Public Accounts Committee on May 21st, 2013

[Michael Ferguson]

Again, Mr. Chair, a certain amount of the work we do is required—financial audits, special exams. There are specific legislated requirements for us to do those. Certainly our budget is sufficient to do those things.

Then we have a certain amount of our budget for performance audits. The performance audits are really where we have discretion in terms of how many we do.

There was a decision taken a few years ago, because part of the consideration of the office in performance audits is also the ability of this committee—and maybe other committees, but this committee in particular—to deal with the volume of work we produce. I think a few years ago there was a determination of the right number of audits we should be doing, and we have more or less adjusted to that.

Right now we feel we will be able to continue to do the number of performance audits we have planned.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Let me now ask you to comment on this committee. If I understand it, this is the primary committee for the review of your performance audits. If you look at the numbers you have presented, we have fallen to 43%. We need to up our game here a little bit. Your numbers don't say that, but I'm trying to kind of get you to....

This is the primary committee that is causing this number to fall. I understand others can choose to review them, but this is the committee where your reports are meant to be reviewed. If that number at 43% is low, is it in part because we're not doing enough here?

[Michael Ferguson]

Mr. Chair, again, if I look at the office in the two components and for the particular year in question, I think we submitted 15 audits under the name of Auditor General. Ten of those got in front of committee. There were eight reports produced by the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. None of those got in front of a committee.

Again I think there needs to be some improvement in getting those chapters in front of committees. This committee is not necessarily the primary committee for the reports of the commissioner. However, many of the reports of the commissioner may be of interest to this committee.

In terms of the rest—as I said, 10 out of 15—obviously we think all the audits we do are important, have good information in them, and we would like to see them all get in front of committee and be discussed in front of the committee.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

Absolutely.

This might not be your field. If it isn't, just say so. What crown corporations are not covered currently by ATIP? Do you know?

[Michael Ferguson]

Mr. Chair, it's not a question I can answer.

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

That's fine. It just came up earlier, and I wanted to come back to that.

Thank you, Chair. I've finished.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Very well. Thank you.

Mr. Byrne, you have the floor.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

There was an earlier request before your term of office, Mr. Ferguson. The officers of Parliament had requested that parliamentary committees review, among other issues, the independence of parliamentary officers. A request had come in to discuss the interaction.

Are you aware of that particular letter? It was done before.... Your signature was not attached. It was Madam Fraser's and Mr. Wiersema's. Are you aware of that particular request?

[Michael Ferguson]

I'm certainly aware of a letter that came forward before my term.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Is that still an active file amongst officers of Parliament, to have a review or a consideration of having parliamentary committees understand better the viewpoint of the officers of Parliament to ensure their independence? Is that a topic amongst your table of officers?

[Michael Ferguson]

Certainly I think it's fair that all of the officers of Parliament want to make sure parliamentarians understand the role each officer plays. Yes, I think that's something that is of concern to all officers.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Would it be valuable, in your opinion, to have a follow-up discussion about that particular issue with officers of Parliament? Since the initial request was tabled, and no parliamentary committee took up the offer of a—

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Yes.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

I don't think this has any relevance to the main estimates that we're here to discuss today. This is not part of the topic.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Well, again, you know my thinking on that. There is wide discretion on the part of committee members. If ever there's an open-ended opportunity to ask the Auditor General any question about what they do, this would be the opportunity, when we're reviewing their work plan and not focused on the work of an audit.

I'll take your point under advisement, I'll listen, but so far I don't hear anything that's out of order.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

So this is a free-for-all, is what you're saying?

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

I'm saying that Mr. Byrne is in order.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Because it's a free-for-all.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

I'm saying Mr. Byrne is in order. Is there a part of that you're not clear on, sir?

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Because it's a free-for-all.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Mr. Byrne, you have the floor.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thank you.

Through you, Mr. Chair, to our invited guests, sometimes we're a little testy at this table about these kinds of matters.

So I'll ask, since a request had been tabled, not only to this committee, but to a number of different parliamentary committees, standing committees of the House of Commons, to review this kind of issue—the interaction, the relationship, the role between Parliament and officers of Parliament—would you see a value to potentially engaging in that discussion down the road?

[Michael Ferguson]

Mr. Chair, what I would say to that is that I think a lot of thought went into the letter that was produced by the agents of Parliament at the time. I think they raised concerns that they felt needed to be addressed. The things that letter was raising are things that should be considered.

I would simply say that I support the letter and the things it was raising.

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Right. Thanks, Mr. Ferguson, for that. I think that's a fair-minded response to an issue.

It appears to me that the points that were raised in that particular piece of correspondence, not from just anyone, but from eight agents of Parliament, are still as relevant today as they were when the letter was actually issued, probably three years ago, or two years ago, and haven't been adequately addressed, in the minds of some. I appreciate your frankness in your answer. It just seems quite sensible that we would want to do that, to maximize the ability of Parliament to communicate with these important agents of Parliament, officers of Parliament. So thanks for that.

Finally, because I guess I don't have a huge amount of time, Mr. Chair, are there things you would like to do that you feel constrained in doing because of resources? You are an independent office and you will do as you deem fit and deem best, but of course we all face constraints because of resources. Are there projects or things that you would really like to do, to take the Office of the Auditor General down a new path, if you had the resources to be able to do so?