Government Operations Committee on Oct. 17th, 2006

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Okay.

Here are two things from my area in particular.

One of the areas you cut was museums' money not spent, basically—not applied for, not spent. I called my museum's organizer, who used to be on the board. They never got any money from that program.

Could you tell me, is there, in your discussions with other departments, a program review that happens, that maybe even happened before we took over government, to let you know where these cuts could be made? What was the process to get to where we are today?

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

There was an exercise by the previous government, where they identified cuts of $12.5 billion. This exercise is a far more modest $1 billion.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

So you asked other ministers to give you suggestions, and then you made—

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

We looked far and wide to identify areas to the criteria, keeping an eye on the priorities of Canadians. Canadians elected a new government. There have been quieter voices that have not been heard—voices for health care and voices for more police officers, as two prime examples.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Okay.

You had some decisions to make. Could you have made more cuts? Is there opportunity for us to be making more cuts?

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

I think when you run a $200 billion corporation, as all of us in Parliament are charged to do, you should always be looking to ensure that you're spending taxpayers' dollars wisely and well and on the priorities of Canadians.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

One issue I heard a fair amount about on the trip out west was literacy. I like to deal with the facts. My understanding—if it's not correct, you can correct me today, or the staff can—is that not a single organization with an existing agreement had their funding cut. Is that an accurate statement?

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

I guess there's a big difference between advocacy and actual front-line learning. We'll probably spend more, with the immigration settlement dollars, on the training component of literacy, and that's important. Again, it's a front-line service. Some people would rather fund conferences or advocacy organizations rather than front-line delivery, which is certainly a higher priority for our government.

I mentioned the Status of Women. They will fund if you want to have a conference or do a study on domestic violence, but if you actually want to provide front-line services, they don't provide any financial support, so the provinces are left to do it. Hopefully, the increase in the transfers to the provinces will give them greater flexibility to meet some of these demands, which perhaps aren't always highest in mind.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Mr. Minister, I think you did an excellent job of getting us to where we are. I think it is only small, at 0.5%. I know we used to get budgets presented to us with 8% and 9% increases, and we'd get them down to 3%. So we were a lot more ruthless at the municipal level than we are here. As a new member, I'm still learning how to make those changes.

What do you foresee in your department's role in terms of the future and the overspending and waste that does happen here at the federal level?

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

All we want to do is ensure that there are better accountability mechanisms in place. There will always be mistakes when you have an organization with hundreds of thousands of people working in it; we're all human, both on the political and the public service side. What we want to do is put in a better process to identify problems and shortcomings earlier. We don't want to stifle innovation within government, politically or within the public service. We want to recognize that on any given program you're never going to get 100% results. But we want to have processes in place to ensure that we do the very best job we can. Those are the types of accountability mechanisms we're trying to put in place, particularly through the Federal Accountability Act and the federal accountability action plan, which are two big initiatives.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Right.

Madame Thibeault indicated where the split is in terms of programming and funding. What's your plan for any employees who are displaced due to the cuts?

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

This is something that's of big concern to me and one of the real priorities I've brought to Treasury Board. We're not going to have perfect relationships with the public service unions, but we're working hard. There will be some 300 to 340 job losses as a result of this, but I'm very comfortable that we'll be able to work with each and every one of those individuals to find them other employment. More than 5,000 people leave the public service every year for retirement or to pursue other opportunities, and the reductions we made are in fact less than 5% of our annual turnover. It's an important message that I brought to our bargaining agents, that if there are concerns raised, we want to work with them. We've been able to establish, I think, five or six collective agreements, negotiated settlements, including one that had gone on for more than four years. So we're working hard for a constructive relationship with the public service at all levels, and it's based on respect.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Okay.

I have about one minute left, so this is likely my final question.

We're working hard. As a government, we've recognized that there's a fiscal balance that needs to be done, and we have you and a number of other cabinet ministers working on that issue, including the Prime Minister. Do these cuts have any effect on our relationship with the provinces or the territories?

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

That was a decision we made right from the get-go. We didn't want to establish the approach that Bob Rae was so critical of, where they balanced the budget on the backs of the provinces and on the backs of our hospitals and our doctors and nurses. That's why we didn't reduce transfers to the provinces, or infrastructure, which is generally a partnership. That was an important priority that we brought to the table.

[Mike Wallace, Conservative, Burlington, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Bains.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I guess there's a certain theme that's developed in today's discussion. Obviously the theme is that there are cuts to social programs, and more to come. Based on your remarks, that's the impression I get.

I would like to echo the comments of my colleague with respect to fiscal management. It needs to be noted that you take great pride in the surplus that was generated, but that was due to hard work and diligence of the Liberal government, alongside many other Canadians, working in a collaborative fashion to fix up the books and the mess that was left by the previous Conservative government, which almost bankrupted this country. So I just want to make that point as well.

But I think there's also a new theme that you developed, aside from the social cuts and aside from the cuts that are yet to come: withholding funds. I think this is something that might be a new practice for you, so I just want clarification on this as well.

You withheld the federal government's $200 million commitment to the City of Ottawa for light rail transit. There are three components of this particular issue that come to light.

First is the legal consequence of your action. When you talk about Canadian taxpayers, you take great pride in it, yet now you put them in jeopardy and they might be liable for your actions for intervening in this particular file.

Second, there's obviously the breach of the confidentiality agreement that has occurred with respect to particular items that you released to the media. There seems to be an implication that you possibly might want to get involved in the municipal elections through these actions. I don't know if that's the case. I trust you don't. I think you're a very honourable member and you work hard. So I hope that's not the intention.

Third is this unprecedented action, why you would get involved in that particular matter like this. This is the first time, I believe, in the Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund, in Ontario, where a minister has gotten involved so late in the game.

The ironic part is that you got involved thinking there was an issue, yet you made it very clear that the new council, if they come in, can okay the deal. If there's no problem with the deal, then why are you involved?

So all these issues really are mind-boggling. It's difficult to understand why you would get involved. Most importantly, you're putting at risk Canadian taxpayers. So I would like you to talk about this new theme now, aside from the social cuts, the new theme of withholding funds from projects, especially infrastructure, as you discussed previously.

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

The case didn't arrive on my desk until September 28, so late in the process. It was the first time that it came to my desk.

I do note that Réjean Chartrand, the director of economic development and strategic projects for the city, the city's top official on the light rail project, responded to questions at the city council and said yes, the prices would remain fixed, and that should the contract be awarded in December, there would be very little exposure.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

So you don't think there's any liability to the government through your actions?

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

That's what Mr. Chartrand said.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

I'm asking you.

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

No.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Okay.

And you think that your actions have no implications on local implications of what you tried to do? There's no perception of that? Or you had no intentions of that?

I give you the benefit of the doubt. I want to hear you out.

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

This arrived on my desk on the 28th, and I had to make the very best decision I could for taxpayers. I'll concede that this government's efforts to bring accountability are unprecedented. They certainly haven't been seen in a generation in this town.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Brampton South, ON]

Yes, okay. I'm talking about--