Government Operations Committee on March 1st, 2018

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

That is basically what I'm asking.

I am trying to get information. According to my understanding, I cannot ask you for any details on the two aspects of the Impact Canada Initiative.

[Matthew Shea]

Yes.

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

However, what is that amount of $1.4 million adding? To what degree are you suggesting or recommending that amount?

[Matthew Shea]

Mr. Chair, I'll just quickly mention again, it's a whole of government approach. We're playing a secretariat role.

The funding that we're requesting is a combination of FTEs and non-salary similar to the question asked earlier. I can tell you that a large portion of it is for seven FTEs. So, of that $1.4 million about $800,000—a little less than that—relates to salaries of employees. The remaining part is a combination of funding for that non-salary type operating which could be.... For example, there's a website that we're going to maintain and it's going to share information. It's going to be a tool for departments to use. That's a major cost. Depending on where they go, it could be used for professional services. It could be used for a variety of different functions, but the lion's share is salary related for these experts that we're bringing together to provide advice to various departments.

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Okay. Thank you.

I don't have enough time left to ask any other questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Blaikie, you have three minutes for a final intervention.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Just before I ask a question of the witnesses, I just wanted to seek clarification on something. We just dealt with a motion that would have called the Minister for Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to committee and before moving to turn to debate, Ms. Ratansi said that we didn't need this motion because the Minister was already confirmed to come to committee for estimates.

Is it the case that Minister for Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness is a confirmed guest of the committee for the main estimates?

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

No. Minister Qualtrough has suggested she is available for the meeting on the 20th of March.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

So, it's not the Minister that was mentioned in the motion that's confirmed to come.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

The minister, I think who Mr. Kelly was referencing, would be Minister Goodale.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Okay.

I just think it's important to note that the committee may have been misled on that point and adjourned the debate under false pretences, but I just wanted to get that clarification from you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

For the record, Mr. Blaikie, any time a motion is presented in proper order...and when the motion was made that the debate be now adjourned, it was in order and is non-debatable, and it has to be voted on immediately.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Yes, I'm not questioning your procedural integrity, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you for that.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I just wanted to be clear on whether we could expect Minister Goodale at committee or not.

One of the questions around Phoenix.... We spoke earlier about the Prime Minister having given PCO a particular role in trying to solve the problems of Phoenix. In the budget recently, about $16 million was designated to start finding new solutions or a new payroll system for government to eventually get away from Phoenix.

My understanding is that Treasury Board was named as the lead in doing so. Going forward, what would be the role of PCO? Has anyone talked to PCO about what the role would be? Do you expect that PCO will be involved at all, providing advice or otherwise, in searching for a new payroll system for government? Are the actors who were involved up to now in Phoenix being removed from the process for finding a new system?

[Matthew Shea]

The $16 million—

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Unfortunately, Mr. Shea, we only have time for a very brief answer—about a 30-second answer, if you can do that, sir.

[Matthew Shea]

I'll focus on the first part of your question if I may. Similar to any major project, Treasury Board would use the funding that they've been given. I believe it's $16 million if I'm not mistaken to look at those different options. Once they come up with an option they want to propose, it would go to cabinet because they would have to seek funding, they'd have to figure out the plan, the timetables and all of that.

At that point, absolutely, we would have a key role in providing advice to cabinet and the Prime Minister as would Department of Finance, as would Treasury Board Secretariat just like any other memorandum to cabinet. Absolutely between the DM committees, ADM committees and whatnot, there is active engagement amongst all the central agencies and departments on this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

To our witnesses, thank you for your appearance here today.

We will suspend for just a few moments while we get the table prepared for our next panel.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Colleagues, we will reconvene.

Now I'd like to welcome Jean-Denis Fréchette and the panel representing the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer. Thank you very much again, sir. It's good to see you once more, two days in a row.

Sir, could you please introduce your colleagues who are with you today, and after the brief introductions perhaps you could go into your opening statement.

[Jean-Denis Fréchette, Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to introduce Mostafa Askari, who is the deputy PBO. It's also his birthday today, so that's why he wanted to appear with you.

[Voices]

Hear, hear!

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

Jason Jacques is the senior director of costing. You will hear a lot about costing in the future. He is also the PBO's CFO. He's wearing many hats, so that's one of them. Sloane Mask is deputy CFO.

Those are my two frugal CFOs. I have to be careful when I speak about money.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the invitation. I also want to thank the vice-chair, as well as the members.

We are happy to present the Supplementary Estimates (C) 2017-18, and the Main Estimates, 2018-19—at least the interim parts—of the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

As you know, amendments to the Parliament of Canada Act last year resulted in the position of Parliamentary Budget Officer being recognized as an independent officer of Parliament. The order in council of September 21, 2017, established its status as such and confirmed that its legislative mandate would be expanded to include the costing of party election platforms.

September 21 was also the date that marked the separation of the PBO and the Library of Parliament, which meant that the PBO had to quickly establish its own administrative processes and internal controls.

As you are aware, the order in council also added your committee to the list of the already three standing committees mentioned in the legislation. Therefore, this committee is now in good company with the FINA committee, the public accounts, and the national finance in the Senate.

Every separation involves a certain level of risk and uncertainty that can affect ongoing operations. Given that new requirements were also introduced at the same time to produce analyses as part of its services to parliamentary committees, senators, and MPs, and that the new requirements included additional administrative responsibilities resulting from the new legislation, such as annual reports on activities, work plans, submitting reports to both Speakers when we produce our own self-initiated reports, it was strategically imperative to act quickly and decisively to maintain services to parliamentarians without interruption throughout the transition.

Given the situation, a decision was made to negotiate with the Library of Parliament administration to have it provide administrative services in the short and medium term. This decision was based on the following criteria. Services at competitive costs compared with other organizations; the political neutrality of the Library of Parliament; and the experience it has acquired since 2005 in providing similar administrative services to another independent officer of Parliament, the office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, and its predecessor.

The added benefit of having a team of Library managers already familiar with the needs of the office of the PBO ensured that all PBO analysts and managers could continue their analysis activities during the transition. The flexibility to revisit the administrative agreements with the Library after the 2019 election was also an important criteria.

And personally, for me it was very important to maintain the option to remain a part of the House of Commons IT environment for protection of data, not only while Parliament is sitting, but also during election periods when political parties may decide to submit their campaign proposals on a confidential basis to have their financial costs evaluated.

To ensure a smooth transition, an amount of $731,000 was submitted to, and was approved by, the speakers of the Senate and the House of Commons as part of the supplementary estimates (C). A business case explaining the basis for the budget requests was provided to the speakers, and also to members of the committee.

In the table you were given, the amount of $731,000 was broken down as follows: $39,600 is set aside for additional analytical capacity; $432,213 for goods and services expenditures associated with the new independence requirements, such as licenses and contracts for IT, financial and compensation services; $218,839 will go to transition staff; finally, $40,575 will go to changes to the employee benefit plan.

I would like now to ask my colleague, Jason, just to walk you through the interim budget, and after that we will be open for questions.

[Jason Jacques, Chief Financial Officer and Senior Director, Costing and Budgetary Analysis, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer]

Thanks, Jean-Denis.

Looking at the coming fiscal year, the 2018-19 interim estimates identify a funding request of $2.9 million for our office, which is the initial proposed allocation out of a total budgetary request that you're going to be seeing in the main estimates of about $7.6 million for the coming fiscal year.

I would note that a significant amount of this funding relates to transition expenses that are non-recurring. These arise from the need to fit up new space to accommodate a growing staff; establishing new policies and agreements to govern the office, that are consistent with our new legislation; and paying for the implementation of a new enterprise resource planning system, which we hope is implemented more smoothly than Phoenix.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!