Mr. Dusseault.
Evidence of meeting #95 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pbo.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #95 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pbo.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:50 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Okay, we'll not have Ping-Pong.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We turn now to amendment PV-4. I would make a comment here on PV-4. The vote on PV-4 applies to amendment PV-13 as they are consequential to each other. If PV-4 and PV-13 are adopted, amendments BQ-5 and NDP-12 cannot be moved due to line conflicts in the bill. It's just a technical matter, according to the legislative clerk.
Amendment PV-4 is deemed moved. Does anybody want to speak to it?
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We turn now to amendment LIB-2.
Go ahead, Mr. Fergus.
5:50 p.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
Mr. Chair, as I just said, I think the amendment I'm proposing regarding the skills needed to hold the parliamentary budget officer position is very simple. Through the amendment, we want to ensure the person appointed has experience at both the federal and provincial levels when it comes to the budget process.
It's crystal clear.
5:50 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
I want to thank my colleague for his proposal, although it's insufficient compared to the NDP-2 amendment, which unfortunately was defeated. My colleague's amendment is too limited and narrow in scope. I must oppose it because it doesn't cover the objective I wanted to achieve through my own amendment, namely, the establishment of a selection process and the required qualifications. These items were much more detailed in my amendment. Obviously, my colleague's amendment is insufficient. I don't think we need to insert the sentence he's suggesting. We need to specify the skills required, as proposed by my amendment. My amendment also made the selection process much clearer. Even though my colleague's proposal is good, I don't think it adds anything necessary to the bill.
5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Mr. Chair, I want to ask a question about the amendment itself. Given the experience of the proposed official languages commissioner, many people would say it's very much a partisan appointment. The amendment states:
The Parliamentary Budget Officer shall have demonstrated experience and expertise in federal or provincial budgeting.
There's no designation like a CPA or something to say that this person has a strong background in accounts and whatnot. Given that there is quite a bit of difference between public finances and a private corporation, this could easily leave the door open for someone who is a former minister provincially or even federally who has had some experience in provincial or federal budgeting.
Does the member anticipate that this could be interpreted as leaving it open for a partisan appointment vis-à-vis what we have seen happen with the—
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Absolutely. It's the same situation as for the position of—
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
—Commissioner of Official Languages.
Thank you for the lesson.
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
If I may interrupt as chair—I know you're having a wonderful discussion—I thought you were talking about Mr. Liepert, a former minister, who might be eligible. Was that the discussion?
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Well, I think he'd be humbled to be asked, but I'll let him answer whether or not he'd be interested in the job.
5:55 p.m.
Liberal
Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB
For me, it's very important that they do have experience with government. As parliamentarians, in the debate with the parliamentary budget office when they came to testify, we heard about the mission of the parliamentary budget office and who they serve. I think they need to have a profound understanding of how this place works—the parliamentary system, the House of Commons, and the Senate—and how they're supposed to help serve us so that we can hold the government to account.
When you read the bill, you can see that the government is still supposed to consult with the Governor in Council, the leader of the government in the Senate, the leader of the opposition in the Senate, and the leader of every caucus. It is still supposed to do that. That's not taking away from that level of consultation, but I think it's really important to note that if, for instance, we say it only has to be a CPA, at the end of the day, there may not be a chartered accountant who has an understanding of how Parliament works. Maybe in 10 years Dan or Ron Liepert might actually be an excellent choice for that position. Who's to say they won't be? Maybe they'll be able to understand how this place works, how you get something done, and how you provide that level of expertise.
Obviously this is done in consultation, and I don't think they're taking anything away from that.
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Mr. Chair, I do appreciate the member's intervention, but as you know, consultation means many different things to many different people. On the Conservative side, and I believe also the NDP side, we have highlighted that apparently the length of the consultation on the official languages commissioner was a letter saying that this is who it is, someone who donated and supported the Prime Minister in both his leadership and his election. This is coming from a former Liberal cabinet minister.
To the officials here, in your opinion would a former federal or provincial minister of finance have demonstrated experience and expertise in federal or provincial budgeting?
May 29th, 2017 / 5:55 p.m.
Allen Sutherland Assistant Secretary, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.
In a very narrow sense, yes they would. I would say, though, that the question before you is whether to put it in legislation. Certainly, as a competition is set up for a future PBO, the sorts of considerations around educational experience could be something that would be written into the job application.
5:55 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
To me, the wording that the parliamentary budget officer “shall” means that the person absolutely has demonstrated experience and expertise in federal or provincial budgeting. That's going to be in law. Is that correct? Someone might say that the person has served provincially, and they may have even served with distinction and honour, but by the same token, that could potentially lead to the same kind of contention with the opposition parties that it is a partisan figure.
I'm not going to be voting in favour of this. I think the member is probably well intentioned, but at the same time, you can drive a bulldozer through this and make a partisan appointment to what should be a position that serves both Houses with integrity. To allow someone with a partisan background may call the whole exercise into question, Mr. Chair, so I will be voting no.
6 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Is there any further discussion?
We'll go with Mr. Dusseault first, and then Ms. O'Connell.
