Justice Committee on May 8th, 2014

[William F. Pentney]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

But based on what I'm reading here you think it increases the demand. It sounds like it makes it more difficult. I'm just wondering, the last paragraph talks about the growth of files because they can do it electronically now instead of by paper. I would just like to have an understanding of why that's not making us more efficient.

[William F. Pentney]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman. It's a very good question.

I sit before you with a giant binder that wasn't typed and photocopied. It was input into a system, other documents were reformatted, and then it was printed. If you or I go back to our office and look at an existing file we will find the draft, the final draft, the final final final draft of some documents. Most of us are not operating with systems that regularly purge drafts.

If you look at the number of emails that you received this morning that have a cc on them in terms of document disclosure, what we're seeing—and corporate Canada and private lawyers are seeing—is an absolute explosion. The first task in dealing with that avalanche of documents is what's affectionately known in our line of work as de-duping. So how many duplicate emails do you need to go through to get to the final one that represents the email train?

Given the nature of disclosure rule, that has lead to an exponential increase because of document management, because of the ways in which information is generated and the need to look at electronic information and paper information. The fact is that the court system has not made the transition that other systems have made to go online, neither federally nor provincially.

So we are working very hard to look at document management within government and document management within our own department and then using more electronic sources to do an initial screen so that we can get to the final email in that chain, because that's the one we need to focus on. It's not the 27 emails that lead to it. Unfortunately right now a lot of that is being done in the affectionate term “handraulically”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much.

That's my time.

Madam Boivin from the New Democratic Party.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to say that it is fortunate that we do not do our household budgets the same way the government does its budget. I honestly think that we would all end up bankrupt. I personally like to have a budget. It helps me see where I am going and what I am going to spend money on.

Over the past few years, we have been led to review the main estimates. The government starts by tabling a budget and then the main estimates are revised three times. At the end of the year, we look at what happened. It is not easy to ensure consistency.

I don't know how each of you manage to do a good job in your departments with the funding you receive and to conduct your activities in line with bills that might change the situation in midstream.

As you so well said, Mr. Pentney, if the Canadian victims bill of rights is passed, it will clearly have a financial impact. If a number of other pieces of legislation are passed, there will be consequences, which will force us to make changes, without forgetting about the existing programs already in place. Think about the people who deal with the Minister of Justice and are making requests for those programs.

I have met with groups that do an outstanding job on the ground to help victims. Here are some of the issues they are dealing with:

human trafficking, supporting victims and survivors, Inuit women and girls who have been trafficked in Canada, Justice Canada's victims fund, denied; understanding the vulnerabilities of Inuit women and girls to violence, Justice Canada's access to justice fund, submitted for 2014-15, denied.

I do not know how we go about coming to an arrangement with the department on this.

Yesterday in the House, I asked the minister a question about the Winnipeg Drug Treatment Court. Basically, the minister’s reply was that he believed in it, but, as for all programs, the government was in the process of reviewing it.

How long will you be in this review process? How are you conducting the review? Let’s say that you decide to continue, where is the budget to do so? I do not see it anywhere.

I am a little concerned about how you find money and how you say no to groups. We need some general clarification about this. How long are you going to think about it before you renew budgets as a result?

[William F. Pentney]

Thank you for that question.

The first part of the question deals with the planning process and the parliamentary process that approves funds. To fully understand the whole, you have to read certain documents together.

We tabled a report on plans and priorities in the House; it lists the expenditures planned for the next three years. We do the planning to the best of our knowledge and we work with professionals like Ms. Thivierge and her team so that we can properly manage our resources internally. We forecast our expenditures for the next three years, we establish our priorities, and we make sure that we can fulfill our commitments and meet our priorities with the resources at our disposal. That is the burden of financial management.

We have a lot of interaction with external people. We have websites that contain a lot of information and we work with experts. We work closely with the provinces and their experts so that there is good dialogue with various groups.

Some programs, like the program for victims, depend on good applications. We work closely with people, but, ultimately, funds are limited and choices have to be made from among the various requests. But I can assure you that we work closely with the provinces, their experts and with community organizations in order to help them better understand the terms, conditions and technical aspects when the time comes to submit an application. The goal is to know what they want to achieve with the funds they will be allotted. There is give and take, but…

Barb could speak to the applications that have been approved and the amount of money that's been approved for worthwhile programs in communities to support victims, to support efforts in communities to address the problem of murdered and missing aboriginal women, and all of those other things that are approved.

But some applications just cannot be approved.

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

[Inaudible — Editor] could change mid-year. I know you plan three years ahead—

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

A very quick answer to that question....

[Françoise Boivin, NDP, Gatineau, QC]

—but am I right to say that if the victims bill of rights is adopted, it has an implication. There's a need for money, you'll have to play with your budget somehow, so what we're doing here might be moot at some point in time.

[William F. Pentney]

Governments govern, parliaments vote, and bureaucrats adapt is sort of the....

It is true that expenditures vary from year to year, but there are no major changes except during the financial crisis or the budget cuts.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much.

Thank you for those questions.

Our final questioner today, for three minutes, is Mr. Seeback from the Conservative party.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I don't think I need three minutes. I want to talk about one of the increases, $1.4 million in the victims fund. Is that anticipated to be used to open new child advocacy centres and if so, what are the plans? How many do you anticipate being opened? I know you can't answer this, so I would also say, are you going to open one in Brampton and Mississauga? You don't have to answer that one.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[William F. Pentney]

Barb Merriam will answer that.

[Barbara Merriam]

Yes, we originally had about $1 million a year for child advocacy centres. Now we hope to have a second million so that will allow us to contribute to new child advocacy centres. Our funding is not permanent funding so we might try to help the set-up of an organization but we wouldn't be funding for five years and the amounts of money differ.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Do you have any idea how much will be used in this fiscal year?

[Barbara Merriam]

I can get back to you on that because we have a listing of the ones that have been funded. We have a listing of the ones that are interested in funding and then we have to juggle.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

That's it.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

Thank you very much for coming this afternoon and waiting for us to come back. I appreciate the answers.

I know some of the questions were tough—

[William F. Pentney]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Mike Wallace]

—but personally I actually like to see a discussion on estimates and plans and priorities happening. I think that's important for us to understand where we're headed as a country.

I want to thank you for all your efforts.

With that, the meeting is adjourned.