Evidence of meeting #34 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was ensure.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Diane Marleau
I call this meeting to order. As far as I can see, we have a quorum.
Minister Toews, welcome to our committee. You know how it works; you know the drill.
3:30 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
3:30 p.m.
President of the Treasury Board
Thank you very much.
I'm here with the Treasury Board Secretary, Mr. Wayne Wouters, and Mr. Charles-Antoine St-Jean. Both of them are here to assist me in answering your questions. I intend to make a brief presentation and then answer any questions that any members may have, Madam Chair. Again, as I say, if I can't answer them, my officials will provide the information either directly or to me and then to you.
May I commence then?
3:30 p.m.
President of the Treasury Board
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm happy to appear before your committee for the first time as the President of the Treasury Board.
I have with me, as I indicated, Mr. Wayne Wouters. I didn't indicate the title of Mr. St-Jean. Of course, he's the Comptroller General of Canada.
Today I'd like to update the committee on the activities of the secretariat in four areas: the implementation of the Federal Accountability Act and action plan, the expenditure management system, the accrual budgeting issue, and large IT projects.
I will begin with some brief remarks, after which I'll be open to answering questions.
Improving accountability in government has been our number one priority since we took office. Our commitment to accountability did not stop with the introduction of the Federal Accountability Act on April 11, nor with royal assent on December 12. We've delivered and will continue to deliver by ensuring that all aspects of the act and its companion action plan are implemented. Together they provide measures to reduce the influence of money in politics, protect whistle-blowers, and improve government contracting.
They strengthen financial management and internal audit functions within departments and ensure more consistent discipline for those who deliberately break the rules. They ensure that agents of Parliament, like the Commissioner of Lobbying and the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner, have the power they need to be effective, independent watchdogs.
But accountability is not just about putting in the right controls and rules to make government work better. It is also about accountability for real results for Canadians. Every year, some $27 billion is transferred to individuals, corporations, and NGOs through grant and contribution programs. Yet time and money are being wasted administering rules and processes that add little to results and nothing to accountability.
I'd like to take a moment to thank my predecessor, Mr. Baird, for the good work he did in this department and the initiatives he commenced. They have certainly made my transition much easier.
My predecessor appointed a blue ribbon panel to recommend ways to make the management of these programs more effective and efficient. The panel will be making its report public in the next few weeks, and I'll be making the government's response public at the same time.
We are also reforming government procurement policy. There is a new code of conduct for procurement that applies to both suppliers and public servants. There is a procurement ombudsman to review practices across the government, consider complaints, and help resolve disputes. These are just a few of the elements of accountability that we are working diligently to put into effect.
I would like to take a few minutes to explain in some detail how we are implementing the act. Let me begin by saying that officials at the secretariat and across government are doing their part to put the act into effect as quickly as possible.
Getting the act passed into law took a lot of hard work. Implementing this complex piece of legislation will take even more time and effort. This is because we need to ensure that all the pieces are in place to ensure a smooth transition.
Some of the major activities that need to be completed are as follows. We are developing several sets of regulations. Those regulations are evident from the act itself, for example, those around the administrative penalties under the Conflict of Interest Act. Some of these will require significant public consultations, and the regulations around the new provisions of the Lobbying Act are a good example of this.
So it's not simply a matter of the act coming into force and simply proclaiming a regulation; consulting needs to be done to ensure that this is done in an appropriate way.
A number of Governor in Council appointments will need to be made. Most of these, including the appointment of the new Commissioner of Lobbying, will require Parliament's review.
A number of the government's administrative policies will need to be amended, including the government's financial management and procurement policies.
Finally, in some cases organizations will need to put new work units in place to administer the new requirements. For example, crown corporations that will now be subject to the Access to Information Act will need to have personnel in place to administer ATI the day it comes into force.
Communications and outreach will also be critical. We will be informing the public, as well as departments and agencies, of the new provisions of the act as they are brought into force. We will ensure that all interested parties are aware of the implications and have the capacity to respond.
The Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act is a case in point. In order for this to be brought into force, several critical steps need to be completed. These include establishing the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Tribunal; ensuring that organizations are ready to fulfill their new responsibilities; and approving the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner to administer the act.
With regard to the last point, we are doing our part to select a strong candidate. When we bring forward our nominee for this position, I hope I can count on you as parliamentarians to ensure that the vetting process takes place as efficiently and as fairly as possible.
Training is also critical to the effective implementation of the FAA. We will be working with the Canada School of Public Service to update existing courses and to ensure that appropriate training is provided.
We have a lot to do to implement the act, but we are moving forward to implement the commitments in the federal accountability action plan. For example, there are several reviews under way to make government work better for Canadians, especially those who interact with government on a regular basis. These initiatives include the ongoing renewal of the government's management policies and the blue ribbon panel review of grants and contributions that I mentioned earlier.
In summary, we are working hard to bring the act into force as expeditiously as possible, but each of these activities will require time and resources to ensure that every organization is ready to properly administer the new activities and to comply with the law. The timetable for implementation will be finalized soon, after consultation with affected stakeholders. In the next few weeks, Treasury Board will begin the process of considering the enabling regulations that will implement the act. We will keep working at it until it's done and done right.
Madam Chair, the Federal Accountability Act was this government's first step in enhancing accountability in government. Improving how spending is managed through a new expenditure management system is the next step to ensure Canadians' hard-earned tax dollars are well spent. That's why, in November, we announced the directions for a new expenditure management system. Our goal is to ensure that every tax dollar spent is well spent. For new spending, that means making decisions in the context of other spending in the same area. For existing spending, it means an ongoing systematic review to make sure programs are still relevant and are achieving the intended results and that funding is adequate.
Simply put, our new approach to expenditure management will support managing for results by establishing clear responsibilities for departments to better define the expected outcomes of new and existing programs. Secondly, our new approach will support decision-making for results by ensuring that all new programs are fully and effectively integrated with existing programs by reviewing all spending to ensure efficiency, effectiveness, and ongoing value for money. Finally, we will support reporting for results by improving the quality of department- and government-wide reporting to Parliament. Ultimately, this new system will ensure that all government programs are effective and efficient, focused on results, and provide value for taxpayers' money.
In the time I have remaining, I'd like to address some of the committee's other concerns: the use of full accrual accounting for departmental budgeting and appropriations and our approach to large IT projects. I have received perhaps more briefing on accounting in the last month than I've received in quite awhile, and I'm beginning to understand how diligently my staff work at these issues. I know they're very much interested in what the committee has had to say on these issues, and I intend to work with the committee and work with the department to ensure that any changes in that respect are implemented carefully and indeed benefit Canadians.
I would like to thank you, Madam Chair, and the members of your committee for your efforts in improving financial management and reporting by the Government of Canada.
The benefits of accrual accounting are well accepted. The accrual method of accounting could improve transparency in financial management and therefore accountability. I'm sure you appreciate the complexities involved in designing and implementing such a system. That's why the secretariat is studying the issue carefully. Our position, which will be included in our response to the public accounts committee, will form the basis of the government's position to be presented in the debate on the concurrence motion for your committee's report. Until that time, I don't want to prejudge the outcome of our deliberations.
Another way we are working to improve accountability in government is by strengthening our ability to manage and implement large information technology projects. Specifically, we have developed an action plan, which builds on the progress made, to address the Auditor General's concerns in this area. That includes developing clear expectations with new policy and a directive on the management of IT projects, providing new guidance and tools, training and development programs, and strengthening the secretariat's oversight of large information technology projects.
Madam Chair, the technology underpins the delivery of almost every program and service we deliver to Canadians. That is why we take the management of these IT projects so seriously.
The theme that runs through every one of the activities I've talked about today is about improving accountability in government. I'm proud of the ongoing efforts on behalf of the people of this country that we as parliamentarians have made. Certainly in passing the Federal Accountability Act, we're working hard, I believe, to restore trust in government by ensuring we have the right measures in place to enhance accountability and manage spending, to provide value for money and real results for Canadians. We won't stop until the job is done.
Thank you. I'm prepared to answer questions.
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
Raymond Simard Liberal Saint Boniface, MB
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much, Mr. Minister, for being here along with some of the department people.
We've heard the word “accountability” quite a few times in your statements. And I know we've been hearing a lot lately that the Senate was responsible for holding back Bill C-2. It seems to me that a lot of the dispositions have apparently not been put into place--apparently 15 of them. I understand it does take time to put things in place, but it would seem to me that some thought would have been put into that and that some of these dispositions could have been actually implemented a lot sooner. Can you tell me why--I mean, Bill C-2 did receive royal assent on December 12, almost a couple of months ago--we are not moving ahead with some of these dispositions?
3:45 p.m.
President of the Treasury Board
I think that's a good question. Some of the provisions of the Federal Accountability Act did in fact come into effect upon royal assent--for example, the designation of deputy ministers and deputy heads as accounting officers; the Director of Public Prosecutions Act, which was a very complex portion of the act that I was involved with in my prior portfolio; and the new mandate for the Auditor General to follow the money to grant and contribution recipients.
Certainly when I was in my prior portfolio I saw that the government was moving as quickly as it could. For example, I think they could have sat and waited for the Director of Public Prosecutions Act to be passed and then commence. In fact in that situation it was felt we could proceed on that issue, and we did. Also, the new electoral financing rules came into effect on January 1. Restriction on gifts to political candidates comes into force on June 12. Other sections either require new regulations or require organizations to perform new functions.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Raymond Simard Liberal Saint Boniface, MB
With respect to the Public Appointments Commission, do we have an idea when that will be coming into place? Normally when a new government takes over, logically there are a lot of appointments that get put forward. We wouldn't want the government to put all its appointments forward before this new process has been put into place. Do we have an idea of when that would be put into effect?
3:45 p.m.
President of the Treasury Board
All I can say is that when I came into the department a little over a month ago, I reviewed these matters. I've been reviewing these for the past month. I'm satisfied that the department officials are moving in a timely fashion. I'm not in a position to release any kind of a schedule. As I indicated in my notes, that schedule is something we're working on. I can say that each one of these issues involves different considerations, and I'm committed, and I know the department is committed, to moving ahead as quickly as possible.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Raymond Simard Liberal Saint Boniface, MB
I was here at the public accounts meeting the other day, and I got a bit of information on making the deputy ministers accounting officers. As a matter of fact, that's probably not a bad idea. I think the buck has to stop somewhere. The danger, I guess, is in what that does to ministerial responsibility and that fine line. I think we have to be very clear that ultimately the minister is responsible. So how do you distinguish between the responsibility of the deputy minister and that of the minister in these cases?
3:45 p.m.
President of the Treasury Board
I guess the short answer to that is that it doesn't change in any substantive way the responsibility of the minister. The minister is still responsible.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
3:45 p.m.
President of the Treasury Board
Absolutely. We believe it's important for the deputies to also be responsible, and that's why they were designated as the accounting officers.
In terms of ministerial responsibility, nothing has changed. What exactly ministerial responsibility involves is another question. I know we had pretty extensive discussion on that during some of the discussions prior to the last election. I know that in front of the public accounts committee, when I was involved in some of the hearings there, that whole issue.... There were some experts who brought forward different ideas on the extent to which ministers should be held accountable in any particular way. This act has not changed ministerial responsibility, whatever one considers that to be.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Raymond Simard Liberal Saint Boniface, MB
Has the act put into place consequences for an accounting officer who does not do his job properly?
3:45 p.m.
Wayne Wouters Secretary, Treasury Board Secretariat
Again, at the end of the day, deputy heads or accounting officers are appointed by the Prime Minister and supporting ministers. So the Prime Minister at any point in time could make a decision vis-à-vis his deputy head, based on the advice of a minister or the clerk or otherwise. Any consequences that follow are very much the prerogative of the Prime Minister.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Raymond Simard Liberal Saint Boniface, MB
Thank you.
You also spoke, Minister, about procurement. One of the issues of concern, obviously, is sole sourcing, or indirect sole sourcing created by establishing criteria that only one company can meet. That has to be a concern in every department, but mostly in Treasury Board. I wonder what kinds of actions you are taking to ensure competitive bidding, for instance, mainly for these huge defence procurements, and, really, for every procurement.
3:50 p.m.
President of the Treasury Board
That's exactly the question I asked when I became the minister of this department, President of the Treasury Board--how our procurement policy actually works. The secretary very kindly explained exactly that. Essentially the general rule is that there is a competitive process. That is the main goal of all procurement. In certain situations, for one reason or another--and I'll have the secretary explain that--that is not the practice. There's nothing inappropriate about it. For example, the criteria are well known; those criteria are put out, and we say, “This is what we are looking for”, and then people are asked to match that. I'm perhaps not explaining it properly.
Mr. Wouters can go on.
3:50 p.m.
Secretary, Treasury Board Secretariat
As the minister said, the principle is that the procurement should be competitively undertaken. There are exceptions to that. For anything under $25,000 or any engineering-related work under $100,000, one can use sole-source.
As well, from time to time, due to the specifications of a particular commodity or good that is to be procured, it is found that, through the exercise of laying out the specifications, there is in fact only one firm that qualifies to meet those specifications. In those instances, there is normally an expression of interest beforehand. There's a meeting that Public Works would undertake to see if in fact there are any other firms. If not, it would normally issue what's called an ACAN, which is the name of the company that can meet the specifications in this case. That is put out for a period of time to see if any other company can come forward. If they do, then Public Works would re-look at the process.
It's only in those unique circumstances in which there is only one firm—it could be for security reasons if there's only one firm—that develops and produces this kind of equipment. In those instances, though, there is still a process to ensure that the public is aware and that other firms can come forward if they feel they can meet those specifications.
3:50 p.m.
Bloc
Louise Thibault Bloc Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC
Thank you minister for being here with your officials whom we have already had the pleasure to meet in previous meetings. I will start with my short questions and will conclude with those that may require longer answers. You have raised several issues in your statement.
About accrual accounting, the Auditor General has said several times — and I will paraphrase — that the issue has already been looked at many times in considerable detail. You've just told us that we will get the answer when it is provided to the Public Accounts Committee, which may be understandable but I would like to know — and this is of interest not only to myself but to everyone here — when we can expect a decision from this government on the implementation of accrual accounting. Believe me, you are not the only one to have gone through a period of intensive training or briefing. I had the same feeling when I started learning about it. That is my first question.