Government Operations Committee on May 3rd, 2016

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

On page 1 of the 2016-17 report on plans and priorities, the government communicates clearly to Canadians that this will be the last report using the existing framework, and states that reports to Parliament will be more transparent and easier to read and will focus on how the government is using resources, etc. I'm just curious as to how you're going to go about making things more transparent in these reports.

We've seen the PBO and the finance department criticizing the current budget as the least transparent in the last 15 years, and yet at this time the direction is to be more transparent, but we seem to be going backwards in other departments. How are we going to measure how transparent the new RPP is going forward?

[Stephen Lucas]

This is—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

You have about 13 seconds to answer.

[Stephen Lucas]

This is an area being led by the President of the Treasury Board, Minister Brison.

I think the commitment is twofold. One, as you noted, is to increase transparency, not just in the report on plans and priorities, but as well in the information—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Will this transparency then be directed upon you the way the transparency has been directed upon the budget or will this come directly from the deputy ministers, the PCO, and so on?

[Stephen Lucas]

I think the commitment, as I said, is twofold.

First, the government has committed to an open-by-default approach thereby improving the transparency of information that it provides to parliamentarians and Canadians.

Then with regard to the report on plans and priorities, I think the commitment is to have clearer articulation of the outcomes the government is seeking through the investment of public resources; to state which indicators are associated with those outcomes or targets to determine whether progress is being made against those; and to report frankly and faithfully on what has been achieved through those investments.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Mr. Lucas, it has been mentioned that in 2013 you launched objectives for Destination 2020. Can you give us an update on where you are in the implementation of this initiative and whether you are reaching its goals?

[Stephen Lucas]

What I would say, perhaps starting with the final point you made, Mr. Chair, is that fundamentally Destination 2020 is about continuous improvement in the public service of Canada to support the government and Canadians, to be more innovative and agile, to harness technology, to have a modern and effective workplace.

To that end, a number of key actions have been undertaken. One of them at the Privy Council Office, as a support across government, was launching the central innovation hub to enable public servants to learn more about new tools and approaches, such as the use of behavioural economics or data analytics to develop program and policy solutions to better serve Canadians.

We're working with the provinces and territories with regard to innovative approaches to policy challenges. We're using online tools; for example, through the Public Service Commission for language training. We have broader, government-wide ways of sharing information now through tools such as GCpedia, basically a Wikipedia to enable people to collaborate across government, breaking down silos between departments.

Through a number of these initiatives, we believe we're making progress on the aspirational goal of being more effective, enabling young recruits to contribute and to break down barriers to enabling the timely provision of advice to ministers in the government.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

It's rather reassuring to see that hard-working civil servants are taking care of things while some others are doing pushups and photo-ops—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

—and more—

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I'm not sure how relevant that is.

Now you're down to 30 seconds.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Thank you.

I would like to go back to the Lac-Mégantic situation.

Ms. Fox, during your investigation, did you form an opinion as to the possibility of creating a rail line around Lac-Mégantic?

[Kathy Fox]

Mr. Chair, we did not formulate an opinion on that. In our view, regardless of the route taken to transport dangerous goods, transportation safety is absolutely essential.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

That's your time

Our final five-minute intervention is for Monsieur Drouin.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

I have to say that I agree with the need to update the Prime Minister's digital presence. Some prime ministers get earned media and some others choose a 24-7 reality show.

More seriously, based on your three priorities but mainly on the second one, in which you stated, Mr. Lucas, that the role of PCO is to support the deliberations of cabinet and its committee on key policy initiatives, and the third priority, to enable the management of open, transparent, and accountable government, how does it work when mandate letters have gone off to each minister and have been posted online for the first time in Canadian history? How do you translate the mandate letter into management practices? How do you measure quantifiable metrics based on the results of each department's ability to enact those mandate letters? How does it work with the new assistant secretary to the cabinet on results and delivery?

Can you explain the process for me, so that I can get a better understanding?

[Stephen Lucas]

I think in the first instance that the public mandate letters, as part of the commitment to openness and transparency, define the objectives of the government in a summative form as articulated in the Speech from the Throne.

A number of aspects associated with them will require decisions by cabinet to enable a policy decision. If there are funding requirements, they are proposed through a budgetary process and spending authorities are approved by the Treasury Board before they're presented to Parliament.

What we're trying to do in focusing on results and delivery through the role of my colleague, Matthew Mendelsohn, the deputy secretary for results and delivery, is fundamentally to ensure that at the front end of the policy development process, we are focusing on what outcomes the government is trying to achieve; the plan to get there; and then how we know whether we're going to get there, which are the indicators or the targets.

For example, in the case of an initiative of government over the past number of months, it set the goal of bringing 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada, so there was a clear target. Benchmarks were set up of how many refugees per week, as well as ongoing monitoring of that, including through an ad hoc committee of cabinet, to be able to track that progress and report to Canadians.

In this the government is sharpening the focus that governments have had on results, to move that up in the policy process to have it defined at the front end, and then to be able to communicate with Canadians what its trying to achieve and the progress en route to achieving that.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

The 25,000 refugees is the perfect example. We're not so much focused on the funding, but rather the hard number.

Is this a move across government? Past governments of all stripes were focused on making funding announcements and the amount of money involved rather than saying how many citizens we have served. That's the number I want to see. Is this what's happening within government right now, a move toward harder numbers as opposed to just a funding number?

[Stephen Lucas]

It's about focusing on outcomes as opposed to activities—which is often how we describe what we do in those outcomes—in a way that is meaningful to Canadians in what it means to the economy, diversity in society, or the well-being of Canadians.

Consequently, by focusing the development of policies and programs with the end point in mind, and then having a means to measure progress toward it and the discipline in the system, we're sharpening the focus to ensure that we're checking on implementation. The goal is to be able to make progress toward those targets.

Other ones are closing the gap in socio-economic outcomes for indigenous Canadians, or our climate change targets, for example.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

That's great. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

We'll go to a three-minute round and we'll have only one questioner, Mr. Weir.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

I have a question for the Privy Council Office.

A few months ago the federal government announced an inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women and girls. I note, however, that in your main estimates there's a forecast that there will be no spending on a commission of inquiry. I wonder why.

[Stephen Lucas]

The government has made the commitment. Ministers Bennett, Wilson-Raybould, and Hajdu have engaged indigenous Canadians, the families of victims, and others in the parameters and approach toward a potential inquiry. The government will deliberate and determine an approach and announce it in the weeks ahead.

Should there be a decision to have a commission of inquiry supported by the Privy Council Office, funds would subsequently be proposed in the supplementary estimates, but that has not yet been determined.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

The presumption at this point is that there won't be an inquiry within the 2016-17 fiscal year?

[Stephen Lucas]

In budget 2016, the government did propose an investment of $40 million in the inquiry. However, as the decision on the specific approach has not yet been taken, the parameters of the nature of that inquiry and the responsible organizations have yet to be determined.