Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like to thank our guests for attending.
This is interesting. I think this is the largest group of representatives from different areas that I've had, and you all bring a perspective. I think you're great, very articulate advocates for your perspectives. As I've listened intently to your perspectives, there are a couple of observations from my standpoint.
The government approach is that each department will make choices related to these budget freezes. It's on the department's total budget, not specifically employment, and that will factor in retirement issues and the like. It's going to be deputy ministers who make decisions as to how best to manage their budgets, because frankly we think they're the best experts to manage their portfolio.
I think this needs to be said, and I like to say this when I have an opportunity: I think we have a great public service. I say that with great sincerity. My sense is that we have a very good record of recruitment of visible minorities. My view is that our public servants serve us well and they are exceptionally high-skilled experts, so sincere kudos.
You wouldn't have been privy to these meetings, but in past meetings we've had a couple of comments that I'd like to share. One of them was from Patricia Hassard, who is the deputy secretary to the cabinet for senior personnel and public service renewal, in the Privy Council Office. She said:
When we embarked on the renewal initiative, the underlying objective was not cost saving, but to make sure that the services and policies and programs were as high quality as possible and that the government and Canada were well served.
I would also mention that Maria Barrados, who is the president of the Public Service Commission, said:
I'm happier with this approach because it allows each department to manage the reductions, to suit their business.
I share that with you, and I have a couple of points.
Our public service grew by 4.5% last year. Our own population, as a country, grew by 0.9%--ultimately, and probably primarily, due to Canada's immigration policies. As well, we've heard from witnesses that departmental budgets have risen to $54 billion in the past few years and they are at their highest levels in a decade.
I took a quote from you, Mr. Gordon—I've never been quoted in The Hill Times, but you were—and in talking of cuts and benefit reductions, it said you were concerned it might make it difficult to attract good candidates to the public service. Interestingly, in 2008-09, which is my last statistic on this, there were 10,332 positions posted on our PSC job site. There were one million applications for those positions, so basically 100 applications per vacancy. You'd be welcome to comment on that in a moment.
Because of the limited time, I have a question I'd like to make as a broader question to all of you. You provided hypothetical or potential scenarios. I respect your concerns based on your constituencies you represent, but I want to say “potential scenarios”, if I can.
It's rather interesting—and someone made a reference to the United States—that the State of California has now introduced furlough Fridays, which are essentially forced unpaid days off for state workers. Some of you might recall there was an experience that was not dissimilar, I think, in Ontario some years back. For the record, it's not a position we would at all advocate, but there are some members of other parties who have had better experience at introducing that kind of legislation than we would.
I'd like to get your impression on whether you think that is the appropriate approach, because I'd certainly be delighted to take your strong feelings, which I suspect they would be, back to the government. If any of you would like to respond, I would certainly be interested.
Thank you.
