Government Operations Committee on April 24th, 2013

[Bill Matthews]

I'm not the best person to speak to sick leave and HR provisions. I have not been instructed to look at savings related to sick leave. But to clarify, the minister's comments were not just about cost-savings; they were about a system that would work better for both employees and employers. I believe he wanted to stress that point when he was here. So I will make the same point. That's really all I can say on that front.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

I'd like to ask you a question related to the amount of internal services, and I'll ask it to you in French.

The main cost-cutting measure announced in the 2012-2013 main estimates had to do with internal services which, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, were never truly defined.

As we can see an increase of 114% for internal services at Correctional Service Canada and 71% for the School of Public Service internal services, could you please explain in greater detail what the amount of $199.7 million refers to? Those that appear on page 10?

Pardon me, I made a mistake. It is not found on page 10. But could you please answer the question anyhow?

[Bill Matthews]

Thank you.

I cannot explain changes that were made in specific departments or organizations. As you already know, there is a difference between internal services and what are known as back offices.

I will say that some of the severance costs for the department were picked up in internal services, depending on where you go. The explanation very much changes by department. So it's really something we can't address on a government-wide basis. Internal services in the current year are down over the previous year. Both the Parliamentary Budget Officer and the government would agree with that statement.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

If backroom savings are not part of internal services, how are we parliamentarians supposed to track the reduction in spending for backroom savings?

[Bill Matthews]

What I would say is, take a look at the votes that get reduced. Operating expenses are a great place to look to understand the nature of the spending, because if it's not in operating expenses, it's either in capital or in grants and contributions. That's the first place I would check. It is worthwhile looking at internal services to see what the trends are there as well, but back office involves more than just internal services, and it's caused some confusion in the spending reductions.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Ms. Duncan, you have about two-and-a-half minutes.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to take this time to table my motion:That the Committee invite the Speaker of the Senate and the Government Leader in the Senate to appear no later than May 28, 2013, for the review of the Senate 2013-14 Main Estimates.

I wish to now speak to my motion.

My rationale is that, pursuant to Standing Order 81(4), the main estimates vote 1 on the Senate was referred to this committee. As this committee's apprised on this matter, it's important that we provide an informed vote and, consequently I'm tabling the motion for which I provided previous notice.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

The clerk advises me it's in order that Ms. Duncan has moved this motion, as she had given notice of it on March 19. Therefore, with apologies to the witness, the motion is appropriate, in order, and debatable.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I don't actually feel it will be a long debate.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Do you have opening remarks on the matter?

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Chair, my opening remarks were very succinct.

This is a matter, under Standing Order 81(4), that under the main estimates vote 1, the spending in the Senate was referred to this committee. Therefore I feel obliged, in order to make an informed decision on that vote, to hear those witnesses speak to those mains.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Committee members, you've heard the motion.

Is there any further debate on the motion?

Peter.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This motion certainly falls under committee business. It is the normal practice of this committee, and of every committee in fact, to discuss committee business in camera.

I would move that we go in camera.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

The motion to go in camera is in order and non-debatable; therefore, we put the matter to a vote.

(Motion agreed to)

We are going to have to apologize and excuse our witnesses and anybody else in the room who shouldn't be here while the committee goes in camera.

Thank you very much, Mr. Matthews and Ms. Thornton, for your testimony.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I don't think it will take very long. If you want, you can wait.

[The Chair, NDP, Pat Martin]

Perhaps you wouldn't mind staying in a holding pattern, Mr. Matthews, but we anticipate the bells at 5:15, so we may or may not be able to invite you back in.

The meeting is suspended while we go in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]