Evidence of meeting #4 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was programs.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:50 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Health
Mr. Chair, thank you very much for the question.
There's one example in the estimates today. It's from HMIRC, the Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission. You'll notice in the estimates that their funding actually goes down, and that is because they had a three-year program. They had some backlogs in handling their claims, and they were given three years of money to actually tackle those backlogs, and now the money is coming out. The reason their estimate has gone down--
11:50 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Health
--is that they've caught up on the backlog.
That's an example. We've had other examples in health where, again, we have gotten into a backlog situation and we actually have tackled it.
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
As members of Parliament, we would never see.... Where would somebody find that? There's nowhere it's listed that these are the programs and this is what was funded.
This is at a fairly high level, so it's grouped together. There's no way for us to be able to figure that out, as members of Parliament, so that when you come here, I can question you about program A, B, or C. How is it doing? How is it evaluated? Does that exist anywhere for me to see?
11:50 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Health
We report to parliamentarians in a number of ways with our program activity architecture. We try to give parliamentarians a good sense that here are all of our programs and this is what we do. We do reports on plans and priorities. I think those would be some of the places. It doesn't reflect the budgeting mechanisms or the scrutiny mechanisms a government might put in place, but it gives parliamentarians, I think....
11:50 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Wallace Conservative Burlington, ON
Asking you back to discuss your plans and priorities document would be a good time for us to do that. Would that be correct?
11:50 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Health
I think that's certainly a possibility, but the committee may have other possibilities as well, Mr. Chair.
11:50 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
You're out of time, Mike.
Thank you.
The last round probably would be the Liberal Party and John McCallum. Do you have any questions?
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
I didn't realize that I would have another opportunity.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Yes, I have a couple of questions.
The first is on first nations pandemic preparedness. How many first nations communities have tested pandemic preparedness and response plans? I think the goal for 2010-11 was 90%, if I'm not mistaken. How has that worked out?
June 20th, 2011 / 11:55 a.m.
Chief Public Health Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada
While Glenda is finding the specifics, I'd just say that we had the ultimate test in 2009-10, and the communities responded actually brilliantly at the end of the day.
11:55 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Health
Thank you again very much for the question.
As David mentioned, I think we were feeling that H1N1 was a significant real-time, real-life test with huge implications, obviously, for first nations. Communities and partners came together very well at that point. My information here is that 98% of the first nations communities have a community-level pandemic influenza plan, and approximately 87% of those have tabletop-tested the major components of those plans.
Again, we've been working very much to try to support communities to understand the importance. We're working, obviously, to understand the linkage with the work Aboriginal Affairs does in terms of the all-hazards planning that is done. This is something that is an ongoing follow-up piece of work for us.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
Thanks. Sorry to interrupt. I don't have much time, and I have just short questions needing short answers.
There's a drug strategy community initiatives fund. I understand there was a cut in funding for that fund, and I'd just like to know if that's true, and if so, why.
I'll ask my third and final question at the same time. Regarding first nations and Inuit suicide prevention, how many suicide prevention projects have been implemented since 2010? Here I understand the target was 200.
11:55 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Health
I may have to get back to you on the precise number since 2010. My information is that we are on track working with first nations communities on suicide prevention, but I don't have the precise information. I'd be happy, Mr. Chair, to get back to the committee with that.
I'm not sure that I know precisely which of the drug groups you are speaking of, Mr. Chair. I wouldn't want to mislead the committee by identifying a wrong group, so if I could just make sure that I'm clear on the question and which group we're talking about....
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON
It's called the drug strategy community initiatives fund.
11:55 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Health
Thank you for the question.
I would just note again that this is one of the restatement challenges we spoke about earlier. The funding has been preserved. My note here says it's a re-profiling issue.
Re-profiling is a little bit different from what we spoke of before. It's where sometimes in a start-up period a group says, “We can't spend our money this year. Could we re-profile some into the following year?” And then it goes back down. I think the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer has some ups and downs with re-profiling. They actually asked to put some of their money into a different year. I have a note here that says that for the drug strategy community initiatives fund, some of the money was re-profiled from one year to the other, but the funding has been preserved at the approved level.
11:55 a.m.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
If I might just say, some of the answers given today serve as a graphic illustration to the committee that we've got to find better ways to follow the money. Your answers are honest and they're forthright and fulsome, but really what you're saying is there's no way of telling. Looking at these books, comparing this set of mains to this set of mains, the public would never know really what's going on. As the oversight committee for estimates, it's really difficult.
Mike has made it his life's work to follow the money and try to compare. But to compare apples to apples, we should be able to review those books and be able to say at the end of the day, this department went up or that department went down. It's a very frustrating process. But it's no fault of your own. I appreciate your answers and we appreciate your being here today.
Peter, did you have a point you wanted to make?
Noon
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just to follow up on that, it would be very helpful to have the supplementaries on those departmental supplementary funds for 2010-11. A cut is a cut, and if the amount is coming back, and we're talking about the same programs that we have in the estimates for 2011-12, it would be helpful for the committee to be able to compare apples to apples, as the chair said.
I also wanted to say to you, Mr. Chair, that you bring a lot of poise and dignity to this position.
Noon
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
Noon
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
I think a lot of other chairs on Parliament Hill could be well served—