Evidence of meeting #42 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was infrastructure.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
If I understand correctly, you can tell some departments to change the way they present their information to make sure that everything is consistent.
4:15 p.m.
Secretary of the Treasury Board of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
Yes. The projects were designed quickly and we wanted people to focus on delivering the services, for services themselves and their implementation. Therefore, we had to coordinate communication activities. As my colleague Mr. Kennedy told you, I believe, the guide on the presentation of the material, among other things, was designed to make the communication material available more quickly. Indeed, given the economic situation, it was in our interest of focus our efforts on the implementation of the projects and to make sure that the information was clearly communicated to everyone.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Thank you very much. I would now like to talk about the life cycle of the projects.
In Quebec, we work closely with the Government of Quebec. When a municipality or a promoter applies for funding, it does so with the Government of Quebec. Could you explain how the process unfolds after that?
4:20 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
It would be my pleasure to do so.
There are two ways to submit projects in Quebec. First, as I mentioned, you can do so under the PRECO program, which involves putting in new waterlines in municipalities. This is a $700 million program, for which we assume half the costs and Quebec the other half.
The applications are sent to the Government of Quebec, which reviews them and approves the projects. Then, it sends the paperwork to the federal government, which accepts or rejects them. Quebec then manages the program, in Quebec. It signs agreements with the municipalities, provides the necessary funding for the projects and conducts follow-up with the municipalities.
Further, there is the Stimulus Fund. Quebec itself can propose projects. There are basically three categories: transportation projects, which basically involve infrastructure in Quebec, such as highways, cultural projects, and municipal projects which do not involve water treatment.
Quebec provides the application forms. As I indicated, they are available online and are only one page long. The federal government then quickly reviews the applications. If the federal and Quebec governments support a project, it becomes part of the agreement between the federal government and Quebec. The province of Quebec is responsible for the implementation of these projects.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
To whom do the promoters or municipalities send their first invoices, when a project has been underway for 30 days and when the foundations have been laid? Do they send them to the Government of Quebec, which in turn sends them to Ottawa? Do they send them to the two levels of government? What is the process?
4:20 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
The municipalities send their invoices to the Government of Quebec, which reviews them. Within the framework of the Stimulus Fund, Quebec and the other provinces make progress reports within a system that is part of the program. They provide updates, indicate how much money has been spent and how much funding has been requested from the federal government. Over 95% of projects are conducted under agreements with the provinces. Most of the funding is given to the provinces by the federal government.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Fine. So the federal government sends the money to the province, and the province in turn sends it to the promoters and municipalities. Do they have to produce a report every 30 days if a project lasts between six and eight months, or do they only have to produce one two or three times?
4:20 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
Yes, that's right.
We had the first round of claims in September. Because it was a new program, a new system, when people did their reports and claims, it took some back and forth. We would say that they might have made a mistake here, or they would have the project starting date but would have the tender after that date. We've been going through that. It's understandable with a new program and a new system.
We've worked very closely with all the provinces and territories to process that first report that was made in September. We now have the second round coming in just now, and we'll process that. Once we have a clean report and claim, we'll process the funds to the province within 30 days.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
November 24th, 2009 / 4:25 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you, Chair, and thank you, guests, for being here.
I guess the reason you're here, and not the Parliamentary Budget Officer, who we expected to be here, is that he's now said that he's been given a bunch more information that he has to process and digest before he can bring back any meaningful report to our committee.
I want to talk a bit about the way the Parliamentary Budget Officer is getting the information about the infrastructure. As the deputy minister for infrastructure, has anybody ever spoken to you from cabinet or the government about how and when you would release information to the budget officer and what form it might take?
4:25 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
No, but I would like this opportunity to explain what the Parliamentary Budget Officer has received and why he received what he received at the time we gave it to him.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
I'd like to hear that too. But in the context of answering, can you explain who thought it would be a good idea, when he asked for information, to give him 4,700 loose pages, when it was available electronically? I'd like you to explain why you would have thought that would be helpful and not mischief.
4:25 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
Madam Chairman, the Parliamentary Budget Officer asked for data on 3,000 projects. If you assume that each project is one page, that adds up to 3,000 pages. It turned out that it was more than that. So we have provided him with the paper copy, on the understanding that we treat him the same way we've been directed for the parliamentary returns we get from Parliament. We provide written copies of this documentation to Parliament. When the Parliamentary Budget Officer asked us, we provided a paper copy.
Then we were told by the budget officer that he wanted the electronic documents. Our staff worked for three days--I'm not exactly sure I can explain the electronic arrangement--to put the information into CD format, and we delivered it to him within three days. It took us three days to put the documentation on CD.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
4:25 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
Yes. It depends. We work in the language of work.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
4:25 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
The information we received, Madam Chairman, was application data. We inputted the application data in the language that it came in. If the applicants, the province, provide the data in English, it is entered into the database in English. If it is provided in French, it is entered into the database in French. We work in both languages.
4:25 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
The reason I ask is that getting the electronic copy in one language only caused us a great deal of inconvenience. The result was that none of us could in fact look at it. We couldn't circulate it. It did us no good at all. It has been part of the frustration of this committee that we can't seem to get the information we want when we want it.
I understand that if you're saying it's entered into the database in the language in which you receive it, then that document, I guess, can be in either language, but it's not translated. Every piece is not in both languages. I understand that.
I have to move on because I'm--
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Yasmin Ratansi
I'm not taking your time.
I would like Madame Baltacioglu to explain to us what translation would cost--and I'm not taking your time at all. If she can explain that, then you can continue with your line of questioning. That way, we have cleared the air on it.
4:25 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
The committee clerk contacted us after we provided the documents. And the honourable member is correct, some are in French and some are in English, because that is the language in which they were received. The clerk asked us whether we could translate this and what the costs would be. We contacted Public Works and Government Services and we have an estimate of $230,000 and it would take two to three months to translate 500,000 words. These are the numbers we were given. We transmitted this information to the committee clerk, but we haven't heard back from him as to whether the committee actually would like us to translate this documentation.
We looked at more efficient ways of doing it, such as dividing up the pieces and contracting them all at once, but then we would have to make sure there's consistency in language. So that's what we have done, and we're awaiting direction from the committee. Should the committee ask us to translate it, we would be tendering this contract of a quarter of a million dollars.
Thank you.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Okay, thank you.
I doubt we'll ask you to do that. It sounds crazy.
I notice that a lot of the infrastructure.... Well, I think I know why there's a lot more road infrastructure. There's a kind of Huey Long mentality: the more projects you have, the more signs you can put up, and filling potholes is a very popular thing to do.
I see that the province of Ontario has a lot of projects. I know the dollar figure is on a per capita basis. But there are a lot of small projects--1,721 projects in total. And I understand that, because you get to put a sign up on each one. I think that's the reasoning.
My question, though, is in terms of the federal contribution and the provincial contribution. In most provinces they're almost equal, almost exactly the same. In Ontario, the federal contribution is $200 million higher than the provincial contribution. I'm going to leave that as a question that I hope you can answer at the end of my comments.
My last question is this. From a communications point of view, is there any consideration of contracting out a new wordmark for the Government of Canada in terms of the federal identification? I ask this because the wordmark that we're all used to has been compromised to the extent that people don't see a great nation when they see that wordmark now. They see the sponsorship scandal. They see Chuck Guité. They see Buryl Wiseman. They see all these sleazy characters ruining the good name of our country. Is it part of the plan to design a new wordmark for Canada as the main label, the main logo, for the country?
Those two questions probably use up my time.
4:30 p.m.
Secretary of the Treasury Board of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
Perhaps I can answer the second question.
There is no intent to redo or rethink the Canada wordmark. The Canada brand is known around the world.
Yes, there were some incidents in the sponsorship area, but by and large the Government of Canada and the Canada brand is a very solid brand. The wordmark is the name “Canada”, with a flag on top. It's very hard to rebrand a country by changing the name of the country and the flag. So I would say the wordmark is here to stay.