Government Operations Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2009

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Order, please.

Committee members, could you take your seats?

Media, could you leave the room, please? Thank you.

Before us today we have witnesses from the Privy Council: Mr. Wayne Wouters, Clerk of the Privy Council and secretary to the cabinet; and Mr. Simon Kennedy, deputy secretary to the cabinet, plans and consultation. From the Treasury Board Secretariat, we have with us Madam d'Auray, secretary of the Treasury Board of Canada, and Philip A. Hurcomb, assistant secretary.

I understand that both of you have a 10-minute presentation.

We will start with you, Mr. Wouters.

[Wayne Wouters, Clerk of the Privy Council and Secretary to the Cabinet, Privy Council Office]

Thank you. I am pleased to be here today to discuss the government's communications activities related to Canada's Economic Action Plan.

In response to the weakening of the Canadian economy and the impact of the global recession, the government committed in budget 2009 to delivering an economic stimulus package to encourage growth and restore confidence in the economy. The International Monetary Fund recently reported that Canada is on track to being the first country to begin recovering from the global recession, with expected GDP growth of 2.1% in 2010, faster growth than for any other member of the G-7.

The economic action plan represents the largest stimulus package in Canadian history. Part of the strategy to ensure rapid deployment of the plan was the rollout of a comprehensive communications approach in order to inform Canadians not only of what was in the plan, but also about how they could access the programs and benefits contained in it.

In my role as Clerk, I provide professional, non-partisan support to the Prime Minister and Cabinet on all policy and operational issues that affect the government. Communications is, of course, a component of the government's operations.

Communication is, of course, a component of the government's operations, so at the table with me today is my colleague, the deputy secretary of plans and consultations, Simon Kennedy, who is a deputy minister level official in PCO and has been responsible for managing the overall communications of the action plan.

One of his key responsibilities is to provide the government with advice on communications and to ensure the government's communications activities are carried out in a coordinated way. The specific decision on what, when, and where to communicate, of course, rests with the government.

In the context of our discussion today, I will talk about the work the PCO is doing to coordinate communications across the government for the economic action plan. In particular, I will focus my remarks on two main areas that I believe will be of interest to the committee.

These are, first, the objectives that the government has pursued in strengthening communications with regard to the economic action plan; and second, the activities that have been undertaken to meet these goals and how they conform to existing policies and rules concerning communications by the Government of Canada.

With respect to the economic stimulus package, Parliament made clear the critical importance of two key objectives: the need for a rapid deployment of the measures, and a focus on accountability to Canadians. All of our work on the communications front, whether the website, advertising, signage, or other activities, has been focused squarely on the achievements of these two objectives.

Informing Canadians about the economic action plan, whether they are individual citizens, homeowners, municipal officials, aboriginal people, or business leaders, has been an important means of supporting the uptake of the measures in the plan.

Our objective has always been to give Canadians concrete information about the different programs and services available, and how they can access those programs and services.

On the second point, accountability, Parliament made clear its desire to ensure that taxpayers see how their money is spent. Thus, communicating with Canadians about the impact of the economic action plan has been an important means of supporting this objective.

I would now like to talk briefly about the various communications activities that have been undertaken.

Let's first look at the website. It was launched in January, shortly after the budget was tabled, and at the time included basic information on the action plan. Since the initial launch, all our efforts have been to ensure that the site provides useful information so that people can not only learn how they can access the measures, but also know how their tax dollars are being used.

Now, the first major component of the website that was developed was a guide to benefits and programs. The guide allows visitors to the website to search for information on each of the more than 130 economic action plan measures, organized by client group—for example, senior, homeowner, municipal leader, aboriginal person, and so on.

It includes information on how the initiatives work, who is eligible for them, where they can apply, and how to find more information. In many cases, the guide will link the citizen directly to the application form of the program in question. This guide is one of the most popular features of the website.

The second major component of the website to be developed was the project map. Using a map of Canada to track projects, the map plots projects by location and uses technology never before deployed by the Government of Canada on such a scale. When this new feature was introduced in June, there were 3,200 projects mapped. It now contains close to 6,500 projects, and while PCO houses the map on the action plan website, the project data are supplied by departments.

This map is helping support accountability to citizens, who can use this feature of the site to find relatively detailed information about how the action plan is working in their communities.

I'd like to talk now about advertising.

Members will know that the communications policy of the government states, “In the Canadian system of parliamentary democracy and responsible government, the government has a duty to explain its policies and decisions and to inform the public of its priorities for the country”. The policy goes on to say, “The public has a right to such information”.

Earlier this year when the government introduced the economic action plan, it faced an important communications challenge: how to reach the largest number of Canadians to inform them of the measures being taken to stimulate the economy. Recognizing that advertising is the most effective way to do that, the government developed an advertising strategy.

In terms of the advertising that has run to date, it falls into one of two categories: first, advertising that describes specific measures in the economic action plan and how to access them, like the home renovation tax credit; or secondly, advertising that provides general information about the broad suite of measures contained in the plan and drives people to either the website or the 1-800 number where they can get the detailed information needed.

Our statistics indicate that the advertising is working to inform citizens about the plan and about where they can obtain detailed information. Whenever the advertising campaign runs, the volume of calls to the 1-800-O-CANADA number and the number of visits to the website increases noticeably.

Let me use the home renovation tax credit as an example. In research done this summer, 70% of Canadians said they were aware of the HRTC. Now, this is a pretty healthy number to begin with. However, a month later, in July, after the introduction of the advertisements, the number had increased to 81%, or 3 million more Canadians. Since February 2009, the 1-800-O-CANADA call centre has received more than 70,000 calls related to the economic action plan.

Now, on signage, it's been a long-standing practice for the Government of Canada to install signs on infrastructure projects so that people are able to differentiate projects funded for the federal government from other projects. Under the economic action plan, the government is following this long-standing practice.

In addition, the government is ensuring that all signage clearly labels the projects as part of the action plan. The signs also refer Canadians to the website, where they can get more information. These common features of the signage help support the objectives, as I've said, of accountability and uptake of the plan.

Clear identification with the economic action plan is needed if Canadians are to know that the individual projects are part of the plan, and clear information about where to get more detail about the plan is important to support uptake.

Finally, I would like to say that in executing the communications activities related to the economic action plan, PCO has given advice to the government to ensure conformity with the existing framework of rules. These rules are mainly included in the government's communications policy and related standards. I can confirm that the advertising, website, and signage described earlier comply with the requirements and processes set out by the Treasury Board.

Some new and innovative features of the website, like Google Maps or other advanced technologies, are features that were not envisioned when the policy was written. In those cases we have worked with Treasury Board Secretariat and others to ensure that we implement these new features in a way that respects the guidelines and the processes. Where policy has not kept pace with the technology, we continue to work with Treasury Board to address these issues.

I will now turn to my colleague, the Secretary of the Treasury Board, to speak in greater detail about the rules and policies governing communications.

Michelle.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you, Mr. Wouters.

Madam d'Auray.

[Michelle d'Auray, Secretary of the Treasury Board, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Wayne.

Madam Chair, with me, as you indicated, is Mr. Phil Hurcomb. He is the assistant secretary, strategic communications and ministerial affairs, and the lead person within the secretariat with the oversight responsibilities for the communications policy and the federal identity program policy.

The role of the Treasury Board Secretariat is to provide advice and guidance to departments about communicating with Canadians. We do so primarily through the Government of Canada's communications policy and the federal identity program policy, otherwise known as the FIP.

The communications policy is a management tool that provides direction to ensure that Canadians receive timely, accurate, objective, and complete information about the government's policies, programs, services, and initiatives. As the clerk indicated, the policy is clear that in “the Canadian system of parliamentary democracy and responsible government, the government has a duty to explain its policies and decisions, and to inform the public of its priorities for the country”.

It is also clear that “Ministers, both individually and collectively as members of Cabinet...provide leadership in establishing the priorities and overall themes of government communications”. The communications policy also clearly states--and this is a requirement directly made about advertising--that “institutions must ensure products are aligned with government priorities...and government themes and messages”.

The policy also helps to ensure that government departments and agencies are visible, accessible, and accountable to the public they serve, and that their communications activities safeguard Canadians' trust and confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the public service of Canada.

The policy sets out 10 interconnected and interdependent policy commitments based on Canadian and public service values, statutes, and regulations. It has 31 policy requirements. It also sets out accountabilities, or if you will, roles and responsibilities, for each key partner in the policy development. Its procedures provide specific direction for advertising, publishing, and public opinion research.

Complementing the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada is the Federal Identity Program policy, sometimes known as FIP.

We often use these policies in tandem so as to frame the voice and the face of government. The communications policy promotes coherent, consistent communications: one government, speaking with one voice; the FIP supports the government's corporate identity—it helps to shape the face of government.

The Federal Identity Program is about clear and consistent identification. It projects the government as a coherent, unified administration and enables Canadians to recognize at a glance where their government is at work for them.

The FIP governs the use of the three identifiers of the government: the Arms of Canada, the signature, that is to say the flag with the title of the institution or the Government of Canada, and the “Canada” wordmark.

You'll see the results of FIP on every Government of Canada building, on every piece of official correspondence—even on the Canadarm on the International Space Station.

Having given the context and an overview of the policies and their functions, I will turn now to some of the specific issues of potential interest to the committee: advertising, events, and compliance.

With regard to advertising, the communications policy clearly states that departments and agencies may place advertisements to inform Canadians about their rights or responsibilities, about government policies, programs, services, or initiatives, or about dangers or risks to public health, safety, or the environment. It also states that departments and agencies must ensure that advertising campaigns are aligned with government priorities, themes, and messages.

Some recent examples include recruitment campaigns for the Canadian Forces and the RCMP, or advice to Canadians on helping them to prepare for emergency situations, or how to take advantage of the more than 100 initiatives contained in the economic action plan.

The rules are quite clear. Departments and agencies must ensure that the design and presentation of advertisements conform to the communications policy and its procedures as well as requirements of the FIP. All advertising and public opinion research projects are reviewed by the Privy Council Office and contracts must be issued through Public Works and Government Services Canada.

Furthermore, departments and agencies must not use public funds to purchase advertising in support of a political party. The economic action plan advertising is in compliance with these policies.

With regard to events, ministers, or their designated officials, are the primary spokespersons for the Government of Canada. Ministers may also designate members of Parliament or other parliamentarians to represent the government on their behalf.

Ministers are responsible for explaining government priorities, policies and decisions to the public and, in so doing, must conform to Treasury Board policies in the running of their departments.

Members of Parliament acting independently of ministerial activities are not subject to these policies, including the Federal Identity Program.

As for the use of so-called prop cheques, or what we prefer to call ceremonial cheques, departments and agencies are permitted to use Government of Canada ceremonial cheques for official events of the Government of Canada, those organized by ministers as official spokespersons or by their designated representatives.

As is the case for all government communications products, ceremonial cheques used in official events must include the official symbols of the Government of Canada, as required by the federal identity program policy. Events organized by members of Parliament who are not acting as designated ministerial spokespersons are not covered by the policy.

I'll turn now to monitoring and compliance. As clearly stated in the communications and FIP policies, deputy heads are responsible for ensuring that their organizations comply with these policies. The policy commitments, requirements, and procedures are clear, as are the FIP rules.

The Treasury Board Secretariat uses a number of tools to help monitor overall compliance to these policies. For instance, the secretariat reviews Treasury Board submissions prepared by departments to ensure that key communications and corporate identity requirements are addressed. We also work closely with and advise departments when initiatives are launched and communications materials are in development. It is an iterative process. This approach was applied to the EAP communications.

When they are raised or when we identify them, TBS reviews issues of non-compliance by departments with these policies. When issues of non-compliance are confirmed, the secretariat works with the parties responsible to resolve the issues.

Having given an overview of the government communications and FIP policies, I would like to conclude by confirming that the economic action plan, or EAP, advertising, website, and signage comply with the commitments, requirements, and procedures set out in both the communications and federal identity program policies.

I and my colleague would be pleased to address any questions the committee members may have. Merci.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We will go with the first round of questions.

Madam Hall Findlay, you have eight minutes.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much, everyone, for being here with us this afternoon.

Mr. Wouters, I offer you belated congratulations on your new role, which is not so new anymore.

Quite frankly, I am now at a bit of a loss as to where to start. I say this with the utmost respect for all of you and for all of the people you work with in your departments. Some of these comments, I stress, are not to be taken personally.

I am astounded at the position that everything that has been done complies with all of the rules. I would first point out that almost a month ago I wrote a detailed letter to the Treasury Board outlining very serious allegations about breaches of the communications policy in the federal identity program. Not once have I received a response or even an acknowledgement of my letter.

I find it astounding that what I have now heard and read in your submissions sounds extraordinarily like a response to my letter, and I find it rather extraordinary that we've waited a month for a response to that letter and you've now done it in this committee process.

We have two hours. We have significant questions about accountability and the amount of money that has been spent, but at this point in time, I want to focus on the content of the advertising and our real concern that the Government of Canada's use of colours, images, and slogans, and the “look and feel” aspects and other branding elements, are the same as or mirror those of the Conservative Party.

Our allegations and concerns about the content of the advertising are very serious.

We saw this in Ontario under Mike Harris's government. The subsequent Liberal government brought in significantly different rules, and I think very appropriately so. I would point out, too, the comments about the Privy Council's involvement in this. There is significant responsibility, and I quote: “To ensure the integrity and efficacy of government advertising, institutions must: co-ordinate advertising planning with PCO...”. There is specific responsibility to do so in a “non-partisan fashion consistent with the principles of parliamentary democracy...”.

The PCO itself has responsibility. I quote from the communications policy itself: “The Privy Council Office...has a central role in the co-ordination and management of government communications”. On PCO, the policy states, “It is responsible for advising Cabinet and its committees...on communication issues, themes and strategies”. I can go on, but I needn't tell you what your jobs are.

But in the sense that we have a massive advertising program that has the same or an extremely similar look and feel to that of the Conservative Party of Canada, and that as far as we know upwards of $100 million may have been spent on this advertising, while we don't take exception to advertising that may inform Canadians of programs, I would suggest to you that the majority of this advertising program does not in fact do so. Rather, it goes out to tell the Canadian public how wonderful the government is. In so doing, in that effort to confuse the government with the Conservative party, it is in effect conferring a massive benefit on the Conservative Party of Canada.

Ms. d'Auray, you said that part of the job was to tell Canadians that the government is out working for them. With all respect, knowing that it's their taxpayer money that is being spent on this, I think Canadians actually would rather have the government simply do the work than spend their taxpayer money on telling them that somehow the government is working for them. I would suggest that it should be an assumption that the government is actually working for us.

I will now turn to what is probably most problematic about this entire advertising campaign and the breaches of the communications policy in a way that confers a significant benefit on the Conservative Party. The logos on the cheques, in my view, are a symptom of the larger disease of trying to confuse the two in the Canadian public's eyes.

There was a piece done by the Canadian Press not too long ago that was the result of what was said by a number of members of the Privy Council Office, both former and current, who, not surprisingly, would not reveal their identities for fear of reprisals, and who had informed the Prime Minister of significant misgivings at the time of the budget and the planning. They said that “the Tories are trampling the admittedly grey area between partisanship and policy”. Also, they said that “they've never seen anything so blatant as the current use of the office for self-promotion”.

Can you please speak to the very specific question? Because if I ask you questions about whether you believe this complies with the policy, you've already said that, and I'll significantly disagree with you. So I'm now going to ask my question slightly differently.

Can you speak specifically to this question? Has there been anyone in the Privy Council Office from January until now who has expressed concern about the partisan nature of the government advertising?

[Wayne Wouters]

I can only speak for PCO since the time I've been there, Madam Chair; it was on July 1 that I became the Clerk of the Privy Council. At no time during my period there has anyone questioned the overall approach the government is taking here.

In fact, if I had been the clerk previous to that, it would still have been my advice that it's important for the government to have an effective, comprehensive communications initiative around this campaign.

I can't comment on specific accusations that individuals are making. I'm not aware of that.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

With respect, Mr. Wouters, if you weren't there, maybe if Mr. Kennedy was there, it's a point-blank question: has anybody in the office.... I say this knowing that there have been people who have expressed concern but are very concerned about reprisals.

[Simon Kennedy, Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet, Plans and Consultation, Privy Council Office]

Madam Chair, I'm not aware of specific concerns that have been raised with the Prime Minister about this. I would echo the comments of the clerk.

I think it's always difficult to talk about the public service's advice in an open forum, because we typically don't talk about what our advice is, one way or the other. But I can confirm, as the clerk said, that PCO in general has been a strong supporter of the need to complement the economic action plan with fairly robust communications with Canadians, to address the issues around accountability and--

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

I hate to be rude, but that wasn't my question, and I have real concerns about.... I said at the beginning that we understand the value of government advertising to inform the public. I would suggest that the H1N1 communication has been clearly not effective, and in fact perhaps quite the opposite, in light of massively greater advertising campaigns such as the wrapping of GO Transit trains. With respect, that is not information. That is the government patting itself on the back.

But you did not answer my question and I think the non-answer in fact speaks for itself. We are very concerned that people within the government have expressed real concern about the partisan nature of this advertising campaign. It is not surprising that the Ontario government imposed significantly tighter rules, because if there is any thought that this might comply with the rules, it's extraordinary.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Ms. Hall Findlay, your time is over.

You have 30 seconds to answer.

[Wayne Wouters]

As you know, Madam Chair, when it comes to individual accusations in any department, unless we're aware of the accusations, unless they're brought forward, it's very difficult to respond and to react. So as I said, I'm not aware of any of these accusations that have been made. Accusations that are made...we see that often throughout the public service, and they could be made to newspapers, they can be made publicly, but I'm not aware of those, and I guess until I am made aware of them it's very difficult to respond to that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We'll go to the next questioner.

Madame Bourgeois, pour huit minutes, s'il vous plaît.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Wouters, Ms. d'Auray and gentlemen, good afternoon and welcome to the committee.

First, I would like to say that I didn't know there was a Government of Canada communications policy. Please pardon my ignorance. I've seen that policy nowhere. Would you be so kind as to file it with the committee so that we can examine it, unless it is already on a website? I see no problem in the Government of Canada's using a communications policy. Canadian citizens, like Quebeckers, have the opportunity, since they pay taxes, to access information and services offered by the Canadian government.

I didn't know that policy had a part entitled “Signage”. Don't worry, I'm not throwing stones, but I get the impression you felt obliged to insert a few pages on signage in your presentation document. You seem to be saying that this policy entails two important points. First, “[...] this information is necessary in order to gain access to government programs and services [...]” and, second, “[...] to reach the largest number of Canadians to inform them of the measures being taken to stimulate the economy.”

Does the Government of Canada absolutely need to install signs to inform citizens that it has, for example, changed the windows or door knobs of a building? I'm referring to an article that appeared in Le Devoir or in La Presse, stating that signs were posted to indicate that the economic recovery plan had been used to make changes to government buildings. Does the Government of Canada need to use these kinds of communications to tell the public how many millions of dollars it has invested in a government building?

[Michelle d'Auray]

I'm going to start by talking about the two policies, which are on our website. The clerk of the committee can access them or I can send you the hyperlinks directly. You'll see that the rules concerning how to communicate, communication orientations and the use of the government's corporate identity are clearly identified in the policy elements.

I'm going to answer your question on signage, and then I'll hand over to my colleague from the Privy Council Office.

It is entirely consistent for the government to use a symbol bringing all elements together to indicate activities carried on under the Economic Action Plan because there are more than a hundred programs. It is normal for people to know that a road construction project, rebuilding project or purchase is funded by the Government of Canada. This is clearly what the policy requires.

Perhaps my colleague can add something.

[Simon Kennedy]

As the Treasury Board Secretariat has indicated, it is the government's long-term practice to use signage to indicate investments that are being made under the Economic Action Plan. In its communications coordinator role, the Privy Council Office has prepared a signage guide that the departments must follow when they make signage decisions. The guide clearly states that it is important that signage be linked to investments. Small investments, such as windows in small buildings, require a small sign, and larger investments, such as a job site or metro, require a larger sign.

I have copies here if committee members are curious.

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

Yes, I would appreciate it.

[Simon Kennedy]

I can leave them with the clerk.

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

All right, thank you.

In your speech, Ms. d'Auray, you say: “All advertising and public opinion research projects are reviewed by the Privy Council Office [...].” I imagine all advertising and research projects are, regardless of subject. The government's recovery plan must have been, no?

[Michelle d'Auray]

That's correct. All advertising and public opinion research projects must be coordinated. To move forward, you have to obtain Privy Council Office authorization. Then it has to go through Public Works and Government Services Canada.

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

That's entirely correct.

[Michelle d'Auray]

So there's a consolidation.

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

All right. That leads me to a question that I hope won't shock you.

A few years ago, we witnessed the sponsorship scandal. In the context of those events, there was a government signage and communication plan. Everything went through Public Works and Government Services.

How can you ensure us that, this time, there won't be any favouritism, that the communication plan of the government—which is Conservative this time—is above all suspicion in this regard?

In asking this question, I'm thinking of an article that appeared in Le Devoir in which it was stated that it cost as much as $7,000 to produce and install each giant sign announcing the recovery plan. They're very costly.

How can you assure us that, as Quebeckers and Canadians, we won't have the wool pulled over our eyes once again?

[Michelle d'Auray]

Madam Chair, I would say—

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Is that all, Ms. Bourgeois?