Environment Committee on Feb. 26th, 2009

[Bob Hamilton]

Yes, there are probably a number of examples. The one I have talked briefly about is the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. That would be an example where I had.... It was a very big change in the structure of it, to set up a separate board that would invest in equities, bonds—a diversified portfolio—rather than government bonds.

It was a management style where there was a lot of pressure to deliver and a lot of complex issues needing to be sorted through. We developed a team within the federal government, and through all of the difficult negotiations we had with provinces and the public consultations we had, we were exposed many times to difficult issues that we had to sort through to decide how to present our advice and what advice to present. Through it all I tried to demonstrate to the team that we needed to do the proper analysis, we needed to do our due diligence, we needed to be open to all the views that were coming to us; then, at the end of the day, we needed to be clear when we made a decision what our advice was, going forward. And we needed to manage all of that in an environment where we were not only consulting with the public and their diverse views, but also with our provincial colleagues, who had a very direct stake in what we were doing.

Being able to manage those relationships both internally and externally with the various people and have a successful conclusion—not only developing the policy, but implementing it and seeing it years later be rewarded—I feel is probably one of the better examples of how I managed an effective file for the government.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

You mentioned that there was pressure to deliver. There no doubt will be pressure to deliver as well within Environment Canada and within the ministry to meet the challenges ahead of us. I wish you good luck.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

We would normally go to Mr. Jean, but it looks as though Mr. Jean is passing.

We'll go to Mr. Woodworth.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to the committee, and congratulations.

I think the term used is simply an expression associated with a person who is not employed, in the legal sense, who has no fixed term. So I think that this expression...

It has no particular reference to you or to your job duties. It's one that's common throughout the civil service.

I want to state at the outset that I have absolutely no doubt that someone of your experience and background will be what might be called a “lifelong learner”, and be quite capable of adapting to new information and a new department.

I am also going to say at the outset that I'm quite happy you have an economic background. When I looked at your résumé, at first I wondered about it, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that all of the important questions I have on the environmental file involve economics. The only way we can proceed with environmental initiatives is by tailoring them to our economic circumstances. So I think you are, quite frankly, the right man for this job at this time.

My area of interest has to do less with some of the policy issues that we've heard here today and more with the management side of things. It's been nibbled at around the edges by a few of the questions.

Can you tell me whether or not the job description for the position you're filling now, as assistant to the deputy minister, will require you to interface with the whole environment department team, as it were, and to act in a managerial capacity with that team?

Also, how does it compare with the managerial side of what you had done previously as associate secretary for the Treasury Board? For example, I don't know how many people you might have been responsible to manage, or, as the assistant deputy minister in charge of the tax policy branch, how large a team you had, or how many sections.

Can you give me some sense of how your current managerial responsibilities grow out of or expand upon your previous managerial experience in those positions?

Merci beaucoup.

[Bob Hamilton]

Maybe I'll start with the current position, that of associate deputy minister. You're right, there is nothing particular about my appointment relative to other associate deputy ministers. It's very similar to what I was at Treasury Board. You're really helping the deputy minister manage the department.

That can be done in a number of different ways. It differs for people. For example, you can be involved in every file that the department is involved in but without any particular people reporting to you; you're sort of jointly managing it with the deputy. At the other point on the spectrum, for particular files, you, the associate, will basically be the deputy, will stand in for them. They will delegate that responsibility to you and you'll manage that group of people and that file. Obviously you'll keep the deputy informed, but really you'll run with it.

From my experience, typically it's a mixture of the two. The associate does get involved to some degree with all of the files, but some of them can be very minimal. There are a few particular areas--these can change over time--where the associate would be involved. There you really are interacting directly on the file, much as you would as a deputy. You have a team of people who are working on it. You are having meetings, getting things done, and basically managing that file.

I would expect that, going forward, I'll have a mixture of those activities. Part of it is for me to learn a little bit about all the interesting things that Environment does, the science, etc., and part of it is really to help deliver on particular projects.

That would be similar to what I was doing at Treasury Board. The only other thing I'd add about Treasury Board as a central agency is that I was involved in management issues more broadly--how it applies across the government, how we're managing things in different departments. It was looking at it from a government-wide perspective rather than just Treasury Board.

Again, there I was involved in a mixture of particular files, but I was also standing ready to be involved in any file that the Treasury Board was involved in.

As a final comment to answer your question, if you contrast that with, for example, when I was an assistant deputy minister for the tax policy branch, or the financial sector policy branch, there it was very much a defined responsibility. You're responsible for providing advice up through the system in the area of tax or in the area of financial sector. You have a team. In tax policy, my team was made up of about 170 people. It's the largest Department of Finance branch, but small compared with the Canada Revenue Agency, at 40,000 people, or even Environment Canada, at 6,000 people. But it was a large branch, with 160 people that you were basically responsible for.

So that's the difference, as I see it, between an assistant deputy minister and an associate. It very much does depend on the issues of the day and, frankly, the desires of the deputy minister in terms of how he or she thinks it's best to manage the issues of the department.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I was a bit intrigued by your comment regarding your experience--

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I believe your time is up, Mr. Woodworth.

Before we go to Mr. Calkins, I've been informed that there's a vote. They're asking that all members head back to the chamber. There'll be a 15-minute bell.

Mr. Calkins is up, and I believe he wants to give his time to Mr. Warawa. The idea was to hear from Mr. Warawa and then to start a third round of maybe three minutes each, in which case, if the committee agrees, Mr. Hyer could ask the question instead of Ms. Duncan. I don't know if we'll have time for a third round.

Does Mr. Warawa want to give his time to Mr. Hyer? Then we end it there and go back to the House to vote.

[Bernard Bigras, Bloc, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Can the clerk look into this? Ordinarily, the rule is that we find out, to know whether there is a vote.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

We have nothing from our party.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Okay, we can go to Mr. Warawa and then see if there's time for a third round and take it from there.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Mr. Chair, before I start my time, if there is a vote, and we all leave, then Mr. Hyer is not going to get a chance to ask a question. If I can have a gentleman's agreement that if we have a third round he would give me that time, I could pass that on to him right now.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

It looks like there's a consensus.

Let's go, Mr. Hyer.

[Bruce Hyer, NDP, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Warawa.

I will be coming to future meetings, given that I'm Ms. Duncan's deputy critic for water, climate change, and national parks and that I'm very interested in the process.

I'm a rookie member from Thunder Bay. I am a biologist, a forester, and a business person.

I'm concerned about what I'm hearing here this morning. There are many economists out there, some of whom I'm quite aware of, who have a lot of expertise on the environment and who have been studying the ecological implications of the environment and the environmental implications of the economy for decades. I'm concerned that while we have a very intelligent man here, who is capable of learning, this is a very expensive training program.

My question to you, sir, is a philosophical one.

Is it the mandate of Environment Canada to seek and find compromise between the economy and the environment internally, or is it the job of Environment Canada to be the effective advocate for the environment and to allow other ministries, such as Natural Resources, Industry, and Finance, to provide that alleged balance with the economy?

I'm concerned that with your experience and focus on the economic aspects you will see your role, and be good at your role, as making those compromises internally rather than as sticking up for the environment effectively.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I would just interject that this could be seen as a policy question. I'll give Mr. Hamilton latitude to answer the way he thinks he should.

[Bob Hamilton]

I'll take a stab at it without trying to cross an inappropriate line.

I think Environment Canada has many experts in the domains in which we need to carry out effective environmental policy. I bring a particular skill set. I think it's a relatively broader skill set than perhaps you're thinking when characterizing me as an economist. Through my work career in the civil service I've been exposed to a vast number of policy files. And I think I'm capable of bringing a broad perspective to issues put in front of me, listening to the views of others, and consolidating advice. That's my perspective on it. Maybe I'm biased, but that's what I think.

In terms of setting up a department as an advocate or as an internalizer of issues, obviously the Minister of the Environment and Environment Canada have roles to play in terms of setting environmental policy for Canada. Clearly, as I mentioned earlier, in setting those policies we need to take into account the perspectives of other departments, whether it's our colleagues at Natural Resources, the Department of Finance, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, or what have you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

I'm having a hard time hearing you, Mr. Hamilton, because there's a lot of buzz around the room. If I could have just a bit more silence, we can hear what you're saying.

[Bob Hamilton]

Sure.

So yes, I understand that in assessing these issues and providing our advice, we need to take into account all of those different perspectives. I just think we're better off if my role in the Department of Environment is not only to bring that broader perspective, but also to contribute from an economic and policy analysis perspective. For me, that's good to have within the Department of Environment. It contributes to more collaborative discussions with our colleagues and with other departments with other perspectives.

The more we can understand about each other's perspectives, I think the more common ground we can find and the more effective we can be in designing proper policies. I think I'm going to be able to contribute on that front, and I wouldn't characterize my approach to these issues as overly narrow at all.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

You have about 30 seconds, Mr. Hyer.

[Bruce Hyer, NDP, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

I'll pass. Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Why don't we go to a third round of three minutes, starting with Mr. McGuinty?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks.

Mr. Hamilton, I want to go back to something--

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Excuse me. We have a problem here.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

It's Mr. Warawa next, isn't it?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Well, there was a gentleman's agreement if we were going to have--

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Francis Scarpaleggia]

Go ahead, Mr. Warawa. My apologies.