Government Operations Committee on Oct. 27th, 2009

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

All right, thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Merci, monsieur Nadeau.

Mr. Warkentin.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I appreciate the opportunity to thank Mr. Page and the gentlemen for coming. We appreciate your testimony this afternoon.

We were hoping to get some additional clarity. I want to go back to some statements that you made, Mr. Page, with regard to information you are expecting to receive from the Minister of Transport in the coming week. I've been advised that the intention is for it to come this week. This will be project-by-project information. Is that what you are expecting to see in that compilation of documents?

[Kevin Page]

According to my very recent conversation with the deputy minister, it would be project by project, but it would also be province by province. As it is made available, she will make it available to me. We are appreciative of that.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I understand that there have been various project numbers thrown around—2,000, 5,000, or whatever. This is not a simple program constructed to make these stimulus dollars flow. There are matching dollars coming from the province, the federal government, and the municipalities.

We sometimes hear members of various groups talking about money flying out the door at breakneck speed. Maybe you could bring some clarification to committee members who might believe this. It is my understanding that money doesn't flow until a project actually exists. There is a certain structure for projects that need money to get started. For the most part, we are talking about communities being reimbursed for projects once the project is complete.

Is that your understanding, Mr. Page?

[Kevin Page]

That is correct. Even the data that we expect to receive this week will apply only to portions of those projects that ministers have signed off on.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

We heard information a couple of meetings ago that 75% of the projects that were targeted for construction in this season have been under way for about a month. I don't know if that is information you are privy to, but that's what we heard. There was a suggestion relating to the construction season, and in that respect it is pertinent information.

[Kevin Page]

When we get that kind of information, we will be looking at whether we can verify the 75% figure.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I sometimes wonder, Mr. Page, if the people who comment on the stimulus fund have ever gone to www.creatingjobs.gc.ca. These are commitments and announcements that have been made by the government relating to the infrastructure projects. I'm sure your office is fully informed about this. Sometimes people say they are not aware of where the money is flowing, but there is a compilation at that site. Do you think this is a useful website for members of Parliament and the population at large?

[Kevin Page]

I think, for our purposes, more information is better. It may not necessarily be that case for all parliamentarians. They may find themselves getting overwhelmed with information, but I would say there are examples, as I've noted already here today, on specific projects that are very well done. I mentioned a few of them here today, like shipbuilding, the Canada graduate program, work sharing, where there's plenty of information on the nature of the projects, even on some of the federal infrastructure projects, the number of jobs that will be created, bridges, etc.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

What would be optimum? And that's, I think, what we want to get to the bottom of as a committee. What would be your ideal after a commitment is made? In some cases, once the commitment is made, the municipality has the full responsibility of moving forward to execute the project, and until they do so, there's really no information to post.

What information, beyond what has been posted on www.creatingjobs.ca, as it relates to local municipal infrastructure projects, do you believe would be helpful for not only you yourself but also the general population in that interim between the time the commitment is made and the time when we actually see money flowing?

We know there's quite a duration, and in some cases it's actually very onerous on municipalities. I have many small municipalities that will be receiving funds. They're working to execute the project and they're doing it as quickly as possible, but it's very difficult for them to provide monthly, daily, or weekly reports, but I sense there's a desire on your part and a desire on the part of many people to have additional information.

What do you think would be a process that wouldn't create an additional responsibility for the community but still allow all of us to have the information that would be helpful?

[Kevin Page]

Very quickly, I think if we can get information that speaks to the kinds of disbursements and to how the disbursements are happening, my understanding is that we may get to see this type of information this week, because it'll have project start dates, project completion dates, levels of over-amounts of money. But I think that is one of the gaps between what we have available in Canada right now and what exists in the United States, and maybe we can close that gap in the fourth quarter, which would be very positive.

Just as background, as budget officers, we look at this in two ways.

One, the economy is very weak right now and we need the stimulus. There are lots of issues about the strength of the economy in the third quarter, in the fourth quarter, and even in 2010, so it's very important that we can provide to you the kind of impact that we see from this very large stimulus package.

Then a second point, from an oversight perspective, is whether these projects are moving forward, whether the money is going to good-quality projects. It's that kind of scrutiny that a committee like this and the public accounts often look at, so we look at it two ways. We're very interested, like you, in wanting to make sure the money flows, but that it flows in a proper way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We now go to Ms. Hall Findlay for five minutes.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Mr. Page, I'm going to quote from the Federal Accountability Act, provisions that I'm quite sure you're very familiar with, section 16.4, and this relates to the accountability of accounting officers within the framework of ministerial accountability. It reads:

Within the framework of the appropriate minister's responsibilities and his or her accountability to Parliament, and subject to the appropriate minister's management and direction of his or her department, the accounting officer of [the relevant department] is accountable before the appropriate committees of the Senate and the House of Commons for (a) the measures taken to organize the resources of the department to deliver departmental programs in compliance with government policies and procedures; (b) the measures taken to maintain effective systems of internal control in the department; (c) the signing of the accounts that are required to be kept for the preparation of the Public Accounts pursuant to section 64...

I had a fourth one, but I actually don't need it because I think it speaks for itself.

Given your past history in various senior positions in the government, I have two questions.

First, given those responsibilities of individuals within the government, how is it possible that there is not in fact significant detail on all of these expenditures and all of the processes within these departments? The second part of the question is, how is it possible that there isn't that detail that would be collected and overseen by this obligation?

Secondly, it begs the question of why that information hasn't been provided to you. I would also ask, given those responsibilities and those obligations under the law of the civil servants who are involved in these various project departments and in efforts to get this money out--and we heard from Madame Bourgeois about a certain suggestion that the instructions to prevent the disclosure of information came from relatively on high--what position does that put those civil servants in, when they know their obligations are in fact ultimately to this standing committee, for example, and yet they are being asked by...it sounds like political masters, not to do so?

[Kevin Page]

As to the reasons behind why we have not yet received information, I think you'll have an opportunity later this week to speak to the Minister of Transport and Infrastructure and perhaps the deputy minister as well. Certainly those responsibilities in the Financial Administration Act are very significant around controls, around compliance with Treasury Board policies, and the need to put together information for statements.

I think it's fair to say that these are extraordinary times. This is a large stimulus package: $47 billion over two years. A large part of it, one-third of it, is infrastructure related. These are a lot of projects to cover across the country. There are different levels of government involved. There are timing issues here.

While it's true and we said quite clearly in the report that we thought we would be further ahead in the third-quarter report, we are hopeful that in the fourth-quarter report we'll start to see the gap close between what American legislators see and what you see, so that we will start to see disbursements relative to those projects.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Mr. Page, I don't mean to interrupt, and I really appreciate your effort to put a diplomatic light on this. I realize that some of these questions may put you in an awkward position, and it's by no means a comment on the talent and desire of our civil servants. We get the sense that there's significant frustration all the way through this. But it is simply not acceptable to have an answer of, well, it's a big project and lots of dollars and it's unusual.

I go back to the situation in the United States. I'm looking at a screenshot from the Recovery.org website. This has been available for months. It hasn't just come out. In Canada, we're now looking at close to a year now of some of these things starting. On the Recovery.org website, the information in the United States, which has been available from very early on in the stimulus package program, has been thorough and accessible. It has shown a tremendous effort of transparency and accountability on behalf of the American government.

I will reiterate that I appreciate your effort to be diplomatic. I will stress that our comments are in support of all of the people in the civil service who are trying. Our sense is that there's a very strong frustration with what appears to be instructions from the political side that this information not in fact be disclosed. We cannot imagine that this information is in fact not in the government somewhere, and that begs the question, why is not coming out?

I thank you very much, but you can understand our frustration as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Do you wish to respond, Mr. Page? No.

We will go to the next person, Mr. Holder, for five minutes.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Mr. Page, it's a pleasure to see you again, sir; and I'd like to thank all of our guests for attending here this afternoon.

Mr. Page, can I just put it out there: do you feel that you're put in an awkward situation in relation to this?

[Kevin Page]

I don't understand the question, sir.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

I'm just building on the previous question. It was quoted--not by you--that you're being very diplomatic. I've always thought you to be diplomatic in any representations I've heard you make—very polite, very thoughtful, and very honest. So I'm asking you, as you are responding to these questions, do you feel that you've been put in an awkward situation at all?

[Kevin Page]

No, sir.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

All right. I appreciate that.

Look, I've only been in politics a little over a year--a year and two weeks--and I feel that when we go around the table there's a lot of “gotcha” politics. That seems to be the tenor. While some people might laugh and scoff at that, I would suggest to you that in taking this as seriously as I do....

I come from a 30-year business background, so I look at balance sheets and I understand them. I haven't read your 47-page report yet, but I think I'll probably get it, and I think I have some sense of that.

Mr. Martin made a comment, and I'd like to acknowledge it. I guess he was crediting the Government of Canada, through the Federal Accountability Act, for creating the role of the PBO, but I don't want to do that kind of “gotcha” politics. What I want to ask you, if I can--and again, I'm going to reflect on some of his comments, because I think inappropriate comments or thrown out comments without responses aren't fair--do you have any evidence that in relation to the information you are getting and will be getting from the Minister of Transport and Infrastructure, there's any hanky-panky going on here?

[Kevin Page]

Sir, we've not yet received anything on infrastructure related to our information requests, so I can't say one way or the other. I don't start with an assumption that there are bad practices at play.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Do you have any sense that this is somehow an elaborate shell game that's being created by the federal government?

[Kevin Page]

The way I approach this issue is that Canada has gone through a very serious recession. We've lost 400,000 full-time jobs across this country. Outputs declined upwards of 4% real GDP. So the stimulus is very important, and as budget officers we want to make sure it's put to good use.