Government Operations Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2009

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

I want to get back to the economic action plan. There's a figure that's been thrown out there that to date $34 million has been spent on the plan.

Is that a realistic figure? Is that what's been spent to date, to the best of your knowledge?

[Simon Kennedy]

We could certainly get back to the committee. I have a piece of paper; unfortunately it's only in one official language at the moment. But this is the breakdown: finance spending on the economic action plan—this was for two phases of work in June and September-October of this year—$12 million; CRA, for the home renovation tax credit, $7 million; infrastructure, for one campaign in September and October, $8 million; and there are plans under way that will be coming out soon for HRSDC for work-sharing and so on, for $7 million.

That's a total of $34 million. It's $34 million and so many cents, but that's a pretty firm number in terms of advertising. It's $34 million, with that breakdown.

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

Do you anticipate spending more?

[Simon Kennedy]

My colleague has noted as well, just for clarity, that signage is in departmental budgets, but for the advertising proper--television, radio, and so on--that's $34 million. There will be some additional spending this year. I believe it's in the order--

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

I'm sorry, but take me back to the $34 million. Does that include the cost of the signage as well?

[Simon Kennedy]

No. This is just for advertising, not signage. Signage would be in departmental program budgets.

[Wayne Wouters]

That would be over and above that.

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

Do you have the figure for that?

[Simon Kennedy]

Not for signage, ma'am, no.

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

Can you get that for us?

[Michelle d'Auray]

That would take a fair amount of time.

I think we can provide the information on the advertising within two weeks. With regard to the signage, that really is within each departmental budget. It is also dependent, if I may, on the number of initiatives and activities. It would be an iterative “constant-evolution” number, if I can put it that way.

So I think where we could do it is on the advertising; and I think it would be a....

[Wayne Wouters]

I think it would be a massive undertaking, Madam Chair.

[Michelle d'Auray]

Yes.

[Wayne Wouters]

The reason is that normally what happens here is that if it's under departmental budgets, so the funding is allocated to the departments, the departments will then allocate that down to program functions--

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

I'm sorry, and I appreciate what you're saying, but I--

[Wayne Wouters]

It would be out in the regions. The regional manager in the west would have responsibility, when he's managing a project, to put up the sign, so it would be very difficult to pull that information.

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

I guess it goes back to accountability and transparency and wanting to get a handle on just how much money is being spent, whether it's on signage or some other element of the economic action plan. Certainly someone has a handle on how much money is being spent on signage.

[Wayne Wouters]

Madam Chair, we have a handle on how much is being spent on the economic action plan on each of the programs in the economic action plan. That's the oversight control function, that so much money has been approved for this particular project. Within that project budget will be a number of operating costs related to the project, including signage. Therefore, in order to get that estimate for each program, each area, we'd have to go back to all the departments, into the system.

It can be done, but it's a huge exercise.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

A short question, Ms. Foote; I’m a little curious about that, so go ahead.

[Judy Foote, Liberal, Random—Burin—St. George's, NL]

The next question, then, is do you anticipate spending more money on the economic action plan? We talked about the $34 million, plus the money that's being spent for signage.

Is there somewhere in your strategy or your plan a dollar figure that you have for rolling out the economic action plan?

[Simon Kennedy]

Madam Chair, there's no specific overall dollar figure.

There are two things here. One is with regard to additional spending. There is a plan to do some additional spending on advertising this fiscal year. I don't have the specific amount available. It's relatively small in terms of the overall spend.

In terms of the way in which the advertising has been done, essentially what was done this year.... The typical advertising budget for the government would be spread across five or six departments. This year basically all of the advertising campaigns of the relevant departments have been branded under the economic action plan, because all of the measures being undertaken by departments by and large are for the economic action plan.

So the actual advertising spending this year is really not out of line with historical norms. It's just that it's all being done under the rubric of the economic action plan as opposed to separate campaigns for different initiatives.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

I have to end with a question from Mr. Anders.

[Rob Anders, Conservative, Calgary West, AB]

You're going to love it. I know you will.

Thank you.

I heard some, I think, interesting statements from my Liberal colleague across the way, Ms. Martha Hall Findlay. She talked about, for example, posing with cheques and whether or not that type of thing can confer any benefit for an entity other than the government, in this case the federal government. I think it's an interesting question.

When I look at this photo...and I know that it's slightly pixilated, and I know that you're doing it from a distance, but I hope that people can help me with regard to this. Committee members may be able to help later on in terms of determining what's going on here.

In the photo there's a young lady. I can't make out who she is because I don't think I've seen her around the committee or the environs of Parliament Hill very much. There's a fellow in the background with a beard, playing a bagpipe, and I don't know who he is. But a couple of these other characters here, I think I've seen, and I think maybe committee members might have seen as well. And, for all I know, our witnesses may be able to help me.

The fellow who seems to be holding a cheque here, I think I've seen him quite a bit, as a matter of fact. I think he's probably a member of Parliament. If I look very closely I think he's actually the former chair of this committee, a Mr. Derek Lee, with the Liberal Party of Canada.

If I look next to him, I see another gentleman who looks familiar too. I don't think I've seen him on the committee, but it appears to be John Cannis, who's also a Liberal member of Parliament.

Then just here, on the very edge of the photograph, if I look closely, I would bet money that this is John McKay, who's also a Liberal member of Parliament.

I notice we have one, two, three Liberal members of Parliament in this particular photograph and they're all clapping and looking rather happy about handing out of this particular cheque. Now some might say that because they're all Liberals and they're handing out a cheque, that would confer a benefit on the Liberal Party of Canada.

I wonder, when Ms. Hall Findlay says something like that, whether or not she would agree that three Liberal members of Parliament holding a cheque is conferring a benefit on the Liberal Party of Canada as a cheque-giver.

I wonder if our witnesses have any thoughts on that.

[Wayne Wouters]

No, not really.

[Michelle d'Auray]

No.