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.
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
6:40 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
I'll just say again that the reason it is that way for judges is that it's in the Constitution. It's actually in law that they will be compensated by the federal government, but there has been an accommodation, obviously, over the years, where there is a quadrennial review, and it's evaluated by someone outside of government. They make recommendations in order to make sure there is not undue political influence. Also, if you look at the way senators are paid, I believe it's 25% less than members of Parliament. You wouldn't think that the Liberals would be opposed to sticking a price in legislation, because in fact they're already doing that with escalating excise tax and CPI increases.
I think we should be supporting this, simply because the more independent we can make the office of the PBO, the better. This really does take that away. Then, when someone signs up for it, they know going into it what the pay is, and there is a certain amount of respect that comes along with that. While I do not find this process of constantly having to change the government's own BIA, it just shows me that this was not the proper process. This should have been done in a single bill.
Mr. Chair, I want to reiterate my concern that with these new changes we are setting this up for partisan influence, whether it be allowing a former finance minister or a minister of the crown provincially or federally to take the office, or by now allowing pay to be at the discretion of the government of the day.
I just think that if we really want to make the office independent, more thought and study needs to be done rather than the two hours of witness testimony that we had coupled with the time we have at clause-by-clause consideration.
I'm not going to make mention of anything to the officials, other than just to thank them for being here today. We appreciate your expertise.
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Mr. Dusseault has the last word on this one.
I would remind people we are on amendments to clause 128 and we have 457 clauses to do.
Mr. Dusseault.
6:40 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
Thank you.
My colleague on the other side of the table said what I wanted to say. This is a distinct position that is in a category of its own. And so the usual salary standards should be applied to it.
The salaries of judges are set by law because we want to ensure their independence. If there is a position that requires similar independence, I think it is indeed that of the parliamentary budget officer. It falls into that category.
The point is not to apply this formula to all other parliamentary officers. It is to ensure the independence of the parliamentary budget officer, given the nature of that position.
My colleague made some points that support my argument.
6:40 p.m.
Liberal
Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB
I promise it's a tiny point.
How do you actually determine that it should be an associate deputy minister's salary? When we heard the judges and they came to do the implementation, we questioned the officials about the salary of a judge. They said the salary necessary to ensure a judge has absolute independence is $315,000 to $400,000, depending on their level and where they sit. How do we actually determine that it should be an associate deputy minister, not a deputy minister? How do we set out that criteria? That's the question.
We're about to set this in legislation so I think for the moment what we really need to do is to ensure that we have the opportunity of allowing the government to make that decision on how they make it with other officers because we haven't seen that in other legislation. If it's good for the Auditor General, I don't see why it's not good enough for the parliamentary budget officer.
6:40 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
There is actually a guidance that is widely available. You can actually find out what an associate deputy minister makes or how the position is paid within the GX salary range. These things are on the Internet and there is a range between a start point and an end point for an associate deputy minister. This is already established and is used as criteria by the Government of Canada. What Mr. Dusseault is suggesting is to use a system that's already been used. I would suggest there is probably sufficient framework.
If the member wants to explore this more, maybe he could suggest to his government that we stop this end of the bill and we go back to a full process, maybe even start with a special committee of both Houses. Then the committee can take the time to get it right the first time.
6:45 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
My question was addressed to the witnesses.
If my amendment is defeated—and I fear that may happen, but I still have hope—and the clause remains as it is, will his salary be made public, nevertheless? Will we know which scale or range will be used to determine it? Can you enlighten us on that?
6:45 p.m.
Director, Strategic Policy, Privy Council Office
The PBO? Yes. The order in council that would appoint the individual would have the salary range associated with it.
6:45 p.m.
Assistant Secretary, Machinery of Government, Privy Council Office
Anyone taking the job would know the salary they'd be receiving ahead of time because the comparable will have been done with other officers of Parliament.
6:45 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
There's also a committee that actually reviews that on a regular basis that's independent from government so to speak. They do an assessment to make sure that we have good retention in the public service. Is that correct?
6:45 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
It's a well-proven system, is it not?
6:45 p.m.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC
The current system of having the pay range and where it's reviewed.
6:45 p.m.
Director, Strategic Policy, Privy Council Office
Yes, it's a well-established system. It's been in place for a long time.
6:45 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
I would like a recorded vote, please.
(Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter
Turning now to NDP-4, there's a technical point. If NDP-4 is adopted, the question cannot be put on amendment LIB-3 due to line conflicts. The vote on NDP-4 applies to NDP-7 as they are consequential to each other. If adopted, the question cannot be put on Green Party amendment PV-5 due to line conflicts with NDP-7. Those are the technicalities around this amendment.
Mr. Dusseault, on amendment NDP-4.
6:45 p.m.
NDP
Pierre-Luc Dusseault NDP Sherbrooke, QC
The amendment would, in fact, eliminate a reference to proposed clause 79.12, in line 6, which concerns the authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons and of the Senate. In proposed clause 79.11, there is a reference to proposed clause 79.12. The purpose of the amendment is quite simply to delete that reference, which as you know indicates that the parliamentary budget officer is under the stewardship of the Speakers of the two Houses.