Government Operations Committee on May 30th, 2006

[Sheila Fraser]

Madam Chair, the federal government departments and agencies report the costs to Parliament they incur. Within accounting systems, you don't record costs that others incur. So it is normal practice and, I think, standard accepted practice. In fact the Firearms Centre is reporting the costs incurred by other departments, for example, the RCMP, as part of the costs. But costs incurred by organizations outside the federal government, be they provincial police forces or the RCMP on contract to provinces, are not included in those costs and would generally only be considered when there is an overall evaluation of the program.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Has that been done?

[Sheila Fraser]

To my knowledge, that has not been done. I think there are some studies out there that purport to show what some of the costs are, but it would really take an evaluation to get that kind of information.

[Daryl Kramp, Conservative, Prince Edward—Hastings, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Ms. Thibault.

[Louise Thibault, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Although Mr. Baker has changed positions, I admit I was a bit flabbergasted to learn that you think things are going well now and look good for the future.

In her main report, on page 112 of Chapter 4, Ms. Fraser says that the issue of data quality needs to be assessed. Two examples are given in this regard. In the first, she says that approximately half of the some 1.2 million firearms registered in the RWSR still have not been entered in the Centre's new system. In the second, she says that the Centre has limited ways to follow up on revocations of firearm registration certificates.

I find this situation disturbing. However, from what you told us earlier — and correct me if I'm wrong — your level of satisfaction in this regard is very high. I don't share that feeling at all.

[William Baker]

Madam Chair, first I want to say that all my comments concerned the control and management systems, not the program's effectiveness, since, as I previously said, that assessment is a matter of the judgment of parliamentarians and the government.

The program definitely has some deficiencies. The Auditor General's report clearly sets them out. Even today, we have action plans designed to correct those problems and to continue improving program operation.

When I say I'm satisfied, I'm talking about the program, since the Auditor General's report appeared in 2002. I'm very pleased that significant efforts have been made to improve the quality of information provided to Parliament.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Ms. Nash.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Fraser, you described earlier some of the reasons for the huge cost overruns. They included opposition to the legislation, the provinces' deciding not to participate, and clearly some huge administrative problems with the program. From your report and from Mr. Baker and others, it sounds as if things have dramatically improved, that although they are perhaps not 100% where they should be, things have improved significantly.

As someone who has supported the goal of gun control, I recognize that deaths from firearms are down 500 over the period between 1991 and 2003, and that suicides are down, and that domestic violence is down, but clearly people want to be assured that the program is running well and doing what it's intended to do.

My view is that it's like having a renovation done on your house. If the thing goes way over budget, you're not going to burn your house down afterwards because the costs were too high. Clearly you've got a system set up, and it now seems to be functioning better. People work hard for their money; they don't want their tax dollars squandered.

My question is along the lines of Mr. Albrecht's question. We're here as elected parliamentarians, and we're looking at going forward. How can we do the best job possible to make sure we don't have to wait, Ms. Fraser, for you do to an audit to identify the major problems that took place after the money has been spent? How do we in good conscience use our positions, especially here through the government operations committee, to make sure the systems are put in place to prevent these kinds of problems in the future?

[Sheila Fraser]

I would have to turn to the documents the government provides to parliamentarians as part of the accountability, and in particular the estimates process. In this process, each department and agency presents its report on plans and priorities for the coming year, and then at the end of that year presents a performance report. We've done a lot of work on assessing various performance reports and plans and priorities across government, and we've noted that while government has made progress, let's say in the last 10 years, there's still a lot of work to be done.

There are a couple of major challenges. The first is that in the world in which we work and operate, it is very rare that you see a departmental performance report that will really explain all of the challenges, difficulties, and problems they are facing. I think we can all understand why that may be.

Second, quite frankly, there isn't a lot of attention given by parliamentarians to those documents and the whole estimates process, and that's a fundamental function in our system. If departments and parliamentarians had more open, honest discussion about management problems they're facing and the realities of how they're working, I think parliamentarians would better understand those things and might be able to make better judgments about policy decisions.

The tools are there; they need to be improved and they need to be used.

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

On that, I'm told that the various committees actually spend astoundingly little time looking at the estimates and the performance reports. Do you have any guidelines, based on your skill as an auditor, on how much time, or what percentage of time, a committee should use in looking at the spending of the money going into achieving the programs that governments are wanting to bring forward?

[Sheila Fraser]

We haven't been quite so bold as to suggest to parliamentarians how they should spend their time, but we have produced a document—and we're updating it for this fall, which we'd be glad to give to the committee—on the review of estimates and the kinds of questions that parliamentarians might like to ask. I think we've suggested to other committees that some departments are so big and complex that to try to do all of the department is going to be very time-consuming, so perhaps they might instead take one program within that, and then you could get into the more substantive issues.

It would be nice, quite frankly, if committees had at least one hearing on estimates, and I suspect a lot of committees don't.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

Mr. Warkentin.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just wanted to pick up on the suggestion that Ms. Nash just made. She said that if you renovate a house, you don't at the end of the day tear down the house because there was a cost overrun. Being a contractor before I came here, I do know those things do happen, so I certainly don't want to suggest that we would tear down houses. But if we install a skylight at the bottom of a roof or in the valley of a roof and it keeps on leaking, at some point we take the measures necessary and remove that skylight if it's put into an inappropriate place. Or if we do something that's wrong, we do what needs to be done.

I am concerned about the effectiveness of the program. Obviously there have been suggestions that the information in the registry isn't entirely accurate and that there are some major issues with the return mail. I know that in our office, even though we had correct addresses at election time, we're now finding that out of 500 letters I sent out recently, 25 came back. It took a day and a half for my staff to figure out where those people were currently living.

I'm concerned that if we have a database that's always in flux and that becomes more and more inaccurate as it ages, these costs are going to continue to skyrocket. Is there any provision in place, or a measure that's going to be taken, to ensure there are estimates of what it's going to cost to try to keep this registry up to date? That would be my first question.

[William Baker]

Madam Chairman, in terms of the registry that we know today, with its assets and liabilities—and we've talked about some of the weaknesses and the measures that are currently in place—without doing fundamental change to that.... The Minister of Public Safety recently announced that for the current fiscal year, the program could be operated for $10 million less, bringing it down to roughly $72 million or $73 million a year. At that level of funding, I believe the program can be sustained in its current form, or as close as we can get to a steady state. Obviously if the government chose to make investments in one area or another, they would have to be funded.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

There's no intent, then, to follow up on these addresses?

[William Baker]

On the addresses, if I may speak to them, first of all, we do have our share of return mail comparable to what other organizations have. There is a requirement in the Firearms Act for people to advise us of an address change, but frankly, like every other federal statute, people are only going to do it if there's a reason to do it. In our case, the primary reason is that they get involved in a transaction—there's a licence that has to be renewed, or they're transferring a firearm or purchasing a firearm—and in the course of conducting that transaction we confirm the address.

The suggestion made by the Auditor General, I think, is a good one in terms of trying to tie into the address bases of other federal, and perhaps provincial, entities. That is something we've taken on board to look at how and when that can be done. It's obviously tied to decisions on the IT platform for the future.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Yes, certainly, that'll be something to assess.

Of course, there are still millions of guns that are unregistered, including long guns. Maybe you'll just have to take my word for it, but I will assure you that in certain communities, especially rural communities, communities where we find farmers, and among senior citizens, or people who don't feel they're of an age when they want to go through the process, because it's a real rigmarole.... Is there anything budgeted currently, or has the program basically decided that any guns that aren't currently registered are just going to be left unregistered? I'm concerned that not only is the information in the registry not accurate, but also that it doesn't reflect the true nature of the gun ownership across the country.

[William Baker]

Clearly there are unregistered firearms in the country, as there are unlicensed drivers and people who are not paying tax, I'm sorry to say. We don't know the extent of that. There have been speculations as to what the quantum is. Honestly, I don't think anybody truly knows.

What we have done in the past is try to make it clear to anyone who hasn't registered a firearm that they can register the firearm. The deadline passed four years ago. The Firearms Centre still takes applications to register firearms, no questions asked, because at the end of the day what's important is that people are in the system, have their licences, and have fulfilled their requirements under the act. We try to support that.

I should also point out Minister Day's recent announcement with respect to an amnesty. To the extent that people's fear over being delinquent in registering a firearm may have stopped them from coming forward to do so, or to get their licence or whatever, that announcement may turn out to be a positive benefit in terms of increased compliance.

We are making the system receptive and trying to create conditions that people feel comfortable complying with, including making the system as efficient as possible. There are more online services. It's faster. It's free to register a firearm now; it's now free to renew your licence. All those things should contribute to improved responsiveness on the part of the public.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Do I have just a--

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

I think you've had your time.

We're going to go to Ms. Ratansi.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Thank you.

I have a couple of questions, but I have one quick one: where, now, is the comptroller general who gave the advice to allocate the $21.8 million as unreported liability?

[Charles-Antoine St-Jean]

At the time this advice was sought from the Department of Justice, the legal opinion came back advising that the amount was not to be charged--

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

I just want to know where he is. I have a lot more questions.

[Charles-Antoine St-Jean]

In your question you asked about the comptroller general who recommended--