Government Operations Committee on May 6th, 2008

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

We could do that too.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Kramp.

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

Thank you.

I'd like to stay on the timetable we have presented, the simple reason being that our researcher has been instructed to give us a broad overview of a number of the components we're about to study, and I think if we get in ahead of ourselves on that, we could just be doing some duplication, overlap, etc. Let's get the information he prepares, and then we'll have a chance to evaluate that and we can discuss it, and then I think it'll give us a much more focused sense of direction on where we need to go as a committee once we have this information.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

I think you're correct, Mr. Kramp.

Oui, Madame Bourgeois.

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

Madam Chair, if I understood correctly, after our researcher tables the document, there does not seem to be anything on the agenda for Thursday, May 8. I would however like to go back to one of Ms. Folco's motions. Will we be able to read the documents? Will we receive them soon, or are we pushing you too much?

[Philippe Le Goff]

You should have them by the end of the week.

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

Okay. What is important to me is keeping some time to go back to the issue of passports, to Ms. Folco's motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Perhaps we could do that this week?

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

This week?

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

If we are ready, as we have not yet discussed the motion.

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

If possible and so that there are no clashes, it is also important for us to have a well-structured plan for the federal government's procurement process. Would you be happy with a nice plan including the time, date and person?

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

It is a bit difficult to produce a plan for Thursday, but Mr. Le Goff already has a preliminary plan.

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

If we deal with passports on Thursday, you would have until Tuesday, May 27, to produce a plan. Does that suit you?

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Yes.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Very well.

Now we'll go to Madame Folco's motion.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My motion, which was distributed to everyone, reads as follows:

That this Committee undertake a brief study on the improvement of Passport Canada's services in the regions of Canada.

I don't think I really need to sell you on the idea, and what I am proposing is quite clear. If the motion is adopted and since we do not have anything on the agenda for Thursday morning for the time being, I would like—and I am mixing in lots of things—us to hold a meeting to see what we have to do and to prepare a very brief report with some recommendations, which should be enough.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Thank you.

Ms. Bourgeois.

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

I just want to say that I support the motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

You support the motion.

I will ask Mr. Le Goff if he has enough time to prepare something for Thursday of this week. He is the one who prepares everything for us.

[Philippe Le Goff]

We have of course received information from Passport Canada. The way we see it is that the key problem with the passports is the distribution of volume. The urban regions are well-served by Passport Canada offices. The problem lies in the more remote or rural regions where there is to my mind an unduly high burden on members' offices.

During the meeting, Passport Canada was asked for data on volume, by postal code, for passports processed. That seems to be the key aspect for opening a new office. The office in Kelowna was opened based on volume. Data is currently lacking for Sudbury, Sherbrooke and in other offices. We do not have that data, but Passport Canada should be providing it.

If the committee wishes to make recommendations on adding new offices or service organizations, that should be based on volume data.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Ms. Bourgeois.

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

Madam Chair, we must bear one thing in mind. I was not at the last meeting, but because my daughter worked in Sherbrooke, I know what it means to issue an additional 10,000 passports per year without an additional budget. That means that the member for that riding cannot deal with other matters. He has three people on staff who do nothing but submit passports. During that time, the member cannot look after having additional staff or his employees.

Given what our budgets for the ridings are, if we have three or six employees, they don't all earn the same salaries. Employees are paid $28,000 or $30,000 a year, that is unacceptable. That is why I am saying that it makes no sense and that Passport Canada, relying precisely on the volume of passports by postal code, is falling back on this idea. The member's office is helping Passport Canada save money on the backs of the member's employees and on the quality of services the member provides. That is why Ms. Folco's proposal is so important.

[The Chair, Liberal, Diane Marleau]

Mr. Kramp.

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

As a member who, like a number of my colleagues around the table, deals with a pile of passports through our office, I'm in support of this motion. I think we can see a definitive sense of direction. The only concern I have right now is the matter of timing. Before Madam Folco came to this committee, we already had a fair bit of in-depth analysis and investigation on this. A lot of testimony has been given by everyone from the minister on down.

I wonder if our researcher could do either a compilation, an assessment, or an executive summary of what has taken place before this committee already on this issue--or maybe we should be doing this ourselves. If we can have that brought forward we would have a starting point, because where do we want to draw our witnesses from?

Let's focus on where we see those definite problems, and then we can move forward on that. But to go wide open on this...I don't want to repeat what we've already heard.