Evidence of meeting #139 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was budget.
A video is available from Parliament.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
None of that is for the Canadian ombudsperson for responsible enterprise—
12:50 p.m.
Director, Softwood Lumber Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Not that I'm aware of, no.
12:50 p.m.
Director, Softwood Lumber Division, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
No, I think there were different elements for Global Affairs, but $29 million was allocated to softwood lumber.
12:50 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
In the departmental plans for the Department of Indigenous Services, we don't read about...and these terms don't really appear in the budget. They appear, but just in tables in the departmental plans. These are the terms that we have allocations for. Regarding the Labrador Innu health programs, first nations health services accreditation program, clinical and client care program, and the e-health infrastructure program, if we're not getting a description of what those programs are in the budget and we don't get a description of what those programs are in the departmental plan, where can we get a description of what it is that those particular programs are meant to do and some sense of the reasons for the allocation of the amounts that are allocated?
12:50 p.m.
Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer, Department of Indigenous Services Canada
Thank you very much for the question.
12:50 p.m.
Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer, Department of Indigenous Services Canada
Those programs are ongoing. They were, for the most part, sunsettable, so they're being renewed. You should be able to find some information about that in previous departmental plans. When we're talking about a department with myriad varied programs with appropriations of $9 billion, it's hard to provide a level of detail on each program that will satisfy everybody, but we'd be happy to provide the level of detail to you in terms of each of those programs.
12:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Thank you.
To our witnesses, thank you all for being here today. You've been very informative and very helpful.
We will suspend, colleagues, for just a couple of moments and then we have some business to do. We will remain in public.
We are remaining in public, but colleagues, we do have a little bit of business to do today, unfinished business, and that's dealing with reporting back on the main estimates. You may know that all other votes were deemed reported back on June 10, the deadline, but the main estimates for the Treasury Board Secretariat have to be done today.
Mr. Blaikie.
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you, Chair. I'd just ask that we break up vote 40 separately, to treat it on its own.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
We can certainly do that, but we have to go through the process. You'll have an opportunity. If we do not get unanimous consent, that's where we're headed.
My first question for all of you all is, do I have the unanimous consent of the committee to call all of the votes under the Treasury Board Secretariat on the main estimates 2018-19 together?
No? In that case, shall vote 1 under Treasury Board Secretariat, less the amount voted in the interim estimates, carry?
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
It has to be unanimous. We did not get unanimous consent so now we're doing them separately.
TREASURY BOARD SECRETARIAT
Vote 1—Program expenditures..........$233,305,792
Vote 5—Government Contingencies..........$750,000,000
Vote 10—Government-wide Initiatives..........$28,193,000
Vote 20—Public Service Insurance..........$2,398,905,397
Vote 25—Operating Budget Carry Forward..........$1,600,000,000
Vote 30—Paylist Requirements..........$600,000,000
Vote 35—Capital Budget Carry Forward..........$600,000,000
(Votes1, 5, 10, 20, 25, 30, and 35 agreed to on division)
TREASURY BOARD SECRETARIAT
Vote 40—Budget Implementation..........$7,040,392,000
Shall vote 40 carry?
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
At this point, I'd like to move some of the reductions on which I served notice.
12:55 p.m.
Conservative
12:55 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
For ease of reference, this is amendment 169. I move:
That Vote 40 under the TREASURY BOARD SECRETARIAT in the amount of $7,040,392,000, as it appears on page II-260 of the Main Estimates 2018-19, be reduced by $745,000, as it appears on page A1–7 of the Main Estimates 2018-19 for A New Process for Federal Election Leaders’ Debates under Privy Council Office, in addition to any reductions previously agreed upon.
Of course, Mr. Chair, you'll know that the $7,040,392,000 comes from the total amount of Treasury Board vote 40, and the reduction amount comes from the allocation under the Privy Council Office for a new process for federal election leaders debates. That reference is just to help provide clarity, because normally, you don't necessarily have all of the different moving parts that you have under a vote. This is just to provide clarity as to where that particular reduction number comes from, particularly in light of the fact that we'll be considering a number, a great number, over 200, in fact, potential reductions to Treasury Board vote 40.
I thought that this was an important one to start with. We heard from the Privy Council Office that they weren't prepared to answer any questions about this particular proposed allocation under vote 40 because they had no plan for the money. I think members will know, and I think I've been as clear as one can be, that I don't think it's appropriate to grant authority for spending when the government has no plan for what it intends to do with the money. A high-level tale of what they're intending is nice, but it's not what I think people expect when they send us here to provide some more rigorous accountability.
It could be an important initiative, and the point isn't that the idea of reforming the process for federal election leaders debates is a bad idea, or that it shouldn't be done. The point is that there's a number here, $750,000, and before we say that this is an appropriate amount to dedicate to that particular initiative, I think we owe it to Canadians to ensure that the government has a sense of how it's going to spend it, because there are a number of different ways that you could support a new process for federal election leaders' debates.
1 p.m.
Liberal
Ramez Ayoub Liberal Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
Mr. Chair, since it is 1 p.m., I suggest that we suspend and continue the next time.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
We cannot adjourn without a proper motion on the floor to adjourn.
We do have this room until 4 p.m. The most pressing thing for me today is the deadline to report back the Treasury Board Secretariat main estimates.
1 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
If I could then, Mr. Chair, I would happily move that we extend the meeting until we've dispensed with all the proposed amendments for vote 40.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Again, we have to deal with this today. I don't know that suspension would serve a very useful purpose, Mr. Blaikie.
1 p.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
I'm not moving suspension. I'm moving extension, that we extend the meeting until we've dealt with the amendments or until the deadline.
1 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
We will be here, Mr. Blaikie, until we dispense with your comments.
