Evidence of meeting #42 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was estimates.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
The deemed rule? I think you could do away with it, if you tabled the estimates a lot earlier.
Conservative
Ron Cannan Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC
Going to program-based, it has been suggested by several witnesses that we should have program activity-based budgeting, rather than what we have now. There are some problems with reallocating funding internally within departments. Do you see any other challenges if we go that way?
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
No, I don't. I think Part III, when it was tabled prior to the reports on plans and priorities, contained a lot more detail on programs than is the case today.
When you take a look at the public accounts, they are separated out. There is program information available there: the transfers are all listed, the expenditures, and the operating expenses are done by major groupings within each department. I think if you start—maybe not being overly ambitious, but start moving down that path—over time you can build it up to know what is important for review and what may be subject to review at another point in time or be done in a different way.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
Thank you, Ron. Your time is concluded.
For the NDP, we have Denis Blanchette.
You have five minutes, Denis.
NDP
Denis Blanchette NDP Louis-Hébert, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. DeVries, welcome to the committee.
We are seeing an increasing time gap between the tabling of the various budget documents: the estimates, the budget itself, and the plans and priorities. All these documents seem to lose their value because of the time delays between each one.
Do you think inertia resulting from the sheer size of these documents is to blame? I get the sense that, regardless of the conditions, we get to this stage and there is nothing we can do. However, could we try to recast the whole process in a shorter time frame to make the documents meaningful again? Could we not just get rid of certain components that could really never be completed in a short amount of time?
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
As I indicated earlier, up until about 2006 there was a logic, an order, whereby the budget was first, then the estimates. part IIIs used to be tabled with the estimates, and there used to actually be a lock-up for the estimates at that point in time, so that officials were available to the media in order to go through the numbers. That created quite a flurry of activity in the media during that day and the next day.
Since 2006, we seem to have gone away from that process more and more. I'm not saying it didn't happen in the past, but since 2006 we've gone away from it more and more. Part of the reason, of course, is elections. If you hold an election late in a fiscal year, it becomes very difficult or impossible to table a budget. You go on Governor General warrants. As soon as the House comes back, then you are required to table those Governor General warrants. The budget may not be ready yet for tabling, but you have to table the other ones.
So there are reasons why there are delays at certain points in time. But normally what would happen is that the major policy decisions with a budget are made at the end of the last calendar year, so that by December a budget is largely put in place. What you're waiting for after that is to know whether there is going to be any new economic information that could impact upon the budget's economic projections and then upon the fiscal projections and the projections of the deficit or surplus.
You may want to wait a little longer to get a better feel as to what is happening on the economic front, because it could have a major impact on your budget projections. Having said that, however, what information do you get after, say, December of the preceding calendar year? You get the fourth-quarter national accounts results at the end of February; however, you also get information on the inter-months within the last quarter, to give you a fairly good idea what is going to happen for that final quarter of the year and for the year as a whole. So I would argue that by the end of January, there's not much more information that you're going to get to help you finalize your budget to table in February.
So—to me, anyway—there's no reason that a budget can't be tabled in February based on the information you have at that point in time. Something might happen in February that would throw you way off, but that could be acknowledged in a supplementary statement shortly after the tabling of the budget.
There's no reason why, in my view, the estimates cannot be tabled after the budget, if the budget is tabled in mid-February. That was the practice before. It was the practice when we didn't have all the computerization that we have today. I don't see any reason why it can't be done. The same thing goes for the reports on plans and priorities.
NDP
Denis Blanchette NDP Louis-Hébert, QC
Very well. In that case, my next question will be brief.
Today, we have three supplementary estimates. Isn't that too many?
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
It all depends on what happens during the course of the year, on how much of the spending that was included in the budget was actually included in the main estimates when they were tabled. If there's a sizable amount that was not included, then you're going to have at least one estimate shortly after the tabling, sometime in the spring of the new fiscal year.
Then a lot depends upon what happens during the course of the year. Are there things that were unanticipated that have to be addressed, for which funds have to be reallocated from one department to another in order to manage a crisis or emergency of some sort? That would mean you would have to have at least another supplementary estimate on top of that, if not two.
I really don't have a problem with the three supplementary estimates, but I do have a problem when a lot of the spending that could have been included in the main estimates is not.
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
Thank you, Denis.
Thank you, Mr. DeVries.
For the Conservatives, we have Bernard Trottier, for five minutes.
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. DeVries, for coming in today.
There have been differing points of view about the budget and the linkage to the estimates. Some people have said it's really just a guiding policy framework, not necessarily an accounting document. But I think the majority of the witnesses, yourself included, have indicated that it will strengthen the estimates process to have them anchored to the budget.
I just want to clarify one thing about budget implementation. Is that a necessary step in the sausage-making of the estimates? Can you go directly from a budget document to estimates, or do you need the budget implementation to make it a reality?
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
That is an issue, an important one, in the sense that the estimates should only include those types of things that the government wants Parliament to approve, and to which appropriate—how should I say it?—oversight has been given, by the government and the Treasury Board.
As I mentioned before, there are things included in the budget.... The budget might say: we propose to do something for sector X, but the Minister of Industry is currently working on our proposal, and so what we've done is set aside a pot of money with which he has to work. But he hasn't come up with the exact parameters yet, and until he does, it can't be included in the estimates or a budget implementation bill.
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Given that, realistically, to be able to anchor estimates to a budget it would have to be tabled in the fall, if we were to continue with an April 1 fiscal year.
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
No. I would say that the budget should be tabled in February and the estimates should be tabled shortly after and before March 1, if they are on a consistent accounting basis and if you can actually link the two. If you can't link the two, then the estimates can go at any point in time.
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
I think on this committee we look at the problem of main estimates that are essentially meaningless and we recognize that this is a challenge. Why are we doing it if this doesn't become the guidepost for budgetary kinds of activities? Maybe as we get into the analysis of a process that can actually work, we'll look at the fall or February. I think there's some sense that this is the direction we'd like to go in.
I think you indicated that we probably could eliminate one of the supplemental estimates if we went to more accuracy in the main estimates.
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
If you included more things in the main estimates to start off....
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
That would be aligned with our desire to wipe out and eliminate duplication and redundancy. I would be very in favour of that.
I want to talk about the RPPs. In your presentation you mentioned that these reports should be overhauled, that there are some real problems with the RPPs.
Could you describe what some of those challenges are? I see the RPPs playing a valuable role when it comes to committee oversight, such that in combination, with the estimates and the RPPs and the DPRs you could do a more comprehensive evaluation of the estimates.
What is wrong with the RPPs?
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
When we were looking for expenditure cuts for budgets, a lot of the information that I would look at in the Department of Finance would be part IIIs, because they would actually give me details on programs by department. Going through that you would get a good sense of the types of programs the department was responsible for and potentially where you could recommend changes to that program. You can't do that now with the reports on plans and priorities. At least, I was not able to do it again—
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
The RPPs are really not granular enough today to allow that evaluation.
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
So just on the oversight loop with committees, do you think that committees should be mandated to spend a certain number of hours looking at programs?
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
Well, I think programs should go through a review type of process. I think the government's initiative on strategic reviews—other governments have done these strategic overviews—is an important thing. I think every program should be reviewed on a cyclical basis. You don't review everything at once, but you do take a certain department, look at the programs they're administrating, and pick a number of those for very in-depth information.
I'm not saying this committee should do that, because there are the other committees that are supposed to be looking at that. But I think they should do that on a regular basis.
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
I guess not every program can be reviewed every year, obviously, so for certain programs that weren't reviewed, is that where a deeming type of rule can...? We'll say that we haven't had a chance to actually review it, and therefore we'll deem the estimates approved for that program...?
Consultant, Budgetary Affairs, 3D Policy, As an Individual
That is a thought. Yes. That could be something.... In order to ensure that you do review everything or that everything does get reviewed within a certain time period, then you leave that one open until such time....
NDP
The Chair NDP Pat Martin
You're out of time, Bernard. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. DeVries.
For the Liberals, John McCallum.