Government Operations Committee on May 27th, 2019

[Michael Hammond]

Part of the reason for that is because we have not gone through the process of baselining all of our results indicators, given that they are very new. Some of the data have not actually been established, in terms of what the target would be. Most of ours that we have announced—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Let me interrupt you right there.

I'm looking at these. We have the numbers from the previous year, so we do have a baseline. For example, percentage of employees who describe their workplace as being healthy, we had 60% two years ago, which dropped down to 56%, which is scary. People are feeling that their workplace is not healthy, but our only goal within Privy Council is to increase that. So, we have a baseline, but we're not setting an actual target.

What percentage of PCO executives are getting paid bonuses and what are we basing their bonuses on, if we're not actually setting targets for them?

[Matthew Shea]

I would differentiate between departmental results and individual executive compensation. Absolutely, there is a linkage between a department achieving its objectives and executives getting paid, but each executive has much more specific performance appraisal items. For example, I have all corporate services, so it would make sense that part of mine are linked to achieving IT projects, achieving forecasting—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

But they're not linked to achieving departmental projects or departmental targets.

[Matthew Shea]

Generally, you have government-wide commitments in every executive's performance agreement, and you'll typically have departmental ones as well, and then very specific ones to the individual. Without getting into a large discussion about executive compensation, one of the key things is what you have control of when you talk about compensation.

A key to that is ensuring we're evaluating executives on things that are within their control, which does not mean they shouldn't contribute to government-wide initiatives, but it does mean we have to also evaluate them on what they are specifically mandated with doing. What is in my performance appraisal is different from what is in Rodney's, for very good reasons.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Maybe in someone's performance appraisal, targets should actually be set. I'm not blaming you. It's whoever signed off on this.

On page 8 of your DP you've got an indicator: percentage of cabinet documents that meet PCO's guidance on drafting is 50%. Is PCO not the primary source of drafting such documents?

[Matthew Shea]

The PCO has the role of vetting the drafts. Each department is responsible for writing its own memoranda to cabinet, no different than with Treasury Board, writing Treasury Board submissions is the individual department's role

When it comes to PCO, the folks who reviewed these are looking at a number of different things. It can be as simple as formatting; it can be the translation quality; it can be the gender-based analysis. They're looking at those different pieces to make sure it's being done.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

On page 3 and 4 of your handout, it states that funding will also be approved in the supplementary estimates to continue to support the management oversight of an open, transparent and merit-based process for Governor in Council appointments.

How does this relate to the news that the government is using a partisan Liberal donation base for vetting senators, but also GIC appointments? I'm wondering what role that played with the fact that you seem to have to be a Liberal supporter to get the GIC appointments. The other report that also just came out showed the inability of visible minorities to get past the vetting process for hiring into the public service for GIC appointments.

[Matthew Shea]

At a very high level, we actually do have a lot of diversity amongst GIC appointments.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

That's not what reality shows.

[Matthew Shea]

I can give you the stats: 54% of appointees self-identify as women; 13% as visible minorities; 9% as indigenous people; and 3.5% as persons with disabilities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you.

Ms. Benson, welcome to our committee. You have seven minutes.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Thank you very much, Chair, and fellow Saskatchewanites. I'm pleased to be here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I don't see you wearing green today, but that's all right.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Today in the House, the minister is giving a statement, and you're here talking about things the government is going to do to ensure that elections are not “tampered with”, I guess would be the colloquial term.

I know you've shared what the protocol will be around the critical election incident public protocol. Looking at the panel, it lists the expertise, or what each panel member will bring, but election expertise wasn't one of them. The Chief Electoral Officer isn't a part of the critical incident team. What was the rationale for not including that expertise on the panel?

[Matthew Shea]

I apologize. In my role, I don't have visibility into the process. I can simply say that, absolutely, the Chief Electoral Officer would be informed of any issues and would be briefed. There is a partnership that exists between the various organizations. This is very specific to how we alert the public to a critical incident that affects the election.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

From your perspective, are you saying that the Chief Electoral Officer will be involved in informing the public, or investigating it, or identifying it? What is the role of that officer in this process?

[Matthew Shea]

The protocol is about making a determination as to whether there is foreign interference and then taking steps from that.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Right.

[Matthew Shea]

As for what goes on behind the scenes in terms of investigation, I don't think it would be appropriate for me to comment, but I think on a case-by-case basis agencies and organizations beyond the five that are making that set of decisions—

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Right.

[Matthew Shea]

—would be involved in any type of investigation, any type of recommendations. This is really a decision-making body that has that final say. That's not to say that there's not involvement from other agencies that exist across government.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

So, what you're saying is that a critical incident team could include the Chief Electoral Officer in rolling something out, or helping them determine whether.... It just seems to me that the person or that role within the electoral system should be a part of that team. I'm just curious as to why they weren't included as part of the team.

[Matthew Shea]

I can only repeat what I've already said.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Okay.

Going to the renewal efforts for the public service and the overall plan, I'm wondering if you might comment about what role you think the inability of the federal government to pay its public servants correctly has played in some of the deterioration within the public service of their satisfaction at their jobs.

To me, the Phoenix pay system needs to be a part of what you consider, going forward, when you're renewing the public service. You have to be able to pay people properly.