Government Operations Committee on June 20th, 2006

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Okay. I think technically that's correct, that the danger pay still exists, but it is so restricted in its application that the people I'm referring to are no longer entitled to it. They were receiving it and they are no longer receiving it. Would that be correct, in your view?

[Hélène Laurendeau]

Some of them may, but the vast majority maintain the same interpretation all across the country. But there are some people, individuals, who had danger pay taken away, that's correct.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

If you have any specific examples concerning your constituents, I'd be very happy to look into it.

[Peggy Nash, NDP, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Holland.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair and Mr. Minister, and all those who have come today. I appreciate the opportunity to pose a couple of questions.

I wanted to start off, if I could, with the notion of a public service commissioner and this notion of Gwyn Morgan being rejected by the committee. I can say that just as the Prime Minister was disappointed in the decision of this committee, it would be fair to say that I was disappointed in the results of the election. The democratic processes are democratic processes, and one recognizes that you don't always get what you want through those processes but you respect them.

The question at the end of the day is what is the view with respect to committees then, in a broader sense? I mean, if a committee strikes down a particular recommendation and says democratically, through multiple parties, that a certain individual is not who the committee thinks is right for the position, is it then standard practice to not care what the committee's position is and to appoint somebody else?

I'm trying to understand the logic for it. I understand that he was disappointed. He was a friend and somebody he had a long-standing relationship with. I'm sure he wanted him there. But through a democratic process, the committee said no, and then to simply eliminate the position because you didn't get the person you wanted.... I'm trying to understand the logic of that. Is it not more important to work with the committee and find somebody who can build consensus?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I think that has been the standard process, to ignore what the committee says. Certainly it was the process with Mr. Glen Murray, of course, and your government. We heard those same concerns expressed by members of the now official opposition when it happened.

If you can ask a political question, I can give a political answer.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

But I'm asking you because I heard, and you bring up the example, there was much hue and cry--

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Different standards--

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Perhaps I could finish.

There was much hue and cry by your particular party about the fact that the committee wasn't listened to during the last Parliament. So you say one thing when you're in opposition, and when you come to government you say, “Well, you did it, so it's good enough for us.”

That's seems like a rather cynical response. I mean, if you had one position in opposition, why is that position not being carried forward in government?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I think it was. When Mr. Murray was appointed, the committee--I think even the House--voted no and the Liberal Prime Minister went ahead and did it anyway. This committee voted no with respect to Mr. Morgan, and he didn't appoint him.

So I think he was actually doing what he said he would do.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

No, he withdrew the entire position. He basically took his things and went home. I mean, it works. Now we don't have anybody in that position, instead of trying to work collaboratively with the committee.

I simply draw the point. I'm very disappointed that we're not moving forward with the position. I think it's a worthwhile position. It's something I certainly would have supported.

I'll just leave it with the point that I think it would be much better, rather than to walk away, to have tried to work with committee to---

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Your new-found enthusiasm for working with parliamentary committees and that of the official opposition is noted. We did work with the New Democratic Party at committee to strengthen the public appointments commission, and actually put in statute the various processes that do require one of the amendments that the New Democrats put forward, which we approved, to give calls for consultation prior to making some appointments.

So I think it's a work in progress. We didn't withdraw the portions of Bill C-2 in that regard. In fact, if anything, they were strengthened by Mr. Martin.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Staying in practice for opposition is very good and criticizing is good, but by the same token, I think it's important to move forward. I can say that in the last Parliament, as vice-chair of the public accounts committee, I spent a great deal of time trying to improve the power of committees. I'm disturbed at any level when committees are essentially either ignored or brushed aside and it's said that their decision is not important and we're going to walk away.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I'm going to review Hansard to see if I see--

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

The other issue that I wanted to talk about is the issue of a centralization or a decentralization of jobs. I know that a number of your members in the opposition had criticized the previous government because there was a feeling that jobs should be moved out of Ottawa into other regions of the country and decentralization should occur. I certainly recall every Friday this issue raised by Conservative members, that decentralization must occur, and it was extremely important.

I'm just wondering what your position is on decentralization and moving jobs from Ottawa to other regions of the country, and if you would share the sentiments of your colleagues when they were in opposition, and if that's something this committee can look forward to.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I think one of the things for which I have an important responsibility as President of the Treasury Board is to stand up for the public service as an institution, for individual members of the public service. I think there has been a concern that governments have made political decisions, not public administration decisions, in the past.

Under Mr. Mulroney, my tax return was processed in Ottawa, my federal and Ontario income tax return was processed in Ottawa. Other Ontarians have their tax processed in the riding of Sudbury. There was a decision taken by Mr. Chrétien to move that to Shawinigan. Now, I'm not sure of the public policyand public administration rationale for moving one of the Ontario tax processing centres from Ontario to Shawinigan, but with no disrespect to Shawinigan, I think that was a political decision.

One candidate in the last election said that he had got the minister to approve moving jobs from Ottawa to Gander. I just find it strange that after a judge issues a major report calling the government corrupt, after the members of the House of Commons have voted non-confidence in the government, after the government has fallen, the Prime Minister resigns, and Parliament is dissolved, the government is making decisions about public servants' lives based on politics.

So I think what I've said is that if there's a public administratio and public policy rationale, that should be fairly considered, but it's not appropriate to play political games with the lives of public servants.

I'll just continue. Bill Casey has brought up the issue that under the previous regime--which had to make some difficult decisions to balance the budget, and I don't discount that at all--on a percentage basis, there were more cuts in the regions than there were here in Ottawa. When the government was then upsized, when there was a surplus, they upsized it in Ottawa and not in the regions. I think it's a fair concern that we should treat people in the regions and centrally here in Ottawa fairly.

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

Does that mean you're favouring decentralization?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I've said if there's a public policy rationale--

[Mark Holland, Liberal, Ajax—Pickering, ON]

On a go-forward basis, there's a lot of history there, but I'm interested in going forward.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

If there's a public policy rationale, it should be considered and weighed.

We heard in another committee--I sat at the Senate committee last night--that the previous government moved the Canadian Tourism Commission to Vancouver without considering official languages, and that raised a huge amount of concern.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

I'm going to throw in a little correction to some of the statements you've made, because I've lived in Sudbury now for a very long time. I happen to know that the tax data centres in Sudbury and Shawinigan were created at the same time. I believe that was done by a Conservative prime minister. They were both established under Joe Clark. They had been promised under a Liberal prime minister and there had been a number of them promised, and my understanding is that only two survived: one was in Shawinigan and one was in Sudbury, and that was in 1979.

So whatever has happened since has been more a case of utilizing what's already in place. I just wanted to make that little correction.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Up until 1996, Ottawa—area code 613—or eastern Ontario tax returns were processed at 100 Heron Road in Ottawa, and now the envelopes are sent to, and the processing takes place at, Shawinigan.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

That's a different issue completely, though. It's more about using what you've got. At any rate, I just thought I'd throw in that correction.

Mr. Wallace.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm glad that when we started at this committee you explained that it was one of the least partisan committees.