Government Operations Committee on April 14th, 2010

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Corbett, you wanted to add something?

[Gary Corbett]

As my colleague mentioned, they have to find the savings somewhere. What happens is that you have professionals in the workplace who need professional development in order to keep current. I mean, the world moves forward, and it's a small place, so you have to have professional development. As the departments struggle for money we're going to see more and more people who don't have access to professional development. We're going to see, in a sense, a de-professionalization of the public service, where people aren't really in a position to make decisions with the right information because they certainly haven't kept up their professional development from a departmental standpoint.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Poirier would like to add something.

[Claude Poirier]

One of the day-to-day consequences we already see--because, as I said earlier, it's been going on for a while--is how the workload of our labour relations officers has changed. They hear more harassment complaints now, and there are more violence problems in the workplace because the pressure has been building up. It's like putting the pressure cooker on the back burner and forgetting about it for a while. It's going to explode sooner or later, and we see that.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

We used to call that management by stress, where you just cut and cut and cut until something breaks and then you back it off a quarter turn and run it like that for a while. I can see that. I can sense that in the public service, but also as a member of Parliament.

A lot of frustrated Canadians who can't get the service they used to get through a well-funded and well-staffed public service end up at MPs' offices complaining. We have first-hand experience. My office is almost an immigration office as it is. When you talk about 140 more jobs cut at Sydney with immigration, they're going to be further frustrated having to wait five months to have a simple visitor's visa processed, etc, and they're going to miss their family's wedding, etc., as a result.

I think MPs here should be aware that some of the predictable consequences of these cutbacks are going to wind up at our office. The expectation of Canadians to reasonable service could in fact be compromised.

I think those are very helpful examples.

Also, Mr. Gordon, thank you for flagging this issue, but I predict the government has the public service pension plan in its crosshairs. I don't think it's paranoia to assume. I believe that the thin intellectual veneer has been put on this notion by the C.D. Howe Institute and by John Manley and his group of chief executive officers. They're trying to lay the foundation for the argument that we can no longer afford pension plans. I'm wondering what the public service unions are doing to inoculate themselves against this looming storm.

[John Gordon]

Even in the budget, they didn't leave the pension benefit plan out completely. They actually made a reference that they weren't doing anything about the plan at this point in time but they were going to continue to look for efficiencies and savings in pension benefits. So that is a target.

At the Public Service Alliance of Canada, we are still going on with our campaign among our membership and among the public about debunking the myth of the pension plan being other than something that is deferred salary and paid for by the workers. So we're continuing with that.

We certainly saw the note in the budget. It was very small, but at the same time, we know it's not going away.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Yes. We all remember Marcel Massé and his last act as President of the Treasury Board, when they, I would argue, stole the $30 billion surplus in the public service pension plan as his parting act. He had to leave after that, because I don't think it would have been safe in Ottawa for him to remain in politics.

But that same reasoning is there today, even more so. I know this is a bit off topic, but I sense it everywhere we go now. The corporate sector and governments are calling pensions “unfunded liabilities”. They call them “legacy costs”. They used to be something we were proud of and we acknowledged as part of retirement security for all Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Mr. Martin, we have to wrap up.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Oh, I'm just chatting here.

The last item--if I still have a second--is outsourcing as being money-saving. I want to thank PIPSC for pointing out the amount of money we're spending outsourcing in IT. It not only seems more expensive than having fully trained professionals working for the government, but there's a national security issue when our entire IT system is in the hands of outsiders.

[Gary Corbett]

Yes, and not only that, it facilitates the fact that it will never be back inside. Once it's outside, then the whole security issue becomes a serious issue for Canadians. It's hard to get it back once it's out there.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

The expertise.

[Gary Corbett]

Exactly. When the expertise resides outside, you don't develop it inside. Then you're forever dependent on it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We will go to the second round. Martha Hall Findlay, you have five minutes.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I again will express our appreciation for your patience at the beginning of this meeting.

Mr. Gordon, we understand your concern, and we appreciate your patience.

I have two questions. One has to do with access to information. I'm wondering if you can help me, because I'm a little bit unsure on this. This is just for pure information.

Each department is responsible for complying with the access to information process, yes? Can one of you tell me which group of people, and therefore which union, which organization, is actually responsible for the people who are responsible in each of the departments for compliance with access to information?

A show of hands? A volunteer?

[John Gordon]

I suspect that a number of those folks are with the Public Service Alliance of Canada, because I'm assuming that while there may be some managers who oversee the program, it's most likely that in some programs the administrative assistants would actually go and get the information. But that would be across all departments.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Right. That would have been my assumption. I just wanted to be clear, before going into the next piece of that, if in fact it is the folks who do the photocopying, the folks who go and dig out where the information might reside.

As you know, yesterday the interim information commissioner came out with an extremely damning report, especially with regard to some departments. Perhaps, Mr. Gordon, you'd be the most appropriate to comment on that particular aspect. We've heard the prior information commissioner talk about the lack of funding, the lack of resources as a reason for some of these real problems and real delays in the provision of information when required. The interim information commissioner's report yesterday reinforced that, that there's a real problem with resources. It may be an obvious question, but I'd appreciate your comments on what this might mean in terms of access to information.

[John Gordon]

My comments would be purely speculative as well.

The thing is that, from what I understand, there would be a number of layers of people who would be involved in access to information. Some would be asked to go and get that information and retrieve it, and then someone else, I would imagine, would have to review it to make sure that the information they're not going to release is taken out. I think it would be different levels of folks. There could be different resources not available across the PS, because more people have to approve the information that's going out.

So I would say there's a bit of everything. The amount of resources would probably be depending on the department. Some departments seem to get a lot more requests for information than others. If they don't resource it with the appropriate people, then it's going to be slow, or they're just not going to get to it.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

I don't think anybody has the answers, because it seems to me, from what you've all said, there hasn't been a whole lot of discussion about how these freezes will end up becoming cuts. In a growing economy, with a growing population, and to some extent growing inflation, a freeze is in effect a cut and any department subject to a freeze is going to be looking at cutting what we have. I think you've all confirmed that today, that somebody, somewhere, is going to have to make some significant decisions about where those cuts are made in each department.

I'll just throw that out there that we've had reinforced that access to information is already significantly under-resourced.

Am I done?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

A quick question.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

I have one quick question for Mr. Corbett.

You mentioned you had met with Minister Day and that you spoke of the government's plan to reduce the size of the public service by attrition. What did the minister say to you?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

A brief answer, please.

[Gary Corbett]

He was looking for our assistance, I suppose, on where we could offer solutions to the government. We had promised that, that we would try not to cut the public service as has been done in the past, but perhaps there are other ways than just looking at the traditional cuts, identify areas. The professional institute is about trying to find solutions.

The public service unions should be asked to help find solutions that are not just cuts across the board. As I said, it's a regressive approach and it needs to change.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Next, Mr. Nadeau for five minutes.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Isaacs, as a result of the job losses you anticipate among financial officers, will financial oversight at the federal government level be disrupted?