Bill C-2 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) Committee on May 30th, 2006

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Chairman, I hope you will not reject my preamble, but I wish to first and foremost apologize to my colleagues, because however interesting the amendments suggested are, we will not be able to accept them. This applies also to the witnesses that we are hearing today and those we will be meeting with tomorrow, because a motion by a member of this Committee is forcing us to table our amendments by Friday June 2nd, at noon. Anyone who is even just remotely aware of the legislative and parliamentary process knows that as of at least this morning we are no longer allowed to table amendments with the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel.

We have been saying since the very outset that this Committee was a bit of a masquerade. We yet again this evening are seeing proof of this with the motion tabled by the NDP and which will be debated tomorrow, a motion that will prevent us from tabling your amendments, which I at first blush i find most interesting. Unfortunately, just as committee members are simply playing bit parts here this evening, the witnesses tomorrow will only be playing bit parts.

Mr. Chairman, with these expressions of harmony as a backdrop, I will nevertheless put my questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Monsieur Sauvageau, you're going to provoke everybody here. First of all, the notice of motion isn't by Mr. Martin, it's by Monsieur Poilievre.

Mr. Martin, if you have another notice of motion, I haven't seen it. But, you know, that's a long way away yet. We haven't got to that. It may never come.

Please get on with your question to these people; they've come a long way.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I take back what I said. Now that you know what I think of the Committee, I can put my questions.

Bill C-2 was drafted and the foundations were included in it in order to resolve a problem of perception. Tell me if the problem of perception has not already been resolved in the following way. Two or three years ago, the Auditor General tabled a report stating that she should have an oversight role over foundations. The Public Accounts Committee did a study on foundations and tabled a report stating that the Auditor General should have an oversight role vis-à-vis the foundations. An MP tabled a private member's bill, Bill C-277, the purpose of which was to subject foundations to oversight by the auditor general. This bill was taken up by the Liberals in the budget bill, Bill C-48, requiring you, as of last year, to come under the Auditor General's microscope.

What will Bill C-2 change in the accountability requirements you now come under since the passage of Bill C-48? Is my summary succinct enough?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Go ahead, Ms. Corbeil.

[Suzanne Corbeil, Vice-President, External Relations, Canada Foundation for Innovation]

For CFI, Bill C-2 will not really change anything in our way of doing things. In practice, what will change will be the way in which we will proceed to implement a system that will be a little more bureaucratic than what we have had up until now.

We have dwelled on the fact that what is presently proposed will be such that the protection of personal information and privacy by CFI will be trickier for us. As for the process, we are already moving in that direction: various motions and the funding agreement have been improved so as to integrate all of these aspects.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Thank you.

[Michael Sheridan]

The Auditor General made mention of no problem with regard to the Canada Health Infoway. Half of our work relates to pursuing the investment program process. Bill C-2 will not have much of an impact on our daily activities relating to reporting and investment programs.

[Norman Riddell]

As for the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, the Auditor Gneral did not detect any problem. Just like you, we had thought that with the passage of Bill C-48 the government had authorized the Auditor General to audit the Foundation's activities and accounts. Government representatives informed us that an additional authorization would be required, and we believe that this is provided for under Bill C-2.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Two minutes.

[Benoît Sauvageau, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

I have no further questions.

Madam Guay? No.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Ladies and gentlemen, these bells mean that we have to go and vote. I'm sorry to inconvenience you.

We will reconvene moments after the votes are completed; you'll have to wait, I'm sorry, until then.

We're recessed.

[The Acting Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

We're continuing the committee meeting, just with another chair. The chair has another matter to look into. So we're going to continue.

I believe, members of committee, we are now on a seven-minute question period for the NDP.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Lucky me. Thank you.

First of all, thank you for patience and for your presentations.

I just wanted to ask you a couple of questions, and maybe I could just go right across the table to the panel.

I and the committee are interested in, and have talked a lot about, the appointments process, and it was touched on by some of your presentations. I'd like to know, just for matter of fact or record, how appointments are made to your respective boards.

[Dr. Eliot A. Phillipson]

In the case of the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the board consists of 15 members. Seven members, including the chair, are GIC appointments. The other eight are appointed by another group of 15 individuals, who are called members and who are analogous, if you will, to the shareholders of a company. They represent the broader public interests; so there are people from the private sector, the academic sector, the non-government sector. So the members appoint the remaining eight board directors.

[Michael Sheridan]

At Canada Health Infoway, the board is basically appointed by the members. The feds have two appointment positions on the board, one is a member, while the federal Deputy Minister of Health appoints the chair of the board. There are five members appointed from each of the five regions of Canada, and the regions appoint their own representatives to the board at that time. And there are six independent directors who are appointed by the members at the annual general meeting.

[Norman Riddell]

The governance structure of the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation is similar to that of the CFI. The numbers are a little different. We have a 15-person board, six members of which, including the chair, are appointed by the Governor in Council; the other nine directors of the foundation are elected by 15 members of the foundation. Originally, six of the 15 members of the foundation were appointed by the government, and the other nine were chosen by the first six. In the future, if any member should leave, the remaining members would elect a new member.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you for that.

In terms of data management, I'm curious how it is done in your respective organizations, because this is an access to information piece, and a privacy peace in some instances—and the privacy piece is of utmost concern to all of you, and certainly to our committee. In other words, is it contracted out to another firm? If it is, we've had some concerns, generally speaking, with institutions and their information being shared, and sometimes lost, and sometimes found in not-so-secure locations.

So I'm just curious as to how your respective organizations do the data management. Is it contracted out? Is it done through your own shop? How does it work?

[Dr. Eliot A. Phillipson]

In the case of the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the data management is all done within the organization.

[Michael Sheridan]

In the case of the Canada Health Infoway, I think we need to understand that Infoway does not hold the data or hold the electronic health records or the information associated with it. That's a jurisdictional data and information holding.

[Norman Riddell]

Most of the data that the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation holds on individuals is transferred to us electronically by the provinces. It's transferred into one computer, and then moved manually onto another computer that has no connection at all with the outside world.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Okay. So strictly speaking, all of the data management you're doing upon receipt of the data is done in-house?

[Norman Riddell]

That's correct.

Now, obviously we need to use that data. For example, we are required to write to students. If we're issuing 100,000 letters, we contract that business out, and the contractors who are working for the foundation sign a code of conduct, with conflict of interest rules, as part of the contract they have with the foundation, which binds them to respect exactly the same rules as we are required to respect regarding the information. To date, we have not had any difficulty with any information going astray.

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I have no more questions, thank you.

[The Acting Chair, Liberal, Alan Tonks]

Thank you, Mr. Dewar.

We'll now go to Mr. Lukiwski.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Dr. Riddell, before I get to my question, I have a fairly simple question first—from curiosity, being from Saskatchewan myself. How long has it been since you left Saskatchewan and were in the employ of the government?