Evidence of meeting #11 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was departments.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
Assistant Secretary, Expenditure Management Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
Yes.
For them to determine the 5%, it may be that those proposals are not fully accepted--
Assistant Secretary, Expenditure Management Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
--so you end up with less than 5%.
Indeed, I will just add that there are reinvestments as well, which have, for the first two rounds, counterbalanced the reallocations. There are no net savings, as such, from strategic reviews.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
That leads me to my next question. The previous government had $2 billion--I remember this well--booked into government operations that weren't realized that this government inherited. I won't get into the whole A.T. Kearney mess and the $24 million for which we got zero value for money. But I will say this: when a government books savings, that means it's your job to go and find them, and when they're not met, someone has to pay. There's no free money here, as you know.
My concern is that if you're being told to go and find these savings--or departments are required to, sorry, let me put it that way--and government priorities....
Just for those who might take the opportunity to listen to us, “government priorities” means what you've been told by the government to go and find--in other words, savings and money.
In this case, we're talking about booking into their budget to the tune of.... Well, it depends on which numbers you're looking at, but I have $4.3 billion. I guess that was the fiscal update number.
To Mr. Botham, is it still $4.3 billion for this year, combining the two? Is that the number you're using, operationally speaking?
Director, Microeconomic Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
The number in the update, you're right, is $4.3 billion for 2009-2010.
Director, Microeconomic Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
The document in front of you probably outlines, at least two lines above that, the source.
Director, Microeconomic Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
Right. That's both savings from the way the government manages its operations—
Director, Microeconomic Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
—and then the second line, being $2.3 billion, includes both strategic review and corporate assets.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Okay. But I'm just establishing, that's the number you're using still.
Director, Microeconomic Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
That's correct.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
So it was in the fiscal update, and it's the number you're using right now.
Mr. Chair, we have a pattern here where the previous government tried to find $2 billion and didn't get it done. We're now talking about $4.3 billion. And we're now saying, well, we'll find it through required efficiencies, 5%, and sale of assets.
My concern is that if we don't have a clear indication of what those assets are, and it happens in the summer, let's say, when we're not sitting, we're not going to be able to hold the government to account and keep an eye on taxpayers' money. I would hope that there is an attempt....
You said in the first quarter you would have identified at least the sale of assets. We've already seen estimates of where some of the efficiencies are, so some of that work is done. I just hope we don't get into a scenario where we end up in July, say, and the list comes out, and there isn't an opportunity for a committee, say, to have oversight on it.
I'll leave it at that. Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Derek Lee
Thank you, Mr. Dewar. It will perhaps be food for thought for our first meeting in September.
Liberal
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
Mr. Chair, thank you. I'll be splitting my time with Ms. Hall Findlay.
I have three very quick questions, and you'll probably appreciate the parochial nature of them.
Is there any anticipation from any of you here as to the possible sale of AECL or the government's commercial portions of AECL? Is it on the books? Is it being contemplated? We know a study was commissioned some time ago by one of the banks. Would any of you care to comment on whether or not that is in fact going to take place? Are there any plans to sell part of AECL?
Director, Microeconomic Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
I think it's beyond what we can provide advice on. It's a decision that the government would consider.
Liberal
Dan McTeague Liberal Pickering—Scarborough East, ON
Would the sale of Hibernia be entertained, with the 8.5% crown asset or portion of the value that you have there, or is it not something that falls within your scope at this point?
I understand the reason that you're before the committee, but I think the committee also wants to understand whether or not these are actual requests to sell assets that have legs. It's been reported in the paper. There's a correlation to this, particularly when I look at the price of energy these days again heading up and yesterday's merger between two very large players. The Canadian government has a number of assets that it can liquidate at any given time. Are you familiar with any attempts on that at this point for either AECL or the government's share of Hibernia Oil?
Director, Microeconomic Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance, Department of Finance
No, not to execute those transactions. AECL is a crown corporation within the portfolio of NRCan, and Canada's ownership stake in Hibernia, which falls within the Canada Development Investment Corporation, is a crown corporation that is within the purview of the Minister of Finance.