Government Operations Committee on Feb. 6th, 2007

[Vic Toews]

Perhaps you would want to call the minister responsible for the contract to ask how that was done.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

We talked about ministerial responsibility. As Treasury Board—

[Vic Toews]

That's right. Well, let me finish now.

I'm prepared to answer questions in respect of my responsibilities in ensuring that there are appropriate Treasury Board rules in place, that appropriate officials are accountable, and that things are done in accordance with that. I don't have all the facts about every contract.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Are you willing to provide us with the facts?

[Vic Toews]

You are asking me what the facts of that particular contract are. I don't have all the facts. If you want the facts, bring the minister here. Let him answer. What I am prepared to say is that my responsibility in Treasury Board is to ensure that there is accountability, that there is transparency, and that the business of the government gets done in an effective and efficient manner. So there's all kinds of weighing that goes into dealing with those types of principles.

Now, if you think the Minister of National Defence has done anything inappropriate, please bring that evidence forward, or bring him here.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

All I'm asking is for you to bring that information forward.

[Vic Toews]

I'm suggesting that you go right to the horse's mouth and have the minister here, and he can explain exactly what he has done. I'm not going to get into any kind of conjecture in that respect. I've heard the minister explain it in the House in the same way that you have. I'm satisfied on the basis of what I have heard. But if you think there is any basis on which to question that, please bring the minister here and have him answer the questions.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Do you have the documentation around this particular procurement available in your offices?

[Vic Toews]

I can tell you how procurements generally are done. You've indicated, for example, that this was sole-source. Even that's a matter of debate. As I understand it, it was one of what we call ACANs, so the criteria as to what was required were put out there publicly: who else can meet these criteria?

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

How were those criteria set? That's the question.

[Vic Toews]

I think you would have to go to the military to ask that particular question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you very much.

By the way, we will have the Minister of Public Works here on February 15. That is also a question that he should be able to answer, because he or she does play a role in the actual contracting out. It could be a he or a she. That's why I did—

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

At the moment it's a he.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Just in case, you know, having been there.

I just wanted you to know that he is coming on the 15th for sure now. He can answer with more in-depth responses as to the actual process that occurred.

[Vic Toews]

I think that would be very helpful.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Also, I think the defence committee is studying this exact contract.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

That's right.

Monsieur Poilievre, I have decided to let you speak this time, instead of Mr. Moore.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Aren't you kind and generous? I don't know if Mr. Moore will forgive you, though.

My question for the minister is, are you aware of the number of occasions on which an Auditor General's report was leaked by the previous government?

[Vic Toews]

I think there have been ten leaks of the report since about 2000.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

That's right, so seven of them happened under the previous Liberal government. So when my colleague uses the term “unprecedented”, he uses it with a great deal of agility. That's the first thing to point out.

Secondly, Minister, I appreciate that the instant you became minister responsible for the Treasury Board, you hit the ground sprinting on implementing the Federal Accountability Act. I note with some interest that a lot of the people who did everything in their power to block the Federal Accountability Act and attack it as going too far are now in a mad rush to see it implemented immediately. I further note that if they had allowed it to pass through the Senate without the extraordinary delay it experienced there, we would be much further along toward complete implementation. So I want to congratulate you for taking up the torch and working as hard as you have been to implement that.

I guess my question for you is, how can we as parliamentarians assist in the implementation of the Federal Accountability Act?

[Vic Toews]

There are a number of things. As parliamentarians, you can provide us with ongoing advice.

I do note, just before I answer that question, that when you're working in a line department, for example, that will be affected by an act's coming in, you don't want to spend too much money and time on any particular thing if in fact that act is going to be defeated. There was never any guarantee that the act was going to be passed. So managers are put in a very difficult position.

How much money and time do we invest in something that may never come to fruition? That was one of the problems we faced as ministers in a line department. For example, when we implemented the Director of Public Prosecutions position, we were able to bring that into effect virtually immediately upon the coming into force of the act, but that's not without its risks. I could see there being the criticism that after having done all that work and expended the money, suddenly the act wasn't coming forward, and you had expended money. So it was frustrating that the act was held up, I think most of us would admit, for an unduly long period of time in the Senate.

Now that the act is, in great part, in force, one of the things that parliamentarians must consider is how you can help the parliamentary vetting process. I think the act gives unprecedented control to parliamentarians in terms of the appointment process for some of these individuals. The appointments requiring parliamentary oversight include those of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner as an officer of Parliament, the Commissioner of Lobbying as an agent of Parliament, the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner as an agent of Parliament, and the Director of Public Prosecutions. At the present time we have a temporary person in place for the latter, and there will be a permanent one in place.

Again, the reviewing of all of these individuals and that process requires, I think, if not camaraderie, at least a willingness to work together to ensure that the best individuals are put in place.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I think you've been very responsible, as was the previous minister, in recognizing that you cannot begin to implement legislation that is not passed. If the law does not exist, it is not right for a department to start implementing it prior to its existence and incurring costs in the process. So I think you've been very responsible in waiting for the passage of the bill. Frankly, once again, I lament the fact that we could not have had it passed more quickly.

There was a period of time when I believed the Liberal Senate would literally never pass the bill--and I mean that literally. I did not think they were going to pass it at all. If that had happened, and our government had gone ahead and spent a whole lot of resources on implementing it, then we would have been accused of spending implementation dollars on a bill that never came to fruition.

[Vic Toews]

More importantly, as important as the money is, it can also be seen as almost a contempt of Parliament to presume that Parliament will do something. In a minority situation, that's a very difficult thing to do. I think you're right.

I have to say that in discussing this matter with departmental officials, I've been very impressed with the timely manner in which they're moving. I've reviewed the entire process. No firm schedule has been set, but I'm satisfied that in each and every area they're moving in a timely fashion and there are no significant impediments to that occurring.

Now, those might develop--I might be unaware of them, and the department might be unaware of them--but I'm very satisfied with how the department is moving.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

That schedule for implementation was approved by all parties sitting around the table when they finalized the passage of the Accountability Act. There are no surprises here. The dates of coming into force were all considered in the legislation, and all parties voted on that. If there had been any great urgency amongst the opposition to see parts implemented more quickly, they very easily could have amended the legislation to see that happen, but they did not do that. So they passed a bill, and now we're implementing it, just as we were asked to do.

[Vic Toews]

There are practical issues beyond the control of the government as well when you're dealing with crown corporations. For example, the access to information that.... For example, I know that some of them are coming in April 1, and we assume that those are coming in. But the crown corporation has to hire the staff and has to put the process in place. I trust they will do that in a timely manner as well, but it is something that is beyond the control of the government. We are moving to ensure that what we need to do is being done, and then the crowns will have to move in a timely fashion.