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.
6 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
The last thing we want is for the parliamentary budget officer to be selected following an appointment such as the one made in the Commissioner of Official Languages' case.
While the intention is good, the amendment doesn't go far enough to reassure parliamentarians that the appointment would be completely non partisan. It's by far the last position for which we would want the person selected to not have the support of parliamentarians.
6 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Mr. Chair, while I understand the concerns being raised, I find there's some hypocrisy after 10 years without a clause like this and partisan appointments being made without blinking an eye.
What's important here is we heard testimony that whoever is selected and then considered by the House and the Senate, and ultimately appointed, have experience in government budgets, provincial or federal. That does not automatically mean that the person is a former minister, as my colleagues across the way would like to paint the picture. This gets down to the fundamental point of experience. We heard testimony that this skill set needs to have the type of experience of government budgets and budgeting. I don't see that as an automatic partisan appointment, although that might have been the practice of the past. I have confidence that this—
6 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
—is moving in the right direction to deal with experience, and there is still the accountability left up to parliamentarians and the Senate.
6 p.m.
Liberal
Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC
I'm very reluctantly giving the floor to my colleague, because I think we've discussed this subject enough.
I think the government's intentions, through this bill, clause and amendment, are very clear. We want to emphasize experience when it comes to the budget process. I can't rely on the goodwill of whichever government is in power and the parliamentarians. They must take their responsibilities very seriously to make sure to recruit the best candidate possible.
May 29th, 2017 / 6 p.m.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Thank you, Chair.
I have two observations to make.
Madam O'Connell raised that maybe at other times we had some partisan nominations. Well, let me remind you it was not so long ago, just a few weeks ago, that the government made a nomination for the official languages commissioner, someone who is clearly a Liberal. Being a Liberal is not a problem, but when you add that kind of stuff, this is a problem.
My second point is related to my personal experience. I was a journalist for 20 years. When I decided to run for office in 2008, I knew my work as a journalist was over and that I could never be a journalist again.
When sometimes we engage in political action, which is great, we know that we are shutting the door to some other jobs. This one is clearly a job that is deserved by someone who has no political link at all, as a journalist should be. When I started to run, I knew it was the end of my career as a journalist and that I would do something else. Well, that's exactly what we're talking about here. If someone wants to table his candidacy for this job, there should be no political link at all, like it should be for the commissaire aux langues officielles, which is not the case now, by the Liberal nomination of a Liberal friend.
Everyone recognizes that Ms. Meilleur is the best Liberal available.
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We're not going to get into previous appointments any further. That point has been made.
On the amendment itself, Mr. Albas.
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
Okay.
On the point, Mr. Chair, this goes back to my earlier contention that this is not the right process. These kinds of amendments....
When Mr. Page came as a witness, even he said there was not sufficient time to analyze this. The Liberals have brought forward amendments that clearly do not pass the test here, given their current conduct with other ones.
I'm going to be voting against this, because this is not the right amendment, but it's also the wrong process for something so important to both Houses.
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
All right, we've had a fairly lengthy discussion on LIB-2.
Shall the amendment carry?
6:05 p.m.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
I would like a recorded vote.
(Amendment agreed to: yeas 5; nays 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
6:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
We'll take a 15-minute break to stretch our legs, a health break I guess we'll call it.
We'll suspend for 15 minutes.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Welcome back, all.
We will start on page 79 of the bill with amendment NDP-3.
Mr. Dusseault, are you ready to roll?
6:30 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like my colleagues' attention. This amendment is extremely important. It seeks to resolve what I consider a very important issue, in other words, the remuneration and expenses of the parliamentary budget officer.
First, could the witnesses tell us whether they considered this? According to the bill, the remuneration and expenses will be set by the Governor in Council. Could we have an idea of the salary the Governor in Council is considering? Has this already been determined? Has a range been established for the parliamentary budget officer's salary? I imagine it will look like the current officer's salary.
6:30 p.m.
Assistant Secretary, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
Mr. Chair, typically what happens is, once the bill has passed, as part of the development of the merit criteria for the position, an assessment is made based on the complexity of the job, so I can't give you an exact range for the PBO. Sometimes it depends on who the successful candidate is, but primarily it depends on the assessment of the complexity of the job. This is done by HR professionals. I think you can expect that it will be an increase on what the PBO currently makes because he is not a deputy head, but I couldn't give you the exact figure.
6:30 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
The bill clearly states that the salary is determined by the Governor in Council. Who is the Governor in Council? It's the government, cabinet and ministers.
My amendment seeks to completely remove the power of the Governor in Council, meaning the ministers, to determine the parliamentary budget officer's salary. The goal is to once again ensure the clear independence of the parliamentary budget officer. The officer's salary will be consistent with the salary range of an assistant deputy minister. This set range can be verified in the public tables.
This will promote transparency with respect to the parliamentary budget officer's salary and will ensure there's no political interference when determining the salary. This will ensure a form of independence with regard to the salary. If the salary were determined by the Governor in Council, it could constitute a form of power. Government employees could be influenced or even intimidated.
This change is very practical and would not lead to a major change in the salary itself. I hope my colleagues will be wise enough to support this amendment, which seeks to remove the political aspect when it comes to determining the parliamentary budget officer's salary.
6:35 p.m.
Liberal
Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want Mr. Dusseault to shed more light on this. Are the salaries of any other officers of Parliament determined or prescribed by legislation?
Maybe the witnesses could also shed more light on this.
6:35 p.m.
Don Booth Director, Strategic Policy, Privy Council Office
I'm not aware of any examples where remuneration ratio levels are specifically set. They tend to be set generally at deputy head level to be determined by the Governor in Council, and there are ranges the Governor in Council uses based on complexity, various HR requirements, and comparability with other jobs.
6:35 p.m.
Liberal
Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB
Also, I suspect it is probably the experience level and the desirability of that individual coming into that position.
6:35 p.m.
Director, Strategic Policy, Privy Council Office
It's all within a range. There is a variety of different factors such as that, but it tends to be set to be comparable to other jobs, say to other agents of Parliament or other GIC appointees.
6:35 p.m.
Liberal
Jennifer O'Connell Liberal Pickering—Uxbridge, ON
Mr. Chair, while I think I understand the intention of the mover of this amendment, I do have concerns. I won't be supporting this amendment because these types of remuneration levels are not usually set in legislation, as has been said. I think the argument that the government could then use this as a mode of intimidation is frankly a stretch, to say the least, because when someone is hired for the position, they are hired knowing the details of the contract, and so on. To suggest that if the PBO had an opinion that the government didn't like, they would then cut their expenses or cut their salary, this amendment would not deal with those types of issues. That would be an issue for Parliament to take on.
Off the top of my head, I can't think of any time when specific salaries have been set in legislation, especially at the official level, at arm's-length from politicians. As for judges, the rationale behind establishing judicial salaries is to ensure there is not undue influence from outside members. Also, the Senate salaries are fixed in legislation to keep a balance between parliamentarians and the Senate. That was established to keep those levels, but they're based on ranges, as was said earlier.
I can't support this amendment, because the rationale behind it is not quite there. I don't think the justification to break away from the norm has been made well enough, with all due respect to my colleague.