Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would appreciate it if we spoke about the same thing. It seems to me that we are discussing two different levels.
Ms. Hassard, we can read on page 12 of your document that our performance management system must be strengthened. And on page 12, it also says that managers are the transmitters and creators of change in organizational culture. A little further on, on page 14, it states that you have also provided a more strict performance management plan for senior officials.
If I understand correctly you, ladies, have the task of managing officials and deputy ministers. You are not managing human resources, namely the employees who work under the orders of officials and deputy ministers. Consequently, you had some difficulty in answering us when my colleague asked you if you could reassure us that there will not be a certain number of people leaving for retirement and that it will all go smoothly. You tell us that it will all go smoothly because you are managing the officials.
Besides, Mr. Kevin Lynch, in his annual report for the exercise ending on March 31, 2009, explains to us the model for evaluating the performance of deputy ministers. I will present it for the benefit of my colleagues. It includes several elements. First of all, there are three broad categories of commitments: the results of policies and of programs—to verify if the deputy ministers have done their management work in compliance with the planned activities of the organization and with the broad objectives of the government—the results of management and the results of their leadership.
On the other hand, the evaluation process consists in four basic elements. First there is self-evaluation, which means that they give themselves a mark. Then, there are the evaluations of management. This is a qualitative and quantitative overview of performance. I imagine that they look at how much money there was to spend, how much money was spent and whether he spent $500,000 less, to see if he is a good manager. This is what I understand. Then there is the peer review. Other deputy ministers from other departments make the evaluation. Finally, there is feedback and if the results are satisfactory, there is a premium. You can imagine that officials, deputy ministers and assistant deputy ministers in 2005-2006, earned a 6.5% performance bonus. In 2006-2007, it was 9%, and in 2007-2008, 9.4%. Did the bonus increase in 2008-2009? It is quite possible.
We are studying the issue of the freezing of ministerial envelopes and of its impact on human resources and service to the population. That is right. I have nothing against these ladies, but they cannot give us any answers because they are managing the deputy ministers. However, we should have the 124 deputy ministers of the 124 ministries here before us.