Finance Committee on May 11th, 2017

[Allen Sutherland]

Sorry, I mean members of Parliament who are part of their party. They would be in a position, on behalf of their party, to request costings.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Let's say I have an election in Sherbrooke, I would be the only candidate in that riding to have access to the PBO costing request.

[Allen Sutherland]

It's in your capacity as a member of the party, right? So in your case, the NDP would be able to request costings because you are a member of the NDP and you are in the Parliament.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Do I have to go through the NDP, through my party, to ask for costing?

[Don Booth]

Yes. Each party would identify a representative who would act as the liaison with the PBO's office.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

So a candidate who was not an MP before could ask the representative of his or her party to ask the PBO for costing if he or she wished.

[Don Booth]

On behalf of the party, they could.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

For those parties with members in the House of Commons, the request would have to come through the party for that kind of costing to be done, and it's not just for the recognized parties in the House. It would include the Greens, who have one member, and the Bloc Québécois, who have 12.

[Don Booth]

It's any party that has a representative in the House upon dissolution of the House before an election.

[Allen Sutherland]

Mr. Chair, you put it better than I did.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

But do you expect the PBO to receive a massive number of requests at election time, and will he be able to handle the number of requests?

[Allen Sutherland]

This is a new area, so it's not possible to understand exactly how much business will arise until it actually occurs.

We have worried about issues around workload. In the legislation there are a couple of measures in place to try to reduce the workload surge that might occur. It has been set out in the legislation that the PBO has recourse to government costing and government information. For instance, if a party were to propose something in the area of Canada student loans, that might be something that ESDC could cost very quickly. The PBO has the right to ask for support from government. It still remains the PBO's costing, but in order to facilitate its ability to do that costing in an effective way, there is access to government.

Another way the legislation tries to address the issue of burden is by having allocating additional resources. The PBO would have additional resources as a result of committees having been dissolved during an election time period. That would free up resources. Indeed, the annual work plan is a way for the PBO, in the year of an election, to say if the fixed election date is being followed, “I expect to get a surge in business, and I can canvas who is likely to use the services of the PBO in an election period.” That could form a part of the work plan discussion and, indeed, the budgetary discussion.

The other thing I'd note is that unlike the Australian case, doing the costing is not mandatory. In the Australian case, the PBO is required to cost everyone's platform after an election. That's not the case here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Mrs. Boucher.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, gentlemen.

I'm replacing someone on this committee, but I have to say that what I'm hearing is very disturbing. I'm going to be honest: I don't know if the others are used to it, but what you've just said really gets my goat. In my opinion, the Parliamentary Budget Officer must be independent and non-partisan.

As you said, this request came from the Prime Minister. You are asking this officer of Parliament to send his work plan to the two speakers, who also have a political affiliation. For independence, we will go back. I don't know if you realize how dangerous this game is to everyone.

Elections Canada is already doing its job when we are campaigning. So why mix an officer of Parliament into the electoral process and ask all parties to provide him with their platform? When we are in an election campaign, we are not sitting in Parliament; we are candidates for a upcoming election.

Why is the bill written this way? Why are you handcuffing the Parliamentary Budget Officer this way? Without realizing it, you just handcuffed this officer of Parliament by asking him to be accountable to people of a political affiliation. I'm talking about political affiliation, whatever it is. I think that's unacceptable. These people are appointed to be independent and free from any form of pressure from one party or another. I am not attacking the Liberal Party. I find that unacceptable, and I will always find that unacceptable. The fact that it is being introduced this way, in a budget bill, bothers me. I don't know whose idea it was. You said it was a request from the Prime Minister, but other people around you were thinking about it.

We have come to interfere in deeply apolitical and independent positions. Could you explain to me how it is that this person has to provide his work plan to the speakers of the House and the Senate, both of whom have a political affiliation, no matter which party they belong to? How will this person be independent?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Mr. Sutherland.

[Allen Sutherland]

Mr. Chair, I'm not sure I have an answer that will satisfy the honourable member.

The role of the parliamentary budget officer is to provide neutral and objective economic and fiscal analysis, including costing, to help members of Parliament do their job holding the government to account. In order to do that, the PBO needs to make priorities.

The intent of the legislation, and in particular the work plan, which I think is the crux of your concern, is to provide a work plan to members and to ensure there's buy-in. That's a way of ensuring the PBO can best serve parliamentarians. That's the intent of the legislation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Mrs. Boucher, do you have anything further?

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Perhaps the bill is clear in your mind, but it's far from being clear to us. You're asking this person to provide the work plan to two people who have political affiliations. That's what bothers me.

Previously, the Parliamentary Budget Officer was independent. Although we didn't always talk about it, we, the Conservatives, were the ones who appointed him. He was completely independent. When it was time to get in, the remarks were quite blunt. That's the way it is with the independence of an officer of Parliament. The position is supposed to be apolitical.

Without realizing it, you are now asking him to become politicized, even though he doesn't want to be. This is unacceptable.

This isn't what Canadians have asked for or what we want. We want independent agents who can do their jobs and give us the right information without political affiliation.

You talked about what happens during an election campaign. I apologize, but Elections Canada is already doing that work. If I have any questions, Elections Canada is here to answer. During the election period, we are no longer in Parliament. Certainly, we are still members of Parliament, but we are outside running a race to get elected.

I can't see why an officer of Parliament would become a political agent during this period. That's what I find disturbing. You have shuffled all these ideas together without distinguishing between someone who is really in politics and someone who is not. Unintentionally, you are binding his hands, because the speakers of both chambers have a political affiliation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

This time I don't think you can provide an answer further than what was already given.

Ms. Boucher, the only way to settle this issue would be, I think, with amendments.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

We could make some amendments, but I would like to understand why this has been written so that people think that the Parliamentary Budget Officer is becoming a political function when that shouldn't be the case.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

I do think that was answered, but we may have a difference of opinion on the answer.

Mr. Fergus.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you very much, Mr. Sutherland and Mr. Booth, for coming.

I'm a big fan of the PCO. I'm a big fan of the work you do in bringing matters together as a central agency of the government. You guys do great work.

I have a bit of a different perspective from that of my honourable colleague. I know that people will comment quickly that it's an easy thing to say, but I actually don't have much of a problem with the PBO's costing the platforms—not to do an evaluation of the platforms overall, but a more limited evaluation of the economic plans being put forward by different political parties.

I will explain why I don't have a problem with that.

I believe the Parliamentary Budget Officer has an obligation to assess the government's budget. In the past, when there were no fixed election dates, the government in place could table a budget and immediately call an election. Given that the PBO is an independent officer of Parliament, he assesses the budget and makes his findings whenever possible. It can happen in the middle of an election campaign, which can be good, in a way. The opposition wants to ensure that an assessment is made of the economic plans of other parties as well.

I think we have to narrow the scope of what has been proposed. I think at yesterday's meeting, members of all parties agreed that there should be some changes.

That's the comment I wanted to make.

My question really is on how we missed the boat. PCO usually does a good bit of consultation beforehand in speaking to various actors and, I'm assuming, to former parliamentary budget officers—or officer, as there's only one former such officer—or perhaps the current one. How did the PCO miss the boat in proposing that the PBO would have to have his work plan submitted not only to the Speakers, but also be approved by the Speakers?

Usually, there is a lot of informal or formal consultation that's done beforehand.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

I don't know if that question is answerable either, Mr. Sutherland.

You can take a chance—

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Give it a college try.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

—though I would refer to the statement that the House leader made. She said she would welcome “suggestions on how to improve the bill, and we are open to amendments to ensure we accomplish the objective of an effective and independent [PBO].” It is really quite unusual in a budget bill to accept amendments.

Mr. Sutherland.