Concerns Over the SAAQclic Platform Development
The SAAQclic platform’s development has garnered significant scrutiny, particularly regarding the motives of the consortium of firms involved. Former financial controller Jérôme Verreault expressed concerns about the intentions of the alliance which includes suppliers LGS, IBM, and SAP, stating that they appeared to be excessively eager to benefit financially from their engagement with the Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ).
Verreault shared these observations during his testimony before the Gallant Commission, a body that is investigating the impediments faced during the SAAQ’s digital transformation efforts.
Inadequate Documentation and Financial Discrepancies
Through documents from 2018 and 2019, Verreault identified troubling gaps in documentation concerning the alliance’s invoicing practices. He pointed out that there were significant irregularities which, in his opinion, illustrated the consortium’s significant desire for financial compensation. A key concern was the non-compliance with a contractual clause that mandated a 10 percent withholding on fees for external firms, which the consortium neglected to apply in their invoices.
According to Verreault, this withholding clause was a safeguard, allowing the SAAQ to retain fees in case the work was subpar, ensuring a measure of accountability among the contractors. He emphasized that the failure to adhere to this contractual stipulation raised red flags over the consortium’s financial practices.
Questionable Contract Provisions
Another alarming contractual stipulation pertained to the alliance’s obligation to provide external resources for troubleshooting during both testing and deployment phases. This clause specified a fee of $100 for each “availability window.” Verreault underscored that the consortium’s responsibility extended to delivering a functioning solution, meaning they should not impose additional charges when issues arose.
He likened this scenario to hiring a plumber who fails at a job but still charges for a second visit—an analogy that highlighted his concerns about unfair billing practices. Verreault, however, pointed out that no documentation existed to support or authorize this additional fee structure either from the alliance or the SAAQ.
He criticized the SAAQ for not conducting thorough verifications to ensure billings were in line with the terms of the contract, further allowing for potential exploitation.
Alarming Rate Hikes
Alarmingly, a former internal auditor revealed that hourly rates for some roles rose dramatically, escalating from $82 to $350—an increase that Verreault indicated could lead to an annual additional cost of around $14 million for 26 consultants involved. He described the reasons for such a steep increase as “obscure,” given that the tasks and expertise required remained largely unchanged.
Verreault argued that any assertions made by SAAQ management regarding the project occurring at no additional cost were misleading, as the financial implications of the risk-sharing clause were evident.
Verreault made a poignant remark regarding the perception of this clause, stating, “The risk-sharing clause wasn’t Voldemort. It was bandied about. It was practically written on the walls at the Société de l’assurance automobile.” This underscores the transparent concerns surrounding the financial management of the contract and how it has shaped the relationship between the SAAQ and the consortium.
The CASC Project and Its Challenges
The SAAQ’s technological modernization project, known as CASA, has been projected to incur costs of at least $1.1 billion by the year 2027, considerably exceeding initial estimates by about $500 million, as reported by the Auditor General. Verreault was present during the inception of the CASA project’s first phase, which primarily aimed at overhauling the SAAQ’s financial and human resources management systems.
Upon reflecting on the initial deliverables of the CASA project, Verreault described the experience as a “catastrophe.” He noted a multitude of problems that arose, contributing to his frustration. His sentiments pointed toward a deteriorating relationship with his colleagues, as he did not hold back in expressing his dissatisfaction, often referring to the situation as a “damned mess.”
Ultimately, Verreault departed from the Crown corporation a few months after the project launched, primarily due to a perceived lack of respect for his input from senior management.
Perceptions of Favoritism and the Tendering Process
During the proceedings, Nicolas Vincent, an SAAQ executive, provided insight into the tendering process that led to the selection of the consortium in 2017. He served as the compliance coordinator for advisory committees that were tasked with guiding the selection committee regarding the submissions they received.
Vincent’s testimony revealed concerns about perceived favoritism among certain committee members and an inclination toward one particular alliance at a time when multiple consortia were still being considered. He indicated that there was a distinct perception that the committee members preparing the tender had a bias towards an SAP solution.
This perception was underscored by previous projects using similar solutions, which involved some external consultants with known associations to key SAAQ officials, thereby raising questions about the impartiality of the selection process.
Continued Investigations and Confidentiality Protocols
Earlier in the proceedings, IT specialist Vincent Poirier, who previously served as an auditor at the SAAQ, addressed an information security audit report he authored in June 2023. However, the specifics of his findings remain under a publication ban for several days, primarily to protect sensitive information related to cybersecurity and data protection architecture.
The SAAQ has stated that this confidentiality measure is crucial to safeguard the security and privacy of individuals in Quebec, ensuring that potentially harmful information does not enter the public domain.
This situation highlights the complex interplay between accountability, financial management, and technological advancement within public institutions, underscoring the necessity for rigorous oversight in large-scale projects that involve significant taxpayer funding.
