Government Operations Committee on Feb. 25th, 2019

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

My question is for Mr. Shea. I'm referring to the first paragraph on page 4 of your written submission. It talks about requesting $53.7 million in these interim estimates. It says it represents “four-twelfths of the 2019-20 Main Estimates”. I think that means 2018-19, or are we getting a preview of what you're asking for in the main estimates?

[Matthew Shea]

This is a sense of what we'll be asking for. We're asking for slightly more than the three-twelfths that you might accustom a department to getting. With the MMIWG finishing, we wanted to ensure they had the funding they require. As you may recall, MMIWG funding falls under our department.

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

Indeed. There are two things I want to ask about. When you say that it represents four-twelfths of the 2019-20 estimates, we haven't seen that number yet. My understanding is that unlike in the old system, the interim estimates would be based on the last year's spending. Is this actually based on a projection of next year's spending?

[Matthew Shea]

I've not heard before that we base on the prior year. What happens is that departments go to Treasury Board and tell Treasury Board what they need to get through the first three months of the year. Traditionally you would divide your anticipated budget by 12 times 3, and that would give you your three-twelfths. In some situations you may ask for more.

In our case, we asked for more this year in recognition of MMIWG. In the case of the Leaders' Debates Commission, they asked for an even higher percentage for the same reason—a lot of their spending will be early on in the year and they wanted to make sure they had funding.

So it's a case-by-case situation depending on what the cash-flow needs of the department are.

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

Okay, but in this case the four-twelfths come from the wrapping up of the MMIWG.

[Matthew Shea]

Absolutely.

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

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

Colleagues, I think I'll suspend now before we go into our next set of panellists, but I do want to thank everyone from both PCO and the Public Service Commission for being here. I know there were a couple of answers that certain members were willing to provide, but we unfortunately ran out of time. So I would certainly encourage all of you, should you have additional information you want to provide to the clerk, to please do so at your earliest opportunity so we can distribute that, as it will help us do our jobs a little better.

Thank you very much for being here. We'll see you next time.

We're suspended for a few moments, reconvening at 4:30.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Colleagues, I think we'll reconvene now.

I think all of you have the written comments from our two sets of panellists, the Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board, and the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner.

I would ask the same question that I asked, colleagues, before our first set of panellists. If there is a willingness to take the comments from both of these agencies as read and appended to the evidence, then, if you agree to that approach, we would go directly into questions.

I'm looking for consensus. Do we have a sense of agreement on that, colleagues?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

[See appendix—Remarks by Kathleen Fox]

[See appendix—Remarks by Joe Friday]

This way we can forgo the opening statements and go directly into questions, starting with Mr. Peterson.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to our witnesses for being here with us again today. I haven't had a chance to review Madam Fox's report, but I think my questions are general enough that I don't need to have that information to ask questions.

I'm going to start with Mr. Friday in any event.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Welcome back.

Well, I have questions for both of you. Hopefully, we'll have enough time. Thank you for being here once again, this time in a new building. I appreciated your written submission, and I have some follow-up questions, mostly on the departmental review and some of the numbers you are speaking about there. It looks like your department is in good shape. Congratulations on that.

There are some interesting facts I want to follow up on, and this might go to some of your speculation. Eighty-eight percent of the employees in your office said they felt comfortable initiating a recourse process.

[Joe Friday, Commissioner, Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner]

Yes.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

I would suspect they're all familiar with that process, given the nature of their work.

[Joe Friday]

That is an increase from last year, I am happy to be able to confirm.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Right. That's what I was going to get to. Do you recall the amount from last year? What was that increase?

[Joe Friday]

I believe it was 77% last year, and this year 88% of the people in my office feel comfortable coming forward. I believe the public service rate is 48%.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

To what do you attribute this 11% increase? Can it be somehow applied to the public service at large in your estimation?

[Joe Friday]

I think the increase reflects the fact that this is the area, of course, that we work in every day. My management team and I focus a lot of attention and effort on ensuring that people understand our raison d'être, understand the processes, and understand, primarily, the great challenges that people face in coming forward. That goes right down to the hiring practices within our office. We try to identify people who really do understand not only the importance of coming forward, but also the challenges facing people who are trying to come forward.

We've also instituted a learning curriculum in the office. Our goal was to have 20 hours of formal training for every employee, not only in things directly related to our work, but to support the training goals of our employees. We're at a 93% rate as of today.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Yes, that's excellent. Most of your numbers are very positive in that sense.

I know we've had you before our committee often, not just on the estimates or the departmental review, but also on the whistle-blower legislation that we reviewed. You took an active part in that process. We're not at a point where we've received feedback from the government on that. What steps are you taking, even in light of that, to make sure the processes are being improved? I know you made 16 or 17 recommendations.

[Joe Friday]

Yes, we made 16.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Even though those aren't legislated in any manner yet, are you following the spirit of those recommendations in your conduct as it is?

[Joe Friday]

We are certainly doing our best to exercise any and all flexibilities that the current law provides for us to do our work.

Of course, it would be easier for us to do the work if we could change the law to improve it in the way that we suggested. Recognizing that we do have the law that we have, we are trying our very best to work with it.

I'm also taking every opportunity to share with the people we reach out to—who could be anyone from media, to students, to other public servants, and our provincial, territorial and international colleagues—and to continue to discuss the proposals and keep alive the issue and spirit of ongoing improvement.