Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Barrados, I wish to thank you and your colleagues for being here. I will be talking about the PSC's revenues during the next round.
Like my colleagues, I think there should be a cost recovery system and that organizations that do not comply with the act should be forced to pay. I, like other parliamentarians, find the non-compliance with staffing principles in 48% of cases to be appalling. Regardless of whether we are talking about 48 cases out of 100, or 480 cases out of 1,000, the figure is absolutely appalling.
Under the Public Service Employment Act, the PSC delegates staffing authority to deputy heads. Under section 15, the commission may revise or rescind an authorization granted under this section.
I would like to come back to the last question. You said that you make sure that an organization is ready and willing to receive a staffing authority. Yet, you said in your report that of the staffing files audited, 48% did not respect the merit principle, and managers do not consider themselves as important actors in human resources management. Either managers are not ready to have staffing authorities because they do not understand their role in human resources management, or else the organization has undergone a complete and total change.
During the 1970s and 1980s, it was believed that human resources management was the responsibility of human resources. A staffing agent simply had to be called to resolve a problem. However, the staffing agent is not responsible for drawing up manpower plans.
Was the agency ready to receive staffing authorities when the commission delegated them? Things happen, and then all of a sudden, there are cracks and everything falls to pieces.
I'm very interested in what preceds the delegation of authority, because 48% is unimaginable.