Government Operations Committee on Nov. 24th, 2009

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes, thank you, we have it.

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

So maybe I can walk through--

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

I hate to interrupt, but we are really short of time. I understand the schematic. We've actually had it described to us a number of times. My question is not how the process works; my question is what has the government paid out so far? I would like dollar figures for what advances have been made and what invoices have now been paid. I am only looking for the dollar amount so far, given that it is now November 25.

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

Thank you.

I was just going to point to the schematic and the advance column. We have provided $230 million in advance payments to provinces and territories. This is important, because it was done very early in the process and was meant to kick-start the activity. We received the first batch of claims and status reports from most of the provinces in September, and we're getting another batch of claims and updates from the provinces now in November.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

If you only received them in September, then--

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Ms. Hall Findlay, your time is finished. I'm sorry.

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

I don't want to take up too much of your time, but when the claims arrived in September--and my colleague John Forster can elaborate on it if you like--we had to make sure the claim data was accurate, because it was from online input. So it took us a while to look through that claims data. We have provided this information to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

However, our financial officials haven't gone through the data and we haven't made any payments on those claims received. We would be happy to provide them to the committee as we process them, because we don't want to give you numbers that will mislead you--or us. We have to make sure they make sense. We're going through them. Our chief financial officer has yet to go through them. The payments will be made the moment the claims are complete. So right now we're ensuring the completeness of the data.

The November data we've received is much better because it was the second time the claims came in, and people are used to how to file the documents, etc.

I'd like one second to make a very important point. Money being paid by the federal government does not fully reflect and is not the best indicator of economic activity. We have 2,500 projects under way, representing over $8 billion of activity. A statistic you might find interesting is that out of the projects under way we have received no claims for about 500, and just looking through the initial data we have no claims yet for 50 of the completed projects. So the projects have been completed, but we don't have any claims to pay.

Later in the testimony my colleague John can tell you the whole story around how these programs run. It's a normal situation and reflects how governments work and how infrastructure is done.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Monsieur Nadeau.

You have eight minutes.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon to all of you.

We are involved in a process to better understand how money is being invested under the federal government's Economic Action Plan. That being said, I looked at the numbers prepared by the Library of Parliament with regard to projects which have been earmarked or, at the very least, which are currently being analyzed. Of 3,035 projects which are happening throughout Canada, over half are in Ontario.

Is there a particular reason for this? Ontario represents about a third of Canada, but over half of the projects currently underway have received federal funding—remarkable, isn't it?—in several areas of attribution and project categories.

On the face of it, can we conclude that Ontario is the big winner or will adjustments be made later on?

[John Forster, Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada]

Thank you for your question. Regarding the Stimulus Fund, the funding is spread among the provinces on a per capita basis. Each province and each territory receives its share of the $4 billion. In Quebec, several programs are in place to receive funding under the Stimulus Fund. For instance, we are sharing the cost of a PRECO program, which is managed by Quebec. The people responsible for the program fill out an application form, and after the applications have been reviewed, they provide the federal government with a list of projects which then receive approval. We also support the project. It's simply a matter of funding. It is managed somewhat differently in each province, but the funding is allocated on a per capita, or per person, basis.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

The funding is allocated on a per capita basis. This does not necessarily mean that the number of projects reflects the allocation, since some projects cost more than others, I suppose. Is that correct? Could you please clarify that for me?

[John Forster]

Exactly. It depends on each province's program. For example, in Newfoundland and Labrador, there are several fairly big projects involving water treatment plants. In another province, there may be more provincial projects. For instance, in Quebec, there are several highway projects which the province is responsible for organizing. They are not municipal projects, they are provincial ones. Generally speaking, those types of projects are bigger than smaller municipal ones. The number of projects simply reflects the fact that each province has its own program.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

You say that funding is allocated on a per capita basis, that is, on the number of citizens. Is that how you calculate the amounts?

[John Forster]

Yes, exactly.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Are these numbers final? Has the entire amount of $4 billion been earmarked? I see that about three quarters of the $4 billion have been set aside. Therefore, $1 billion should still be available. Is that correct?

[John Forster]

It is not a matter of the money already being spent. Of the $4 billion, $3.3 billion have already been committed for projects. There are $700 million left to complete and approve projects. For example, in Quebec, all of the PRECO programs have cost the federal government $350 million, with Quebec contributing another $350 million. Not all of the programs have been approved at this point. We are still reviewing and approving projects submitted by municipalities in Quebec.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

During the first phase, when a project is reviewed, when it is deemed eligible but not yet 100% approved, and when the province or the municipality is not able to invest its share based on a pre-established percentage, be it 50%, 25% or 33%, the funding becomes available again, if I understand correctly. Does the funding become available in the province where a project could unfortunately not go ahead, or does it become available for any other Canadian province?

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

Funds are primarily available to the province where they aren't expended. For example, if in Quebec a project falls off for any reason, the money is available to be reallocated within Quebec. However, we're making every effort to commit all the money and get the projects all started and hopefully completed, because this is a time-limited program. Timely delivery of the programs is very important, and we count on our partners to make sure this is done.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Ms. d'Auray, I believe that, a little earlier, you talked about how the projects were being announced. The Privy Council, which is the Prime Minister's Office, submitted a request to us for an amount of $4 million. The money was to explain how the funding available under the Economic Action Plan would be spent. However, you told us at the beginning of this meeting—and we have also received this information—that departments already have communications funds to explain to Canadians how the money was being spent. So we are a little confused and we are wondering why the Prime Minister's Office, and his department, namely the Privy Council, asked for another $4 million.

Can you explain to us whether the department, which is a partner to this project, is also engaged in communication, advertising and broadcasting—

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Monsieur Nadeau, wrap it up, please.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Does the Prime Minister come next? Can you explain that to me, please?

[Michelle d'Auray]

As I explained, departments are responsible for their own communication activities regarding their initiatives. Radio or television activities, which are usually referred to as advertising, are coordinated in a manner whereby departments can spend money from an advertising fund with regard to specific initiatives.

As I mentioned in my opening statement, the Privy Council Office coordinates communication in the case of so-called horizontal activities. When there are initiatives which affect several departments, we have to make sure that communication is coordinated.

When my colleague Mr. Kennedy appeared with me in November, I believe we discussed the website. The Privy Council Office designed a site which integrates all the available information, including where activities take place and the projects themselves. This way, information is not repeated by each department.

The Privy Council Office makes money available for communication coordination activities, but not for advertising, as well as for the coordination of those communication activities. In other words, the funding is for the coordination and integration of communication activities, especially concerning electronic broadcasting and websites.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We'll now go to Monsieur Gourde for eight minutes.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

My question is for Ms. d'Auray.

You talked about the communications plan which applies to many departments, the Privy Council and the government. Is the objective to present a uniform and global vision? Is this done to prevent, for example, a department from using a different logo from those of other departments within the same communication strategy? Is it to maintain a certain degree of consistency?

[Michelle d'Auray]

There are several reasons why the Privy Council Office engages in coordination activities involving several departments. Sometimes it is to reduce overlap. As I explained, the Privy Council Office has designed a website in which all the information is integrated. This way, it is not spread over many websites, which makes it more difficult to find. Consequently, any Canadian, an entrepreneur or an association would not have to look through the website of many departments to find out which program or project could be useful under the economic action plan.

Further, everything is coordinated to make it easier for Canadians to access information more quickly. Indeed, we wanted there to be two main aspects to coordination, namely to ensure that projects and initiatives are launched quickly and to ensure that Canadians are informed about these initiatives.

As you mentioned, there is a third mechanism, which consists in ensuring that the presentation and identity of the federal image is respected within all of the communication activities. In the case of initiatives which span all of government, this coordination is the responsibility of the Privy Council Office, more specifically the Treasury Board Secretariat. We want to make sure that the use of official symbols is respected.