Government Operations Committee on Dec. 3rd, 2009

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

We'll use that. Thank you.

First, I'm astounded that the federal government does not ask for job reports, whereas the provinces apparently are much more on the ball and have insisted on job reports. Given that it is this federal government that is doing all the advertising about all the jobs that have been created, it is simply not enough for us, in doing our jobs, to rely, as you've admitted, on anecdotal numbers based on estimates. We're not interested in estimates anymore. We're not interested in announcements. We're interested in numbers.

When you talk about the federal government requiring quarterly updates and progress reports, with all due respect, the reason we agreed with the budget, because it included the stimulus measures, was to create jobs. We had the federal government promise at two different times 190,000 and 210,000 jobs. We want to know whether in fact the stimulus fund effort has been creating jobs as promised and as we expected when we approved this.

After 20 years of practising law, if I were advising the Government of Canada—and by reference, it refers to the Government of Canada's monetary assistance—I would say that to the extent the provinces under this agreement are entitled to progress reports that show jobs created, the federal government is absolutely entitled to see those numbers that are provided to the provinces under this agreement. I would ask that you do in fact ask the provinces for that information.

Is that something you're prepared to do?

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

Thank you very much for the statement as well as the question.

The only province we have seen that has a schedule along the lines you have pointed to, so far as we know, is Ontario. We did check with other provinces. Some provinces collect the job numbers; some provinces don't. There is no consistent job collection annex regarding the infrastructure stimulus fund. We can definitely check around and have a thorough conversation with all our provincial colleagues to see what they are collecting or what they choose to collect in their agreements.

However, I have to stress that this agreement you're referring to is an agreement of the Government of Ontario. The two ministers' signatures are on it, and the municipalities' signatures are on it. It is not an agreement we are part of. Our agreement is with--

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

But I will say again--

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

If I can--

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

There is a point of order.

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

This question actually would be better answered by the Department of Finance, because they're the ones that set out the reports that have the figures.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I'm sorry. That's not a point of order. You're bringing an argument.

Go ahead, Madam Hall Findlay.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

I'm completely entitled to ask these questions.

I understand that this agreement is between the province and the municipality. It specifically refers to defining the terms and conditions of the financial contribution from the Government of Canada as well.

My question is whether you are prepared to ask for the number of jobs.

Second, this government is advertising that it is creating jobs, and it has promised significant jobs. Who is giving the information to whoever is planning the advertising so that they can actually say they're creating jobs?

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

Regarding what we can ask from the provinces and what we're entitled to, I appreciate that the honourable member is giving a legal interpretation. Given that it's a cost-share agreement, your assumption is that we are entitled to anything the province asks for from its citizens. I have to check legal opinion from the Government of Canada. Based on that, I could give you an answer.

Second, I'm not exactly sure whether Ontario has received this information. We will definitely be happy to talk to them. However, we are caught in an uncomfortable situation, Madam Chairman. We cannot speak for another order of government. I can answer as to what we can promise to do, but I do not want to promise you things we can't deliver. For example, I don't know what the Government of Quebec is collecting and whether we are entitled to it. This becomes a jurisdictional issue. It's a little beyond, right now, the subject matter.

I am committing to you that we can get a legal opinion, and we will check the status of what our partners are collecting on the infrastructure stimulus fund.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You'll have to wrap up.

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

It's an important issue, Madam Chairman.

When I talked about the Government of Canada, I was talking about the infrastructure stimulus fund that is administered by Infrastructure Canada. I cannot speak about the regional agencies, as one of the honourable members just said. I'm not exactly sure what they're collecting. I'm sure you can ask them. Overall government job numbers are calculated on a macro basis by the Department of Finance.

The decision was made by the government to not collect them project by project, consistent collection across, for Infrastructure, for obvious reasons. The United States, for example, is having a lot of issues with self-reporting and inaccuracies around that. In addition, direct job impact plus indirect job impact and induced jobs...the economic activity. According to our economists in the Department of Finance, macro models are better indicators. That kind of information is a better indicator than on a project-by-project basis.

I'm explaining what they have said--

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

You will have to stop there because I have to get a few people on.

Madame Bourgeois.

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

Madam Chair, I have no questions for our witnesses, but I would like to make a comment.

I am stunned. We have a recovery plan that has cost us millions of dollars to promote. Money has been spent on advertising. We are being told that this recovery plan will have created, in total, between 190,000 and 220,000 jobs, but no one can assure us that this is in fact the case. We are working with macro-models. I just do not get it.

This afternoon, I asked Minister Vic Toews how much money had been spent promoting this famous recovery plan, which is also being used to promote the current Conservative government. But he could not give me any figures.

I appreciate your frankness, sir, but I was expecting you to provide us with numbers. Unfortunately, once again our questions remain unanswered. Hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers' money will have been spent. In my view, this is terrible. I cannot wait to get out of this Canada!

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

Madam Chairman, I appeal to you. We can give you what we have. We are not trying to not give you the information. We have provided the information we have to the committee. We do not have the information the committee seems to be requesting of us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I appreciate that.

We should come to a close, because there is some committee stuff that I need to discuss with the committee.

I know you're frustrated. We're frustrated. I accept Mr. Mayes' analysis that it is a macro tool. Somehow in the fourth report the infrastructure dollars have gone down. They are all fluctuating. This committee is trying to figure out what it should do with its report so it can give a fair analysis. That's all.

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

The point being made here is that we should have the Department of Finance here to determine how they calculated these numbers. It's obvious that the agreement between the provinces did not request those--

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

We will have them.

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

Do you agree?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Yes. We can make it job creation numbers and we can call Infrastructure Canada, ACOA, and Finance and figure out what's going on. Perhaps we'll get an answer.

Is that agreed by everybody?

I have one last thing. I received the report that was given to the Parliamentary Budget Officer that was promised by the department. It is unilingual again and the Quebec component is missing.

Will the committee give me the right to distribute it to members?

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

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Fair enough. Then you don't get it.

We will come back to you requesting some clarification--

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

A point of order, Madam Chair. [Inaudible--Editor]...this ministry back here when you are already going to find out the information from Finance?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

We will try to call Finance. Tuesday the committee was going to look at reports, but the government has just released its fourth report, and we have to be fair. Nobody is trying to beat down the government. What we are trying to say is that stimulus is important.

We have to do a logical analysis of what has happened so far, so the report cannot be ready. The fourth report has data as of September 22, and more data will be released December 31. So 20 days after December 31 the updates will be given. If we could wait until we come back in January and look at the report in a logical way, that would help.

[Colin Mayes, Conservative, Okanagan—Shuswap, BC]

It's Finance's report?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

No, our report that is being prepared. But we can call Finance on Tuesday.

Mr. Holder.