Government Operations committee  I think it probably was generally the case in the past that when the federal government signed collective agreements, they were after the fact, after the expiry of the previous collective agreement. So we're always in this mode of retroactivity and making payments to departments for wage increases retroactively.

Government Operations committee  Certainly, I'd be happy to address that. As you know, from Budget 2010 onward we're starting to set the stage for restraint. As I think your questions last week noted, there's still a lot of spending this fiscal year as we continue with the economic action plan for another year.

Government Operations committee  I think in the first year, this year, 2010-11, departments are experiencing the absorption of the 1.5% wage increases. We have anticipated that will have a savings effect of about $300 million overall on the system. It's not a huge amount, but it does increase over time, and as the operating budget freeze applies in the next couple of years, I think you will see more of a pinch on departments' wage bills.

Government Operations committee  We do have some elements in the operating budget restraint that allow for flexibility. For example, departments can still reprofile, so you see a lot of reprofiling from the previous fiscal year in these supplementary estimates (B). Quasi-statutory expenses are still accommodated, so increases that are quasi-statutory that are going to be outside the control of departments are permitted.

Government Operations committee  Good morning, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your invitation to appear before your committee on the supplementary estimates (B). Thank you for your invitation to appear. We are happy to be here to answer questions. We hope we can answer all of your questions. I have with me David Enns, who is acting assistant secretary of the expenditure management sector at Treasury Board.

Public Accounts committee  Perhaps I can try to address this. The memorandum to cabinet is intended to get the policy authority and the submission to the Treasury Board is eventually to give the financial authority. The two have to work together. Essentially, the TBS submission is the implementation of the policy authority.

Public Accounts committee  Yes, I think they did. They shortened the timeframes for approvals quite dramatically--from six months to two months--without sacrificing the due diligence. So I think they were quite successful.

Public Accounts committee  Sure.

Public Accounts committee  Sure. Well, I think the diagram on page 8 that Mr. Saxton is referring to and Mr. Stock discussed is quite revealing. A lot of the work had to go on in parallel between Treasury Board and PCO, and with a lot of coordination, in order to make this work in this way. Normally it's a linear process, where we require policy approvals before we take submissions into Treasury Board for funding approval, and we were able to work in a much more parallel fashion in these circumstances.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you, Chair. I think that's accurate. I don't have anything to add.

Public Accounts committee  Very briefly, I'll turn quickly to the Department of Finance on this. We did provide some early guidance to departments on collecting job information, and it was quickly pointed out by departments that it would be very difficult to collect the kind of precise information we would want in order to aggregate to good job impacts.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, thank you for your invitation to appear before the Committee on the Auditor General's Fall report on the implementation of Canada's economic action plan. I'm joined today by my colleagues from the Privy Council Office, the Department of Finance, Transport Canada, and Infrastructure Canada.