Government Operations Committee on May 8th, 2018

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Do you believe that using one central vote, in most cases part of the Treasury Board approval, to approve funding for all the new programs announced in the budget is an appropriate way for Parliament to approve the funding? How does it compare to the regular process?

[Mostafa Askari]

It's certainly different from the regular process. However, as I mentioned earlier, our main concern was that the vote, as worded, did not include the details of the table that is supposed to allocate those funds. If that reference is made in the vote and it becomes part of the law, then that allocation would be according to that. As Mr. Fréchette said, that would certainly be an improvement to address the concern we had related to the allocation of funds.

You would see what you're voting on. You would see that the money will go to these departments based on the vote, and the amount is clear and certain in that table, whereas the votes right now do not make that reference. You're not voting on the allocation; you're just voting on the full amount.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you.

We will now go to Madam Mendès for seven minutes.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for being here.

I would first like to clarify one point. As I understand it, in the context of our parliamentary system, the government has to be accountable for its expenditures to the public, but that is not the case with the opposition. If the government makes a decision, the government, not the opposition, is the one that has to account for it. My comments relate to the drafting of the bill or, in this case, the vote.

Certainly the opposition would still like to have a say, but ultimately, who will be responsible for the vote?

It will be the government, will it not?

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

Absolutely. It is a democratic vote, so everyone around this table and in the House of Commons has the right to vote.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Absolutely, thank you.

As you have pointed out, I think the addition of the appendix will certainly clarify how those funds will be used. As we know, the funds are earmarked for new programs.

I would like your opinion on how the use of those funds will be reported monthly. You said, I think, Mr. Askari, that the reports produced monthly by the Treasury Board are still a novelty. Have you had an opportunity to look at how the department will do that? Is there already a snapshot of what the reports will look like?

[Mostafa Askari]

No, we have not seen the table. We do not know how the department wants to report the expenditures.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

You are talking about the new funds. Okay.

So you have no idea what kind of report they're going to be using.

[Mostafa Askari]

There's a template they have for it.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Okay, they do have a template.

[Mostafa Askari]

However, the template does not really have the details they are going to report.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Not yet.

[Mostafa Askari]

That's right.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Okay. We do expect the Treasury Board to do their due diligence now, after the vote, before they actually allocate the funds to the departments. Is that the way the process is going to go?

[Mostafa Askari]

That's correct.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Okay, thank you very much. That clarifies things on that issue for me.

Now let's go to your budget and your allocation for next year, which I think is what you're here for.

Sorry, I was speaking English.

If I understood correctly, Mr. Fréchette, the budget for the next two years takes into account the transition that you will be going through and for which you will have to pay. However, you are saying that, in 2019-20, if I understand correctly, you are going back to $6.5 million over a three-year period. Is it three years?

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

After the 2019 election, in 2020-21, we are once again starting a three-year cycle, the first three years of Parliament, with a budget of $6.5 million. According to our business plan, that's how we are able to function.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Okay. But are you not underestimating the needs that you will have?

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

The business plan was built to take into account that we have a Parliament of 338 members and 105 senators, and the demands are growing. As I said, this year, the reason the amount is higher is to manage the transition, but also because we are relatively much busier than in the past years because of the Parliament of Canada Act.

The act now requires that the cost of any proposed measure be assessed. The act has been changed to use the word “shall” in English, which means we must do it. If a member of Parliament, a senator or a parliamentary committee asks us to do an analysis of the cost of a parliamentary measure, we must do so. Clearly, that's why we are going to increase our staff. Right now, we are aiming for 32 to 35 analysts, for a total of 42 people in our office. That's what it will look like in a year. We have 15 or 16 analysts right now. So we are going to double our staff and we think that, with the amount allocated, but also with this number of people, we will be able to meet the requirements of the act that tells us we have to.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

Okay, but it's still not a big increase compared to your traditional budget over the three years when there are no elections or transitions, is it?

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

You are absolutely right, but, having said that, our office has only about 40 people. Let me add that this is also part of the criteria used, for example, by the International Monetary Fund or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to analyze the situation in other countries where the mandate of PBOs or independent financial institutions is about the same.

In terms of resources, what is most expensive or most time-consuming is really the assessment of the cost of the measures. That's what costs the most in time, money and resources.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

That's what we are asking you for the most. Is it not?

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

Increasingly, the trend is to assess the cost of bills, both government and private members' bills. In the case of election platforms, it's part of the legislative mandate. Clearly, it is not mandatory for political parties to ask for the cost of a measure to be calculated, but if one party does, I suspect the others will follow suit.

[Alexandra Mendes, Liberal, Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC]

So you have an obligation to comply with a political party's request, if need be. Is that right?