Evidence of meeting #7 for Natural Resources in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was million.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
It was well within the maximum carry forward, which is 5% of our operating budget.
4:45 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
Our operating budget is in the range of $850 million. I think we would have been in the range of $18 million to $20 million all told in terms of our carry forward.
4:45 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
Actually an amount that is within 5% of what you are allowed to spend in a year.... And as you know whether it's particular projects, particular contribution agreements we have with different parties, whether it is other kinds of contracts such as procurement and so forth, it is very difficult at midnight on March 31 to have come to spend 100% of your budget. Nor is that necessarily the goal. You obviously want to spend what is sensible to be spent. It is reasonable to leave ourselves some margin so that we don't overspend the budget. This means that typically it is not atypical for a department to be roughly 2% unspent at the end of the year because that is a prudent margin that you are observing to ensure you don't go over budget during your fiscal year, which would be very bad for any public servant to contemplate.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Leon Benoit
Thank you, Monsieur Gravelle.
Mr. Regan, go ahead please, for up to seven minutes.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
We begin by following up on an earlier question. I don't know if I heard the answer to Mr. Julian's question about the total amount. I'd like to know, not only for this current fiscal year but also the previous fiscal year, what the department's total spending on advertising is, and was.
4:50 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
I'm not sure I have the prior fiscal year. Perhaps my colleagues can get the number, as I'm looking too.
What I can tell you is that the numbers authorized for this fiscal year may be different from what will ultimately be spent.
4:50 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
The supplementary estimates (B) for international stakeholder engagement and outreach is $12,997,886, of which $500,000 is not specifically advertising but may be to work with different research institutions or third parties, to supplement our body of science and our body of knowledge vis-à-vis energy and environmental issues for Canada. That is on the international side.
Moneys also voted by Parliament in the main estimates for this fiscal year were $4.5 million, and subsequently in supplementary estimates (A), $12 million; this is for domestic advertising.
I would again indicate that these are amounts that have been authorized; they don't necessarily mean at the end of the day that they will be spent.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
4:50 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
No, domestically it would be $16.5 million, and internationally is $12.9 million.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
In other words, $30 million in total.
Would I be right in assuming that much of the money for outreach is for developing support, let's say, for Keystone?
4:50 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
Obviously, there has been some expenditure on advertising in the United States, which is not specifically directed at any project. It is providing information about Canada as a responsible, reliable energy supplier.
We also plan to have some advertising in Europe, where some of our interests are also compromised by various measures contemplated by the European Commission, as well as in Asian markets.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
Thank you.
On the funds set aside for AECL, how much would be for things like severance packages, people being laid off—how many people will be laid off at AECL?
4:50 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
There are no moneys before you today that have to do with any workforce adjustment at Atomic Energy of Canada Limited.
Currently, there are no workforce adjustments planned at Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. The $8.5 million is for advisory services we are paying now at Natural Resources Canada in order to help us move the laboratories to new models of governance, which have a private-sector operator.
Again, nothing is contemplated, at this time, in terms of workforce adjustment at AECL.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
On the filing of Canada's claim under the Law of the Sea convention, concerning the continental shelf limits, do you have any idea how many other countries filed their claims ahead of Canada and how long it will be before our claim is heard?
My understanding is we were one of the last countries to file it, and it will be decades, in all likelihood, before the claim is considered.
4:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
I may refer to one of my colleagues.
The date of the filing is partly related to the date when we joined the convention. On joining the convention, we then had a number of years to file a submission.
November 27th, 2013 / 4:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
That was the outside limit, but a substantive body of work has to be assembled if you're going to have a viable and solid, credible submission.
We're very satisfied we have that submission. We're quite confidant that with this kind of submission, Canada will be able to claim as added territory beyond the 200 nautical miles, the equivalent of the territory of the three western provinces together.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
But if you could answer the question about what number we were in getting our claim in, and when we can expect it to be heard, that would be appreciated.
Regardless of the limit, the date when we joined the Law of the Sea convention obviously set an outside limit for us but it didn't say we had to wait until near the end of that time. Clearly there is a lot of work involved, but I'd like to know the answer to my question.
4:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
The short answer is that it took the time it did in order to develop the proper submission and—
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
4:55 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Natural Resources
Maybe I didn't hear the question properly.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
The question was: how many countries were ahead of us, and how long can we expect it to take before our claim will be considered, in view of all the countries that are ahead of us? How many decades?
If you don't have the answer, you can get back to the committee, perhaps.
