Evidence of meeting #162 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 pco.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Let me ask a specific question. We brought this up before about the budget, that supposedly the mandate commits to “balance this year”. It says, “underway with challenges”. It's obviously been abandoned, and this is fact-based, as it's not under way with challenges. It's not going to get done.
Who decides to put it as “underway with challenges”, as opposed to not being pursued, like electoral reform?
Assistant Secretary, Impact and innovation Unit, Privy Council Office
As I mentioned, that's a decision taken at the departmental level with the officials and the relevant ministers.
Assistant Secretary, Impact and innovation Unit, Privy Council Office
That would be the finance minister.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Would that be the finance minister saying to your department, put it here?
Assistant Secretary, Impact and innovation Unit, Privy Council Office
It's always in consultation with the departments and agencies that feed in as we aggregate all that information, so we're not—
Conservative
Assistant Secretary, Impact and innovation Unit, Privy Council Office
That's the accountable minister and department.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Let me ask you another question. There are several other commitments here: ensure that the Armed Forces have equipment they need; infrastructure bank support; building new rental housing. The government is clearly not doing that.
PCO is responsible. Do you not feel a bit awkward when you're representing information that clearly is not correct, or not truthful in the mandate tracker?
Assistant Secretary, Impact and innovation Unit, Privy Council Office
Our position, as I mentioned the last time I was here, is that the information is verified through the departments and officials and the responsible minister. Our role, within that entire process, is to represent the views and opinions of the departments and their ministers.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
I'm not sure who would answer this. How many Senate appointments were made last year?
February 25th, 2019 / 3:40 p.m.
Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Privy Council Office
We'll get that number for you.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Are we still maintaining the same amount of support services for the Senate selection process, as we did last year, or does it ebb and flow depending on how many Senate openings we have?
Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Privy Council Office
I would suggest that it ebbs and flows. It's a large unit that does all the different types of appointments, so obviously, it has to be nimble.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
I'm talking more specifically about administrative support, because we've had some order papers come in that it was like $1 million for the secretarial and administrative supports for the selection committee.
Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Privy Council Office
Sorry, Mr. McCauley, I'm just trying to find the Senate piece. I don't have it broken out here. Perhaps I can give you that later. I don't want to waste time while I find it.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Sure. I suspect we're pretty much out of time anyway, so maybe you can have that for the next round.
Thanks.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Before I go to Mr. Blaikie, I will say that I have noticed a number of committee members and some of our guests half squinting. We tried to find a dimmer switch to lower the level of intensity of the lights. This committee room doesn't seem to have one, so we're stuck with what we have. I hope it doesn't make anybody too uncomfortable or the glare off of.... Oh, I won't go there.
Conservative
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
I'd first like to come back briefly to the discussion Mr. Shea was having with Mr. McCauley about the vote 40 money that was allocated to the new Leaders' Debate Commission. I'm trying to understand the process. I think it's good we see that a certain amount of money has been withheld and that the money exceeds what appears to be allocated to the Leaders' Debate Commission under the supplementary estimates. How does that process unfold? What is the discussion like?
I mean, you guys were the ones entitled to that money under vote 40. Is it understood that the money is being withheld because it will be transferred to the Leaders' Debate Commission? What exactly does that accounting conversation look like when the decision gets made to withhold that money? How obvious and how documented is it that the withholding is meant to create space to allocate funds to the new entity?
Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Privy Council Office
First, maybe I can just close the loop with Mr. McCauley. We made 16 appointments last fiscal year and 49 in total under the current government.
To your question, as I explained before, the process was in the federal budget. Money was set aside. There was TB vote 40, which we have spoken of before. That's an “up to” amount. Ultimately, that money is in the fiscal framework, available for the departments when we talk about the $5.5 million. Ultimately, as we worked on the estimates for this, we found that it could be done for a lower price, working with the debates commission and that's the reason they're not accessing the full amount that was available to them.
Mr. McCauley alluded to the fact that we spent around $400,000 at PCO in set-up costs. For personnel and those types of expenditures, this year it will be a little under $300,000 for the commission itself. Next year they're looking at spending around $4.6 million. That's their best estimate. If they spend under that amount, obviously that would be returned to the fiscal framework.
One thing I'd like to address, because I think it's been alluded to a couple of times, is the opportunity to challenge the plan. I would suggest that every department has to come forth with a departmental plan. I mentioned that they were created as a department, so just like PCO, in the coming months there will be a departmental plan and there will be an opportunity for parliamentary committees to actually bring witnesses to talk about those plans. That would be an opportunity for PROC, as an example, or this committee, to call the debates commissioner and ask those questions. I know that his office has indicated he would be pleased to answer questions on the way in which they're going to spend money.
I am hesitant to answer too deeply about their spending, because we're trying to maintain an arm's-length relationship. In terms of a role, we have an MOU with them to provide administrative services.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Fair enough. Just to be clear, that's why the target of my question is more about how the money moves to the new entity and less about what the new entity is doing. That's what I'm trying to understand. For instance, in the supplementary estimates, there is an item with a voted amount of $257,000, roughly.
Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Privy Council Office
Yes.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
It doesn't say in there that this is coming from the vote 40 allocation that was under the PCO rubric, and therefore the amount that's being withheld on your vote—or a sub vote, as the case may be, within vote 40—is actually about $300,000. It's not clear in the estimates that those are proxies. I can see that they are similar numbers and that what the new organization is getting approximates what's being withheld from you. I don't think that's really clear enough.