Government Operations Committee on Feb. 6th, 2007

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Saint Boniface, MB]

I would like to ask a last question, madam Chair.

Mr. Toews, you said about the Court Challenges Program that 5 million dollars is not a big amount. You are probably the Manitoba MP whose riding comes second after mine, Provencher, for the number of French-speaking people. You know that it is thanks to that program that French-speaking people have managed to get their school board which has been very important for their development.

Do you really believe that 5 million dollars was not a big amount for them? It is with that program that they have managed to get their rights protected in Manitoba.

[Vic Toews]

Well, first of all, I don't know whether the Manitoban societies ever received any money under that program.

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Saint Boniface, MB]

They did. That's how they obtained their school division.

[Vic Toews]

Well, it's nice that you tell me that, but the program would never tell us who actually received money. So I have no way of saying—

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Saint Boniface, MB]

It seems to me you have the second highest number of francophones in your riding. It seems to me you would know that; you would have a certain interest in that community.

[Vic Toews]

Well, now, hold on, how would I know that? When I made inquiries, I was told that information could not be disclosed, that it was subject to solicitor-client privilege.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you, Mr. Toews.

Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Good afternoon, minister, Mr. St-Jean and Mr. Wouters.

I have several questions for you.

A debate has been going on since the seventies in the Ottawa area. In 1983, Cabinet decided that 25% of all federal positions in the Ottawa-Gatineau area would be located on the Quebec side and 75% on the Ottawa side.

I could provide you with a copy of a study which has been tabled here — you may not have received it but the previous minister did — indicating that about 7,000 positions are missing on the Quebec side to implement that 25-75 rule.

We've heard the comments of Mr. Baird and Mr. Fortier but I would like to know the position of your own officials on the steps that will be taken to ensure that justice is done in this matter.

[Vic Toews]

Thank you for the question. I'm sorry, but our department and the board does not specifically look at this issue. Mr. Fortier is responsible for this particular issue. I understand he is looking at that, and that's perhaps something you could direct to Mr. Fortier.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

If I am not mistaken, Treasury Board is the number one employer for the federal government. However, Mr. Toews — and you now have the document in your hands — I want you to know that this is a very important matter for this area.

On another issue, the temporary employment agencies, i.e. those that provide temporary staff to federal departments and private employers, were terribly shocked last summer when the government tried to change the supply and demand of services. A whole process has been set up and we have been able to get a study from the Conference Board of Canada on this matter.

Mr. Fortier, the Minister for Public Works and Government Services, wanted to cut the number of temporary employment agencies from 144 to 7. He wanted to make sure that there would not be a large number of partners, agencies and temporary employment services, which would have forced several agencies to pull out of the market.

What is the status of that plan? Have you studied the matter? What is your thinking now for helping those agencies?

[Vic Toews]

All I can say is that I have not had a detailed briefing on this, but I know that Mr. Fortier is working with these people to address this particular issue. I'm sorry. If there's something my department can give you on that, I will provide it, but the responsibility lies with Mr. Fortier.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Let us now deal with appointments. Bill C-2 has now been implemented. Recently, one of your colleagues who had been a candidate in Mississauga—Streetsville during the last elections — and I am not referring to Mr. Khan, the turncoat, but to Mr. Gill — was appointed citizenship judge at the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.

Was that appointment to as important a position as that of judge a political gift or a legitimate appointment and it was it done according to the rules? Have you been made aware of that situation? What is the process?

[Vic Toews]

I'm certainly aware of the appointment. I heard about it in the House as well as you did. I understand this individual is a meritorious individual. He's qualified, if you look at the qualifications that are required to fulfil this particular position.

I know that several allegations have been made in that respect, but I've seen nothing that would indicate to me that he is any less qualified, for example, than other individuals who have been appointed to that particular position. Indeed, I would say he has higher qualifications than some individuals who've been appointed in the past.

Simply because someone is politically associated doesn't mean they should be barred from being considered for a position, provided they meet the qualifications. For example, in Manitoba—

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

If I understand correctly, you have had a close look at this matter.

I will now move to my last question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you, sir, your time is up.

Mr. Albrecht.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being with us today and also your officials.

I just want to comment for a few minutes and ask a question regarding the expenditure management system. I don't think there is any issue that Canadian people are more interested in than to be sure that their tax dollars are well spent, whether that involves good planning in terms of the program or avoiding duplication or waste and all of those different things that can happen to tax dollars.

I was particularly pleased to see the system put in place for a systematic review to make sure that programs are still relevant. I can remember from my school board days that it's always easy to start a new program. It's much harder to cut one off after it's no longer effective. So I applaud the government in that direction.

You also make a point on page 5 of your notes regarding ensuring that all new programs are integrated into existing programs, and I think that's a great measure.

Do you have a timeline as to when this program will be fully implemented and up and running and producing the kinds of results that really it was intended to do? I know we're all eager to be sure that we're managing our tax dollars well.

[Vic Toews]

The comment I'd like to make at the onset is that the program will never fully be implemented in the sense that we have the program and this is what it's going to look like, but we in fact do want to ensure that the system is up and running in a timely fashion.

Work is continuing right now. This is not a simple project, and I know that—

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I just wonder if you could help me understand what's different about this from what had been in place. That might help to at least see what direction we're going in.

[Vic Toews]

I think what's different about this is that we actually are looking at past programs to determine that they are still relevant, effective, and efficient, as we're putting new programs in place. We're emphasizing value for money. That was one of the reasons I pointed out in an answer to one of the earlier questions about the A-base budget doubling in six years from $45 billion to $90 billion.

It's something that I was faced with in my own department as a minister prior to coming to this department. As our priorities as a government changed when we came into office from the past government, when we were then implementing these new measures and trying to put them into place and identifying how much it would cost in terms of resources, the question I kept asking was, “What about the things that we are no longer doing? What has happened to those resources?” There didn't seem to be a particularly good way of handling that.

It has been explained to me as to why there was never that emphasis on examining existing programs in order to ensure that those existing resources are being used properly. One of the reasons was that back in about 1995 when the A-base budget was cut to its bones, it was always assumed that everything that was there was absolutely necessary to make the government run, when in fact I think it's a mistake to assume that if it's relevant at one point in time it will continue to be relevant.

We have essentially set up a five-year review of this and are attempting to put the new system in place in about a five-year timeframe.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I'm just wondering what kinds of programs are in place to avoid duplication and waste between different ministries that are sometimes responsible for programs across ministry lines. It's one of the issues I'd like to see us address as a government. Are there things in place to address it?

[Vic Toews]

That's something the secretary could answer, and I think it's something Treasury Board is looking at.

[Wayne Wouters]

As part of the new expenditure management system, we are working with departments to develop a number of tools, because to move to this new system, we really have to look at new tools or implementing further some of the tools that we have. One of them is a policy that requires departments first to articulate the strategic objectives of that department, and then to be able to allocate its resources, both financial and non-financial, to those strategic objectives, down to a number of different levels.

Our view is that as we continue to work on that, we will be able to make that comparison between departments that have similar programs. What are they trying to achieve with their programs? Here are the objectives. Are they working toward those, whether they're in aboriginal programming or take what you want? We'll then compare them to another department and hopefully begin to align those objectives across departments over time, so that we're managing our resources more effectively.

So there are those kinds of tools that are in fact somewhat advanced. You asked the question about when this will begin. I would say it has begun, but it needs to be pushed a lot further.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

In our procurement processes, I assume Canadian labour regulations and legislation would be adhered to. It's one of the requirements for the procurement process. Is that assumption correct?

[Vic Toews]

I would assume that all relevant laws, in terms of laws governing contract or otherwise, would have to be obeyed if they're the applicable laws.