Government Operations Committee on May 3rd, 2018

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

The reality is the Conservatives had to be taken to court to provide—

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Gentlemen, as much as I'm totally engaged in this, we are out of time. I'm sure this conversation will continue as we go around the table, but we have to move on to Mr. Blaikie for seven minutes, please.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

When you talk about tabling items from A2.11 into the appropriations act, will you include the amounts in the table as well? For as much as you say you're bound to spend only on what's in the table, it's not clear to me where the authority comes from for that. If it's not in the wording in the bill, where is the legal constraint? And if it's in the wording of even the main estimates where it says that the vote is for “new measures approved and identified in Table A2.11 of Budget 2018”, that doesn't commit the government to the numbers in the table.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Again, the annex in the main estimates refers to the table, and the table provides the amounts granularly. We will go further and take the items as listed line by line and put them—

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

With the amounts?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

—in the supply bill. Brian, they will have the amounts. There's no reason we wouldn't. I wouldn't put them in without the amounts, Mr. Blaikie. But we will do that, and you will appreciate—

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

Are you going to take the items from the budget table, or from the annex in the main estimates? There are some discrepancies between the annex in the main estimates that's supposed to mirror what's in the budget and the budget table itself. For instance, under the Department of Industry, two programs that appear in the main estimates table don't appear under that same department in the budget table. There's a suggested allocation for regional development agencies, and for a new women entrepreneurship strategy under that department that wasn't reflected in the budget. Which is it? Are you going to use the numbers from the appendix in the main estimates, or are you going to use the numbers from the budget?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

The annex items are more detailed, and we would provide that level of detail.

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

Why do we continue to talk about the table in the budget when we're talking about the information in the main estimates, and they're not exactly the same?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

You're asking a very good question, Mr. Blaikie. The reality is that the information we've laid out both in the main estimates, which is more detailed, and the line by line items in table A2.11 in the budget should clear up any questions. The wording they're putting in the supply bill—

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

Are we going to get the wording for the supply bill when this comes to the committee of the whole, or are you committed to working with opposition parties in advance to ensure that we find the wording satisfactory as well?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

If we put the level of detail from the annex into the supply bill, I can't imagine there being dissatisfaction with that level of—

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

It's going to be in the wording. You didn't imagine there would be dissatisfaction with the original wording of the appropriation bill, and there was.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I still find it hard to believe, to be honest.

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

What I want to know is, are you going to be speaking to us prior to tabling the bill so that we can let you know whether or not we find the wording satisfactory before Parliament is put on the spot?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

We will take that under advisement.

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

So that's neither a yes nor a no.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I keep saying yes.

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

What I'd like to know, because you're the principal spokesperson for Treasury Board, obviously, is whether you think that the costing process at Treasury Board provides a level of rigour and detail that the budget costing process does not.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I believe that the working relationship between Finance and Treasury Board—

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

Do you think that process adds rigour and detail to a significant degree over what's presented in the budget?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

I believe that the budgeting process and the Treasury Board submission process work together very well, and the Treasury Board—

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

But they don't. The reason for the central vote is that those two processes don't work well together. We've heard clearly from the Parliamentary Budget Officer that if Treasury Board and the Department of Finance worked better together, we wouldn't need a catch-all central vote for all the new budget items.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

The last time I checked the PBO doesn't work at Treasury Board. The reality is—

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

You don't have to work at Treasury Board to see that there's a lack of co-operation, because if you had that co-operation you wouldn't need to have a catch-all central vote.