. However, briefing notes, question period notes and ministerial transition books consistently mention a figure of $2.3 billion to complete the benefit delivery modernization program. At no point does any document say otherwise. The proof is that a note dated September 20, 2023, prepared for the member for Burnaby North—Seymour , the then minister of citizens' services, clearly states: “The December 2020 Budget of $2.2B included estimated costs for OAS, EI and CPP on the Benefits Delivery Modernization (BDM) Programme”. The government knew that the estimated budget was $2.2 billion in December 2020.”
“They went on to say that cost overruns often happen with big IT projects. This means that some officials gave the department estimates they knew to be inaccurate. Ministers knew that, but they decided to move forward anyway. This is extremely troubling for me. It means that Canada's public service does not have the necessary expertise to evaluate IT contracts. It cannot say whether IT consultants are telling them the truth or not, which means that expertise is now in the hands of the private sector, and the private sector has no compunction about putting both hands in the cookie jar. Officials also said they were surprised to learn that it would cost money to dismantle the system that they have to replace. Why was this analysis not done before an estimate was submitted? Analyzing the cost of a transformation is a no-brainer.”
“The Prime Minister made the same type of claim when answering a question that I asked him in the House. He said that the Bloc Québécois had not attended a technical briefing, when that briefing was actually scheduled for the next day. The Bloc Québécois did its homework. We take our work seriously. For me, the answers that senior officials gave to the media at a technical briefing last week clearly demonstrate the importance of calling an independent public inquiry. We need to put politics aside and have a judge examine this issue. First, let me reiterate one critical point: The estimates were not reliable, and the department knew that. The official quoted in La Presse stated that there were no precise estimates and that the government knew the costs were going to balloon.”
“I will begin my speech by saying something that I think all my colleagues in the House will agree with. The Bloc Québécois knows that that the outdated computer systems had to be replaced. No one is denying that. We agree with modernizing our IT systems. The government keeps claiming that we want to hang onto the old systems that date back to the early 1960s, but that is false. We are in favour of modernizing our IT systems. What we are speaking out against today is the skyrocketing costs associated with IT contracts and the government's lack of expertise in this area. That is why we are calling for an independent public inquiry on the management of IT contracts, and the Quebec National Assembly has also adopted a unanimous motion to that effect.”
“Motion for concurrence Mr. Speaker, I move that the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, presented on Monday, March 23, be concurred in. First, I want to say that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Richmond—Arthabaska , whose co-operation on this issue has been invaluable. The motion we are debating is as follows: That the committee report to the House to request that the government establish a public and independent inquiry into cost overruns on IT contracts, including the Phoenix pay system, ArriveCAN and Benefits Delivery Modernization programme. First, I want to reiterate my support for the many seniors in need who do not have access to their benefits because of the problems with the Cúram software.”
“Phoenix went from costing $309 million to over $5 billion, and it is already on the way out. It is headed for the trash heap and being replaced by Phoenix 2.0: Dayforce. This pay system was expected to cost a few million dollars, but the price tag has since climbed to $4.2 billion, not including the cost of transitioning to the new system. A year ago, the contract was supposed to cost $350 million; today, the amount is about $560 million. The question remains: When can we expect an independent public inquiry? Everything is exploding.”
“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the parliamentary secretary for her tone of voice. It makes a refreshing change from a lot of ministers, including the Prime Minister . Obviously, we forgot to mention during this debate that errors have occurred in 85,000 cases, that some seniors have not received their benefits on time, and that many people are still waiting a year later. That is irresponsible on the part of this government. It has assured us that some cases have been resolved but that 69,000 cases are outstanding. The problems persist, and people are suffering. Let us talk about the context surrounding IT contracts. This is not the first case of its kind. Allow me to remind the House that the ArriveCAN contract started out costing $80,000 but climbed to $60 million.”
“It stated that the ministry said it had relied on the IBM project manager to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of Cúram consultants' work, that the consultants were overseen by an IBM consultant, and that Cúram consultants worked inefficiently before the launch. The same mistakes are being repeated. My question is: When will there be an independent public inquiry? We are looking at a figure of $6.6 billion, and we know it is going to keep going up.”
“This contradicts the idea that the government did not know the figures, but an assessment was conducted. The Auditor General's report later on yielded new figures in 2022. At that point, the estimate was more in the range of $3 billion to $4 billion. The Auditor General's report was particularly noteworthy because it also indicated that the government knew the Cúram program was problematic, given that there were precedents, notably in Ontario. The Ontario government had used this platform for its Social Assistance Management System software in 2009. This project was the subject of an audit carried out by the Auditor General of Ontario in 2015. Her report stated that IBM had missed deadlines for converting the data while also introducing errors and that IBM had not provided adequate expertise.”