Government Operations Committee on Nov. 2nd, 2006

[Robert Fonberg]

I think each individual deputy would have made a judgment as to who they needed to consult in their departments, so I can't answer that question.

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

Okay, but the assumption is that people on the ground were not consulted.

[Robert Fonberg]

I genuinely just can't answer the question. You'd have to ask each deputy how they managed the process in their department.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you, Mr. Bains.

We're now at the five-minute question and answer session.

Monsieur Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome.

We know that it is government that decides where cuts will be made. You must follow their instructions and implement those policies.

For the record, I would like a clarification. We talk about a billion dollars. Mr. Kramp said that this accounts for only 1 percent and is rather insignificant. However, if you are part of an organization that is being cut, the impact is enormous. He should show a little bit more compassion than that. However, I will not dwell on that.

Was the idea of eliminating tax havens part of the measures you were asked to explore? Has it been discussed? You may answer by yes or no.

[David Moloney]

The budget for 2006 established a spending reduction target of one billion dollars.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Yes, but I would like to know if there has been any discussion on eliminating tax havens in order to decrease the requirement for budget cuts?

[David Moloney]

No.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Fine.

Has there been any discussion about the tax credits given to oil companies? These amount to 250 million dollars a year. Have you been asked to look into this, into cutting the tax credits given to oil companies in order to have more funds available and having to cut less elsewhere?

[David Moloney]

No.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Fine, thank you.

The objective of making these cuts is to allow the government to save money. The concept of saving money is fine: he who pays his debts becomes richer.

As far as Public Works and Government Services Canada is concerned, did you consider the fact that 39 leases are expiring in Ottawa in 2006? It would be possible to save money by renting buildings in Gatineau where rents are cheaper.

Did you consider the potential of this in order to save money?

[Mike Hawkes]

We did not consider it in this exercise.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

It could have been, but it was not considered.

Madam Chair, I would like to table a document. It is in French only and I suppose it will need to be translated. Mr. Moore already has a copy. It talks about possible savings. Public Works and Government Services Canada could implement a principle which was adopted in 1983 and was reaffirmed under the governments of Trudeau, Turner, Mulroney, Campbell, Chrétien, Martin and now Harper. Under this principle, 25 percent of federal jobs in the National Capital Region would be located on the Quebec side and 75 percent on the Ottawa side. This would mean that more jobs would be located on the Outaouais side since the number presently is only 18.9 percent.

Did you consider moving employees to the other side of the river where rental costs are less, in order to achieve savings?

[Mike Hawkes]

This wasn't an issue that was raised during this particular reduction, but we are examining the issue of that split on a regular basis.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

You examine it on a regular basis. We know that this plan was introduced in 1983. Implementation of this government directive would result in savings.

Furthermore, this would allow, for example, to abstain from cutting groups with which I talk in my riding. I am thinking, Madam Chair, of a group such as Le Tremplin des lecteurs, a literacy group. They were getting $14,000 a year, were performing miracles and fell victim to the cuts.

All of this goes to say that it would be possible to find efficiencies without destroying the social fabric. Nobody would be a loser. On the contrary, our taxpayers and our government would benefit from the savings that could be had, for example, on the rental of office space.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Just a minute, please. Mr. Moore has a point of order.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

Yes.

I do not want to take away from the time of Mr. Nadeau, but he knows fully well that Mr. Fortier will appear before the Committee next week. He will be able to ask him those questions about the 25—75 percent split of public service jobs.

Our witnesses are here to talk about our budget choices and how to implement this program. Mr. Nadeau should comply with the Standing Orders.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Moore, this is not a point of order.

[James Moore, Conservative, Port Moody—Westwood—Port Coquitlam, BC]

He should comply with the Standing Orders.

[Louise Thibault]

This is a matter of opinion.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Madam, I hope this interruption will not take away from my time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

It was an opinion, a matter for debate: I will give you another minute.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you very much.

I would like to make one thing clear. It is possible to cut spending without wrecking the social fabric. I believe you, our senior officials, should analyze those aspects. These solutions should be put forward.

Let us talk about the cuts to museums. I would like to know what justifications you were given. Were there any? Were you told to just go ahead and slash these expenses, without any consideration? Museums who get few visitors, especially in the regions, require more assistance than major museum institutions throughout the country. I would like to know your analysis of this aspect.

[David Moloney]

If I may, I think it would be better to put this question to the minister.