Government Operations Committee on April 1st, 2008

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

We will now go to Mr. Moore.

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

Thank you very much.

It almost seems, when you look at it on the surface, with the dynamics and the timing of this, that it's one of those things where you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. If the federal government announces a project while there happens to be a campaign going on, people say they're interfering in the campaign; if you don't announce a project, they'll say you're interfering with the campaign. It seems that no matter what you did we were headed for this kind of accusation/circus.

One quote that Mark Holland left out of his presentation was that Wayne Wouters, before the committee, when asked point blank if there was anything even slightly abnormal, out of step, or inappropriate in any way whatsoever in the process of this project with regard to Treasury Board, said no, that everything went forward precisely as it was supposed to.

I guess one thing that a lot of people in the Ottawa area—your constituents, people in the area—want to know is whether the $200 million from the federal government is still available for the City of Ottawa for a rail project, going forward.

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

Yes, it is—or for any transportation project.

No matter what you do, I guess if you had to err on the side of caution.... There had been, in the previous administration, billion-dollar boondoggle after billion-dollar boondoggle, whether it was on the gun registry, in HRSDC, or with the sponsorship program and Adscam.

It's not easy to make a difficult decision, but we were elected to make the difficult decisions. We campaigned on a new era of accountability. I was Mr. Accountability. If I had the choice between being more accountable or less accountable, I'd be more accountable.

I wasn't going to have anyone say to me after the fact, “Well, Minister, you approved this 33 days before an election and now there's a $500 million cost overrun and you should pay up, because you approved it, not me.” That's why we opted for a 33-day delay.

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

When we see the headlines and declarations that are made that “Baird cancelled light rail project”, is that assertion false?

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

It was approved. It left Treasury Board, never to come back again; it was approved. All that had to be done was to subject it to a ratification vote by the new council, and then Transport was authorized to sign the contribution agreement.

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

So the money was set aside by the federal government.

Wayne Wouters is well respected. We had him in this room. I was on the Bill C-2 Accountability Act committee. He is a fantastic civil servant and he answered all the questions of all the opposition parties. He is a well-respected civil servant who said clearly that no rules were violated, everything was maintained, the recommendation came from Treasury Board, and the money was set aside, but that whether or not the project would go forward would be the consideration of a new city council, because we were in the middle of an election campaign.

There were three principal contestants for the mayor's job. What was the breakdown of the votes, and what were their positions on rail?

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

It was literally 85% against.

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

And the money is still on the table for a light rail project going forward—

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

Or any transportation project the city would like to follow.

I think around Ottawa there was a perception that Treasury Board was a group that just met once a week and rubber-stamped things. That was not the case when I was President of the Treasury Board. We held things up, we stopped things, we turned things down, we put on conditions, and we asked a lot more tough questions.

One senior official at Treasury Board said that we asked 20 times more questions than the previous Treasury Board. I'm proud of that. That's exactly what we promised to do when we sought election: to bring a new era of accountability to federal spending. And we delivered.

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

In the preamble to every question in the House of Commons on this issue, and when the Liberals try to bridge into other issues, they say John Baird interfered in a municipal election. What is your response?

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

In no way, shape, or form did I interfere. If the mayor had been able to do a great photo op, hammering in the nail of the first rail 33 days before the election, people would have been able to say that I was interfering in the election and providing the photo op for him.

So we approved the project as it was. It's the city's right to determine what kind of project it is. If they're asking for federal funding, they have to obey our processes, and one of the processes right from the get-go was that it required my committee's approval—the Treasury Board's approval—of the project.

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

We're talking about a municipal election that took place a year and a half ago, and I think most people want to look forward to the future. What is the current status of light rail in Ottawa, and what is your involvement as a member of Parliament for the area regarding light rail or transportation projects in the future?

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

The city will make a determination about what they want to do, and they'll have to live with the consequences. They made a decision to start from scratch, believing the proposal was badly flawed.

It was not done on partisan lines. Five former Liberal candidates, including a former Liberal candidate who ran against me, agreed with the decision not to proceed with the proposed light rail project, precisely because they felt it was financially irresponsible. So this was not an issue decided on party lines.

From my perspective, we promised a new era of accountability. We promised we would step in and make the difficult decisions.

If I had wanted to do the easy thing, I would go along to get along, but I wasn't elected to rubber-stamp anything. I wasn't appointed President of the Treasury Board to be a yes-man. Treasury Board, under my leadership, exercised real financial controls, and I think that's what taxpayers expected us to do.

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

What were the principal arguments made by the Treasury Board department officials who said, “Wait until the new city council is elected and let them ratify or defeat it”?

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

My first reaction on this project was to question why this was coming before us just 40 days before voters vote on what was a very controversial project. We had a good number of infrastructure projects, and I don't remember getting letters from any city council anywhere in the country saying, “Don't approve this project. Get involved. Ask the tough questions.” I did in this case, and we did.

I recognized that it was not my role to decide what type of transportation system this city chose. It was a political liability that we would have. If the project went $600 million over budget, the pressure would be for us to come up with one-third. This is exactly what's happened in a good number of other capital projects for which there was a political liability, and it is difficult to say no. When you're a third partner going in, you're a third partner at the end.

I always wanted to be clear that we had $200 million. That was all that was approved at that stage. We're happy to hear what city council wants to do. We've committed $200 million. If they come in above that, we're happy to hear the case, as I know the provincial government would be as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Angus.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Baird, I'd like to start by asking in what capacity you acted in intervening? Was it in your role as President of the Treasury Board or as political minister for the city of Ottawa?

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

I didn't intervene. It was legally required.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

What role were you playing?

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

President of the Treasury Board.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

As President of Treasury Board.

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

So it wasn't an intervention. It was put in front of me as required by statute.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Whatever. I guess many of us on the committee were somewhat dumbfounded when the Secretary of the Treasury Board said, “At no point did I say that Treasury Board asked for a copy of that contract”. The Secretary of the Treasury Board told us he had never seen the contract, that you had the contract. Is that the way you act as the President of the Treasury Board?

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

Often I will ask for additional information for a given project. But we were told that it had to be approved by October 1. Then we were told that it had to be approved by October 4.