Government Operations Committee on May 5th, 2010

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Can I make a suggestion, Madam Chair?

I believe that May 10 has actually been solidified, and we have confirmed that PCO would be here for that date. That's the main estimates, so that would be a two-hour meeting. We've now given up one hour of the main estimates; four hours over two different meetings were designated, and we've already given up one hour.

If we decide to reallocate that meeting with PCO to a different date, we'd certainly want to do that before May 31, because the main estimates have to be looked at and approved by our committee by the end of May.

I would suggest keeping PCO scheduled for May 10. Let's take away part of the main estimates review on May 12 to bring in Mr. Snowdy.... No, pardon me, we're going to have Mr. Snowdy there for the full meeting of May 12 and then move the second one-hour meeting with Government Services and Public Works on main estimates to May 26 with Mr. Wright.

That leaves us the federal building contracts, which we've confirmed with SNC-Lavalin, as well as Public Works for May 31. They are confirmed. Let's bring the PCO on June 2, because then we'll have hopefully cleaned up the building maintenance issue after hearing from those witnesses.

Right now we have about seven different subjects on our agenda. If we can help the analysts as well as members to clean a number of things off our list, we can then continue in June on the issue of future witnesses and the review of the budgetary freeze, and that's when we can bring in the budgetary officer. PBO information doesn't expire; it's stuff that we'll be looking at. In June we're going to continue on that review of the freeze, so there's no real push to get that testimony in until June anyway.

I think we'd better do due diligence on main estimates and make sure that we take the two full hours on May 10 as well as the second full hour on May 26.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Madam Coady, and then Monsieur Nadeau.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you very much.

This is precisely why I wanted to go through this, and why I tabled up front what I was hoping to achieve today.

I have a couple of questions. I'd have to go back through the blues to confirm this, but I understood that we had agreed on PBO and Corrections for May 10. It's an important study and I thought we had agreed, when Martha Hall Findlay was here, that we would actually look at that study on that day, because we wanted to move it from when it was scheduled earlier because the Parliamentary Budget Officer, of course, is tabling a very important report.

My second point is that maybe we need to have special meetings, as I said at the very beginning, because I am frustrated with not being able to get the witnesses before us so that I can fulfill my responsibility. Maybe there are additional meetings that this committee needs to have, Madam Chair, so we can actually get through our business. We have a list of witnesses here. I do not want to go into our summer break without having had these witnesses appear before us. I'd like to have a lot of this work concluded.

Again, I suggest that we first check on PBO and Corrections, because I had understood that we had agreed to having them originally.

Second, I'm listening, and I'm trying to agree to a lot here. If you want to move up estimates, look, I can accept that. But what I'm not going to accept is not calling these witnesses before we go into summer break.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Monsieur Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Madam Chair, in my experience, one hour is enough to study the main estimates. In any case, if we changed anything in the main estimates, we would go back to the House of Commons and that could lead to a confidence vote.

It is rather about looking at the big picture and asking logical questions. Then we could make time to discuss the Correctional Service issue, for example. I am referring to the May 10 meeting where we have to welcome officials from the Privy Council Office to talk about the main estimates. During the other hour—it does not matter what goes first or second—we could address the Correctional Service issue because it has been dragging on for a long time.

Then, on May 26, we could hear Mr. Wright for an hour and Ms. Ambrose for the next hour on the main estimates. We have two hours; we can do two different things. We do not have to talk for two hours about a budget that we already know and that we cannot even change. Let us move the whole study forward.

As for SNC-Lavalin, Mr. Warkentin, its representatives are just across the river; they take a taxi and they are here. It is the same thing for Public Works and Government Services Canada. So, if we move their appearance from May 31 to June 7 or another date, it is not a big move. It is not like Montreal moving to Gatineau or Ottawa.

We can play around with the date of May 31 based on the availability of the players we are interested in for the green energy study. We must think about the ministers' offices, including Mr. Paradis, who was the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, and Ms. Ambrose, who is now running that department. That way, we get to the right targets for the discussion of topics that were announced ages ago.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I tried asking the clerk if we could get this to work. Now that you've all come up with suggestions, I just want to see if we can make it work.

On the meeting with PCO, the analyst advises me that you are correct that it will just take an hour, as it's such a small budget. We can also have PWGSC on the same day. If we can get both to come on that same day of May 10, then we will have covered the estimates.

You're right, Monsieur Nadeau, it doesn't take long and we're not going to be able to change anything. So it is just a matter of our stamp of approval, and it's really an edification exercise for us.

So the bottom line is that if we can have PCO—which is confirmed—and PWGSC and its minister on May 10, that will free up the second hour on May 26 for some of the witnesses you would like to see. If you are in agreement that SNC-Lavalin was your request as well, we can get them pushed into June, if you wish.

Are we comfortable with going with PCO and PWGSC on May 10?

I have Mr. Warkentin first, then Ms. Coady, and then Mr. Nadeau.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Madam Chair, we certainly could do that. I think there'd be a good possibility of that. My understanding is that PCO has agreed to come on the 10th.

My understanding is that what we're dealing with in these main estimates is the plan that PCO will be bringing forward to move out of a budgetary deficit. I think it's absolutely essential that we, at this committee, get a handle on what the plan is exactly. The contribution that this committee will make will be determined based on the dialogue that we have with PCO, as well as the officials, with regard to the main estimates.

I know we have a lot of things that are pulling us in different directions at this point, but the fact of the matter is that we're talking about a time in history when the estimates really matter. I mean, we are running deficits. We're having plans of restraint coming forward. If we, at this committee, haven't made some effort to understand what's going on, we can't claim two years from now, when we go to public accounts, that we never had an opportunity to bring this forward and dig through this.

I'm comfortable, because I happen to sit in the position where I'm a government member. So I can go to talk to ministers about these things and to different people and get a sense. But this really is the opportunity, and we have an obligation, regardless which party we come from, to dig through this.

I hear from Mr. Nadeau that we don't have any authority, that we have no opportunity to make any difference. Well, actually, we at this committee have one of the greatest responsibilities, in my opinion, as it relates to this Parliament and as it relates to finances in this country. There's no other parliamentary committee that quite has the influence of the ongoing operations of government.

I understand the political desires of people to go in different directions, and I fully understand that. But I just hope we don't sacrifice one of the main responsibilities of this committee in the effort to get in every other witness. The main estimates are the only ones where there's a deadline provided for us, and that's the 31st.

I think if we look at the freeze, or the case studies that we were looking at as they relate to the freeze, we had a number of different witnesses coming. Certainly Corrections was one of them, but we also wanted to look at the Information Commissioner as well, and there were several others.

So there are a number of witnesses that we need to get through before we can complete our study on that, anyway. That's why I'm suggesting let's move that into June, let's get through the work that we as the committee are tasked with and responsible for, and do it appropriately and diligently.

I would hate for this committee to get into a position of simply being a rubber stamping of the estimates. The whole reason that this committee was set up was to engage in a dialogue that would be something more than a rubber stamp.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Before I turn to Ms. Coady, I will just say that if a plan is going to be submitted to us, perhaps we could ask that this plan be given to us so that we can study it and we're not looking at the plan while they're talking to us. I think that would be a better idea and an effective utilization so that the government members are not advantaged over the opposition that doesn't even have a plan.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Madam Chair, all I'm suggesting is that in the budget, there was...and in PCO, of course, we're talking about restraint in certain areas. So we already know that the plan is out there.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

So if they have a plan, if they give it to us, I think we can ask intelligent questions.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Absolutely, and that's why I think that two hours is necessary.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

The two hours between the two would be, I think, sufficient, because we are not collapsing any government or doing any such thing.

Ms. Coady.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We're all trying to be reasonable here. If we're going to bring PCO and PWGSC on the 10th, then on the 12th I would suggest Mr. Snowdy as well as one of the other witnesses we've put forward. There was an extensive list put forward. I'm suggesting here Ian Harvey. It could be anyone on the list that we have.

I'd like to see PBO and Corrections fairly soon, because I thought we were going to do it fairly soon. So if, on May 26, you're saying Jim Wright, for the first hour, then perhaps PBO and Corrections for the next hour, that might be an option.

Then my suggestion would be, on the 31st, to start to invite some of those on our list, because it's quite an extensive list. Then I think Mr. Nadeau suggested SNC-Lavalin was okay for the 7th. I believe he indicated that, and I think we're okay with the 2nd as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Monsieur Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

No, that is fine, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Okay. Here are the suggestions that were given, and I'd like us to vote on that.

It will be PCO and PWGSC on the 10th, with a proviso that PCO gives us a plan of action prior to the meeting so we are comfortable we are asking legitimate and logical questions.

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I have a question on that. Are you going to go through the whole list? I want to know where the PBO and Corrections are.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Sure. If that's what you want--

[Siobhan Coady, Liberal, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Sorry; I just want to know where we're headed on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Here is what I'm going to do. I'm going read out your suggestions and see where we can find commonalities.

The first suggestion is PCO and PWGSC on the 10th.

On the 12th, we have Mr. Snowdy. It was suggested that we need him for two hours. We can leave that. That was agreed upon by everyone.

I'm only going to take those we have made changes to. The changes we have made--and I need a vote on it--are PCO and PWGSC on the 10th, for main estimates, and PCO is to provide us their plan prior to that, if they can.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Madam Chair, just in terms of clarity, I'm not sure what plan you're speaking of. If it relates specifically to the budget freeze, that is outlined in the budget, so that's what they'll be speaking to.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Warkentin, you suggested that you are aware of a plan that PCO is going to bring to the committee that they would like to discuss with us, and therefore we need two hours with them.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

No, I'm speaking specifically to the budget measures. They plan to deal with the deficit through the budget freeze. We as a committee are aware of that, because we're investigating the budget freeze as one of our additional studies.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

So we're doing estimates, and we will look at the estimates--

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I just want clarity in terms of the plan.

Are you asking that they bring their testimony early? I'm just not sure what you were referring to in terms of a “plan”. There will be people that are seeking that information.