Government Operations Committee on Nov. 22nd, 2011

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Okay.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Thank you, Mathieu. That's the end of your time.

Next, for the Conservatives, we have Jacques Gourde.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here with us.

My question has to do with the renovation of the parliamentary precinct. In your presentation, you said that the work was going well, the deadlines were being met, and costs were even below the expected costs, the estimates. How do you manage to keep costs in line? There are always horror stories about renovations of this nature. I think you have showed discipline so far. Other public administrations would benefit from knowing what your secret is.

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau, Assistant Deputy Minister, Parliamentary Precinct Branch, Department of Public Works and Government Services]

Thank you for your question.

The process we have had in place since 2007 is based on a five-year planning system. We are still talking about a project that will go to 2025, when all the buildings will be ready, but we have divided that into five-year blocks. For each of those five-year blocks, we work together with our colleagues from the House of Commons, the Senate, the national capital region and others in order to determine what projects will be planned or carried out in those five years. That also enables us to make sure that costs will be reviewed and that we will be able to respect our estimates.

We have teams of architect-engineers working with us internally; they are our staff. We also have consulting teams that prepare plans and specifications. Those consultants are also responsible for preparing estimates; so we double-check everything. We have also hired a third party that reviews all the evaluations or estimates for the projects. So we have the main architect for the project, we have the internal teams and we have a third party that reviews the estimates afterwards.

I should also mention that we have some leeway for our projects, given that they are complex. We have the means to deal with contingencies, to deal with the unexpected. We might use that leeway or not, depending on the complexity of the project or the surprises that come up on site.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

When you say third party, do you mean independent experts in architecture that can give you advice on the process that is underway?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

Thank you for your question.

The consultants or specialists we hire are hired through a bidding process. They are private companies specialized in cost management. They are the ones we hire to validate what we and the firm of architects have done.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

What have they validated so far in the process? Is it going well? Do any reports show that there could be improvements?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

We are learning a lot. The buildings on Parliament Hill are a hundred years old. So we are learning things with each project. Based on the lessons learned, our planning can be better and so can the estimates for the next projects. Those people help us to be even more efficient in subsequent projects.

So we are constantly making strides in our way of doing the estimates. We have so far managed to show our efficiency.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

To conclude, we can see the work that is being done on our buildings. We see that the outside work is rather intricate. The masonry work requires exemplary skills on the part of those Canadians who are practically craftsmen. It is in part masonry and in part, art and culture. Do you have trouble finding workers specialized in this type of work?

[Pierre-Marc Mongeau]

We definitely require great expertise for the renovation projects. At the moment, there is enough staff, enough specialists to meet our needs. Clearly, if schools of masonry or specialized trade schools produced even more young masons, we would have some efficient workers readily available. So we hope that this will further encourage young people to opt for those schools.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Please pass this message to those doing the work: based on what I have been able to see so far, they are doing an outstanding job. As you said, I hope that there will be other young people wanting to learn a trade like that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Thank you, Jacques.

For the Liberals, we have John McCallum.

You have five minutes, John.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses.

I'd like to begin with a question along the lines of Mike Wallace's.

I don't quite understand: in the note at the bottom of page 128, under “Explanation of Funds Available”, it states that about $16.5 million “in total authorities is available within the Vote due to savings identified as part of the government’s ongoing strategic review”, which is a similar quantity, about $16.5 million.

It certainly looks as if you found $16.5 million in one part of the department as a savings, and then you put the $16.5 million back in some other part of the department as spending. So the net saving is approximately zero. Is that right?

[Alex Lakroni]

I wouldn't like to contradict you, but on this one, I think it's the cash management. As a responsible department, we do not draw cash unnecessarily from the bank of the government. What we do is generate savings, and then either we give them to the centre and we get them back for legitimate requests, or we reduce our legitimate requests. So instead of the government printing new money for us in the amounts you see here, which amount to $148 million, and then having us return $16 million, we just “net”. This is a government-wide practice.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

It does strike me as a somewhat theoretical concept that you are sort of saving the $16 million, but then you're re-spending it, and you're saying that you're taking from the centre $16 million less than you otherwise would have taken. I would think that would be a little difficult to measure.

Anyway, are we going to be told at any time what that $16 million in savings consisted of, from which programs or which kinds of expenditures? Also, the budget said that not $16 million but more like $23 million was the target for your department, so are you going to have additional savings?

Are we going to be told what those savings consist of, other than the gobbledygook in the budget with words like “improve use of internal resources and administrative efficiency”. That doesn't tell you anything. Are we going to find out what programs are involved in these savings?

[Alex Lakroni]

Absolutely, and thank you for the question.

In fact, PWGSC, as I mentioned earlier in my opening remarks, is fully committed to delivering on our commitments in terms of strategic review savings, which are $24.1 million. I can elaborate on the quality of the work we've done on strategic review if you wish, as advisers, the Treasury Board Secretariat, and ministers have stated. But with $24 million dollars, the delta of $6.5 million that you see here is savings for leases, which my colleague John McBain can elaborate on. Otherwise, we would have asked for the money to be printed in these supplementary estimates. Instead of asking for the money and reducing it by $6.5 million more, we don't ask for the money. It's taken from the source.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Is it written down anywhere or can you provide us information on what the $16 million or $24 million in savings consists of in terms of program activities?

[Alex Lakroni]

I can tell you now.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Perhaps you could give it to us in writing, if that is all right. I don't want to run out of time.

[Alex Lakroni]

Absolutely. Just for the record, it's $24 million. It involves 22 specific initiatives that we proposed in the strategic review, touching all areas of PWGSC. PWGSC will deliver $24.1 million in savings this fiscal year.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

My last question has to do with Treasury Board vote 30. I think your department received $32 million. It looks as if a lot of that money has gone on severance. You're one of the three departments with the largest receipts of money. Is a lot of that $31.7 million for severance? Is this an index of job losses in the various departments?

[Alex Lakroni]

The $32 million is a combination of many things. It's maternity leave, severance pay, termination benefits, and other benefits that are managed by the centre--entitlements for employees.

Now, is it an indication that we are losing employees? The answer is no. It's that the government gave the choice to employees to have access to their severance pay while they are in function, while they are still working. What you see here is just a portion of what is owed to those employees.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Okay. You're well over time, John. Thank you very much.

For the Conservatives, Kelly Block.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank you for being with us today. There are two programs that you mentioned in your opening remarks that I would like to ask about. The first is the federal contaminated sites initiative. I'm wondering if you could explain to me what exactly that is.

[John McBain]

Thank you for the question.

The federal contaminated sites program is an initiative that is administered by Environment Canada to assist the federal government in managing and remediating its contaminated sites. Public Works and Government Services Canada is a participant in this program. We are beneficiaries of some of the funding that the government has identified for this program.

We fulfill two functions for the program, or FCSP, as we call it. One is remediating PWGSC sites. At this time, the department has identified 308 contaminated sites across Canada, of which 200 sites have been remediated and closed. The remainder are either under active work or under investigation. Our portion of the funding will help us address those contaminated sites.

The funding asked for in these supplementary estimates is primarily to address removal of contaminated sediment at the Esquimalt Graving Dock in Victoria, British Columbia, and remediation along the Alaska highway.

The other function that the department performs in support of Environment Canada is professional technical services to assist departments in cleaning up their sites.