Government Operations Committee on Nov. 19th, 2009

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Great.

In terms of polls and polls that PCO conducts from time to time, when we hear of “polls”, I think as politicians often we reference them as the types of polls that we're engaged in—the ones that find out whether people support a certain initiative. My understanding, and maybe you can elaborate, is that much of the polling that different departments and PCO would engage in is actually to find out a level of awareness of services that governments are providing, in terms of the uptake of certain programs.

Can you confirm or explain a little what type of polling would be taking place as it relates to people understanding the services available to them as Canadian citizens?

[Simon Kennedy]

Yes. Thanks for the question.

Mr. Chair, the polling and other kinds of survey work that are done would be aimed entirely at gauging awareness levels of programs and services and that kind of thing, or at trying to ensure that the communication that's taking place with Canadians is useful. For example, there has been some very limited focus testing of the website, and the questions asked are: “Do you find it useful?”; “Is it easy to navigate?”—those sorts of things. It's either about the utility of the products the citizens are using, or it's about things such as awareness of programs and services.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Concerning PCO funding, we understand that Minister of State for Democratic Reform is a new position, and therefore it falls under the supplementary estimates. I'm wondering, is it five ministers or ministers of state who are funded through PCO?

[Marilyn MacPherson]

That's correct—in addition to the Prime Minister.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Thank you.

From the Bloc québécois, we have Ms. Bourgeois for five minutes.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Kennedy, you have expertise; we, however, do not. It is very difficult, especially for someone who, like me, is visual, to understand how, exactly, departments' expenditures under Canada's Economic Action Plan are different from PCO's expenditures.

Perhaps you have already been asked the question. The communication plan you produced in the Privy Council Office has to be accompanied by an action plan, a plan. Could you table before this Committee the action plan and its objectives, expected results and performance indicators? We want something detailed so that we can track you. And that document must certainly contain expenditure breakdowns that we could get.

You are telling us that your $3.9 million in expenditures includes $1.2 million in miscellaneous expenditures for other activities. What are those expenditures exactly? We have to be able to track you. I doubt that you are here to hide anything from us. It's just that I want to understand, but we have no document, nothing.

Today we received a document which shows that the Treasury Board Secretariat of Canada's Web site lists Treasury Board approvals of funding for the government's advertising plan. According to that document, the Canada Revenue Agency has allocated $7 million for a campaign on the Economic Action Plan – home initiatives. Then, the Department of Finance has allocated $10 million for a campaign on the Economic Action Plan and $2 million for the Economic Action Plan Web site. The Department of Human Resources and Skills Development has allocated $7 million for the Economic Action Plan. The Office of Infrastructure of Canada has allocated $8 million for the Economic Action Plan. And we have just been asked for another $4 million almost because a committee has to coordinate it all. Yet there is no breakdown of the expenditures.

Can you see why we are skeptical? We are entitled to wonder. I therefore ask you if it is possible to table all of that before the Committee and even come back and explain. That would be greatly appreciated.

[Simon Kennedy]

Thank you for the question.

We have put together a small table regarding the $3.9 million we are discussing today which shows where we are spending the money. I can give you that document if it might help.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

But that is not what I am asking you for.

[Simon Kennedy]

Of course, we had to prepare some information on these matters to submit to the government.

As Mrs. MacPherson explained, in order to get the money, it was necessary to talk to Treasury Board officials and convince them that there was a need for the money. There is the material which explains that the money was needed in order to manage the process, but there is no big written plan that we refer to every day. It's not like that; the departments are responsible for the activities. Some activities are already under way. To coordinate those activities, they have to have money to hire other employees and so on, because...

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

But it's your plan, Mr. Kennedy, that I want to get. I want to know why you are asking us for $4 million. You have to have a plan. When I plan my budget, I have reasons...

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

Excuse me...

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

...for putting money here or there. That is what I am asking you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and excuse me.

[Simon Kennedy]

Mr. Chair, I have the numbers here. I can hand them out to the Committee. They are here.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

That will do.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Rob Anders]

That was an interesting exchange.

Now we're going to move to the Conservative party for five minutes. Mr. Holder.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you very much, guests. We're an interesting committee because we ask for lots of paper, and while I think we are entitled to a great need to know, I wish I had as much time to read as the quantity we ask for. Wisdom will prevail in its own way, though, I'm sure.

I have a couple of questions, if I could.

In clarification of your first request, which has to do with additional costs to support ministers' offices, you indicate in your report, Madame MacPherson, that PCO is requesting funding for five ministers' offices, including the newly created Office of the Minister of State for Democratic Reform. It couldn't absorb all the cost within the existing appropriations. Why not? Did it become a function of timing? What exactly was it that made this have to come in as part of the estimates?

[Marilyn MacPherson]

I can tell you, from a historical point of view, that PCO has had lapses—which is unspent money from the appropriation—for a number of years. More recently, that lapse has been decreasing. In 2007, we put in place a strategic HR plan, because one of the reasons we were lapsing money is that we were not staffing as quickly as we should have been, which obviously is not good for public service renewal.

There were a number of changes to the amounts of money allocated to ministers' budgets, and we have been absorbing them with those lapsed funds. It became clear in the middle of last year, as we were looking at our mid-year review, that we were not going to be able to absorb those costs going forward, and certainly not for another new minister on top of that. For Minister Fletcher, I think it's almost $1 million, so it just became a point in time where we were concerned that we would no longer be able to manage the funding of those ministers' offices within our allocated funds.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

You've come to us with requests in eight different items and the various amounts. Do you ever find that you don't spend it all, and if so, do we get it back? I know that sounds odd, but what's the process? Presumably estimates are what they are, and there is some potential that you might come under budget from your request.

[Marilyn MacPherson]

Yes.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

So what happens there?

[Marilyn MacPherson]

That's certainly a possibility. What happens is that the money lapses.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Right.

[Marilyn MacPherson]

We have a policy in place in the public service where we are allowed to carry forward a certain amount. In Privy Council last year, we were allowed to carry forward from our unspent funds a little over $5 million. So we can take that much. Anything above and beyond that is gone.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

So in a sense, it's like a member of Parliament's budget. There's a certain modest amount that we're allowed to carry over actually to another term.