Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Shugart, thanks to you and your colleagues for coming here today, and thank you for generally addressing in your opening statement the real topics we're discussing here at this committee in this study, because looking at how departments are going to manage the kinds of spending restraints that we put on you at a time when you're facing various challenges is an important question for Parliament to understand and for us to examine as we look at approving expenditures by the government.
I must tell you that I have the utmost respect for our civil service in Canada. In view of this, it seems to me that you've been put in an awful position by this government and the kind of spending spree it's been on since it came into office.
We've seen federal spending under the current government grow from $175 billion in 2005-06 to $245 billion in 2009-10. That's a remarkable growth in spending. In fact, in the last two years we've seen record deficits of $45 billion and $56 billion respectively, making it obviously challenging for departments like yours.
The IMF and the Parliamentary Budget Officer both say that the country has a structural deficit. This, of course, is in contrast to what the finance minister wants Canadians to believe. We have the Treasury Board president talking about solving their mismanagement of our country's fiscal matters through attrition rates in excess of 11,000 persons a year, but the government's own departmental reports on priorities and planning identify only 1,133 staff reductions.
We're told there's a plan to dig the country out of the massive hole the Conservatives have put us in, but all the Treasury Board president is able to produce is a single sheet--and I have a copy of the lovely sheet he had the other day before the committee. I'm not laying my hands on it quickly, but he was holding up two sheets, saying this is our plan. In fact, it was one single sheet translated into French and the other one that simply tallies up the spiral of deficit the government has in mind over the next five years. In view of that background, all departments find themselves in a very difficult situation.
But let me ask you another question to start. The question is, have you ever had a minister take a document received from you as senior civil servants in your department and change it or doctor it to make it look like you approved something or recommended something when actually you recommended the opposite?