Evidence of meeting #48 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was going.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
What kinds of grants and contributions are those? Give me an example. Are those the kinds of grants that ACOA or FedNor...? What kinds of grants and contributions are we talking about?
12:15 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
We're talking in terms of the knowledge infrastructure program. The modality that we used was to enter into contribution agreements with provincial governments. So for example $985 million was targeted to be delivered through provincial governments. That's an example, if you wish, of a contribution agreement.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
What Ms. Gillis is telling us is that you have no staff reductions beyond the issues around the economic action plan. Is that correct?
12:15 p.m.
Chief Financial Officer, Comptrollership and Administration Sector, Department of Industry
In the report on plans and priorities, the difference that was quoted in the report is related to the downsizing after the economic action plan, yes.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
12:15 p.m.
Chief Financial Officer, Comptrollership and Administration Sector, Department of Industry
Not in that particular document, no.
12:15 p.m.
Chief Financial Officer, Comptrollership and Administration Sector, Department of Industry
Not publicly, no. When we look at our staffing and our attrition, we plan accordingly. Right now on the amounts we have in our reference levels, the documents that were posted were prior to budget 2010 coming out, and the absorption and the expenditure restraint.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
I guess what you're telling us is that you have other numbers in terms of what you forecast in terms of reduction, but you're not going to give them to us because the government won't let you give them to us. Is that right?
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
The problem we have, of course, is we are trying to assess as a committee what the impact will be of the spending freeze, and what the impact will be on departments, their programs, and on Canadians, effectively. So it's awfully hard for us to do that if we can't get access to the real information, as you can imagine, I'm sure.
12:15 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
Two points. One, and I recall discussing this with another committee about six or seven months ago, is there is a time-sequencing challenge in regard to when the document you're referring to goes to print and the budget of the next year. There's a time gap there.
Secondly, just to put it back into context, as I said in my opening remarks, we're dealing with $3 million, and I think $4.5 million or $5 million for next year, on a base of about $400 million. Our overall Industry Canada O and M base is about $400 million. As I was trying to say, perhaps not as well as I could have, we do adjust as circumstances warrant. So sometimes we will spend more on consulting, as we did quite purposely during the auto negotiations, because I needed on-the-ground assistance very quickly. In other cases we will perhaps build up staff. If I talk about something that's happening currently, in real time, assuming the TMX and the London Stock Exchange proposal goes through, I will probably ramp up my legal staff bills.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
You also have the problem of course that the President of the Treasury Board identified your department as one of 13 subject to strategic review. That's in this current fiscal year, which requires you to reduce your program spending by 5%. What have you identified to date in terms of that 5%, and what are the low-performing programs you've identified so far in that respect?
12:20 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
It's for next year. Strategic review is done over a three-year timeframe. Our first year where these reductions would be implemented would be 2011-2012. Secondly, we don't know what the specific number or target is going to be because that will come out in the budget.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Just a minute now. Weren't you told and directed last year, on May 3, to find 5%? Isn't that the number you were given?
12:20 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
We were asked to present proposals to cabinet for ministers to consider. We have not been made aware of any decision to date by ministers. Those will come out in the budget, and those will relate to 2011-2012.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
You see, our problem here is that we have the government assuring us that it's going to balance the books by 2015. Meanwhile, we have the Parliamentary Budget Officer and the IMF telling us that's not the case, it's not going to meet it. Yet we can't get access to the kinds of figures involved in what the government expects to do over the next few years to get to that target. What it's saying to Canadians is don't worry your little heads, trust us. That's very worrisome.
12:20 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Industry
I was familiar with your concern, having watched Minister Day appear in front of your committee on Tuesday, somewhat as a warm-up to my appearance today.
12:20 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John McKay
Mr. Dicerni and Mr. Regan, my thanks to you both.
Madam Bourgeois, you have eight minutes.
February 10th, 2011 / 12:20 p.m.
Bloc
Robert Vincent Bloc Shefford, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Dicerni, Ms. Gillis, Ms. McDonald, I am pleased to welcome you to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates. We saw each other for years at the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology.
In your documents posted on the Internet, I was able to look at the 2010-2011 estimates and, indeed, the answers you provided earlier do in fact reflect your plan accurately. In 2010-2011, you had financial resources totalling $2.448 billion, but this amount will be reduced to $1.058 billion in 2012-2013. As far as human resources are concerned, you had been loaned 112 person-years which you will be losing, so you will be going from $5.279 billion to $5.176 billion. In my opinion, the problem lies in the fact that these cutbacks are far too big.
Let us look at the way spending will be broken down under the heading Canada's research and innovation capacity. I think that this is an important field for you. You actually talked about this a little bit further in the document. You state that these are cutting-edge organizations and that we need to be investing in these fields as they are effective in driving a strong Canadian economy, etc. These are the fields which enable our economy and our businesses to break through on the international scene. In addition, this field also generates well-paid jobs.
I would like you to explain something to me. According to the estimates for 2009-2010, total program activity expenditures were $1.745 billion. Included in these program activities is $1.281 billion for Canada's research and innovation capacity. This is apparently a very important field, it drives the economy, but we will be investing $170 million in this sector in 2012-2013. Think about it—this budget will be slashed by more than $1.11 billion.
