Government Operations Committee on June 5th, 2019

[Bill Matthews]

Sure. Thank you, Minister and Mr. Chair.

In terms of the deadline being missed, the member raised the issue that the 30-day deadline was missed. He's quite right. The department has a window where it can ask for an extension and we missed that window, so the opportunity for an extension was lost. The 30 days was not respected.

The reason we missed the window is that we discovered, in the 200-and-some pages of documentation, which I'll come back to, that some of it does belong to another department. That means we have to consult with the other department, and that's a perfectly legitimate reason for an extension, but we missed the window.

Of the 200 pages, a lot of it is various headlines, news media, and not what I would call real information or new information inside the department.

What is going to happen in the next couple of days? We will release the information that is PSPC-specific and then for the information that is an exchange between ourselves and our colleagues at National Defence, as they have a role here, we'll get their consultation, and that will come later.

That's an update on that issue, Mr. Chair.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Okay, so we'll see that in the next couple of days here, but in terms of releasing information, the same article I quoted points out:

Last week, the office of Innovation Minister...alerted Irving that Globe and Mail journalists had asked that department whether an investment in an Alberta french fry plant counted toward the industrial benefits.... As a result the newspaper received a letter from an Irving lawyer threatening legal action if the article contained any allegations of improper conduct.

I take it that this must bother you as well. I mean, this is another example of a company being tipped off to do this. I think the media has a right to ask these questions.

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

I think it's essential that the media ask these exact kinds of questions. It's a fundamental right.

Again, on that information, this had to do with a specific ITB: assignment of ITB value for a specific project. Again, it is legitimate for a department or a minister's office to reach out to a supplier or a partner to ensure that we are getting the right information, especially if it's information, maybe, that's kind of brand new to us.

Again, the error lies in having shared the personal information of that journalist. Again, I can't tell you what has happened in another department, but I can tell you that in my department and within my own minister's office we've taken quite significant steps since our error happened to ensure that it doesn't happen again.

[Rob Nicholson, Conservative, Niagara Falls, ON]

Well, I—

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much. I'm sorry. We're out of time, Mr. Nicholson, but we will have another attempt.

Mr. Blaikie, you have five minutes.

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

On the question of Phoenix, I want to zero in on the departmental plan that suggests the number of FTEs in payments and accounting are going to drop by approximately 53% between the 2019-20 fiscal year and the 2020-21 fiscal year.

We've heard that the pay pod model has been pretty successful and that part of the success in getting some of the claims with Phoenix under control has been staffing up appropriately. Why is the department thinking it can tolerate a decrease of 53% in the payments and accounting workforce?

[Carla Qualtrough, Liberal, Delta, BC]

Les, thank you.

[Les Linklater, Associate Deputy Minister, Human Resources-to-Pay Stabilization, Department of Public Works and Government Services]

Mr. Chair, thank you for the question.

I think the context here is the funding that was received in budget 2019 for the department. Essentially, we are looking at operational funding for one year only, which will necessitate a return to the centre for a budget request for budget 2020 to be able to sustain or perhaps enhance the number of staff that we have on strength.

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

If those staff are required on an ongoing basis, why wouldn't that just be part of a more regular ask? Why would we be projecting a drop? Every year, you come and ask for certain voted authorities. You don't project that you're going to lose all your staff if the vote doesn't happen. Why in this case would there be a projection of a staffing decrease in the departmental plan?

[Les Linklater]

In this instance, I think it would be prudent in terms of understanding the progress that is made on the queue when we might be in a position to in fact project a decrease. We've been managing a lot of our hiring on a determinate basis, bringing in people on shorter-term contracts of six months or a year, and then looking with the central agencies, as part of the budget planning process each year, at where we will need to be over the course of the coming fiscal year.

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

Am I wrong that the departmental plan also talks about how training and retention have been one of the challenges in addressing the Phoenix issue? How does the strategy of hiring people on short-term contracts and projecting the end of their position in the next fiscal year dovetail with the goal of increasing the training and retention of the people who you do attract?

[Les Linklater]

There is a certain amount of risk management associated with this, but at the same time, most of the people who are coming in to work on compensation are coming in at entry-level CR-5, AS-1 and AS-2 positions, and we know that, grosso modo, there are opportunities across the public service for people with that kind of training. As departments mature or as Phoenix continues to stabilize, there will be opportunities for those folks to potentially off-ramp to other departments and agencies across the public service. The training isn't lost. It's retained in the system.

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

Are they not encouraged to leave sooner rather than later, though, if they're on a short-term contract and the department is projecting that the position will be eliminated within 12 months?

[Les Linklater]

Some may feel the need to move on if they have the opportunity for indeterminate positions, but also, with a foot in the door, they can apply through other competitive processes for indeterminate positions as well.

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

When you talk in the departmental plan about IBM being tapped for technical and functional support to relieve the workload of public servants so they can work on other things, and you're projecting a 53% decrease in the workforce, that's not really freeing up public servants to do other work.

On the one hand, that's engaging IBM to do some of the work public servants are doing right now, and then projecting that you're going to reduce your workforce by 53%. That sounds like contracting out to IBM the work that those folks are doing right now. It doesn't sound to me like freeing them up to do other work.

[Les Linklater]

I think it's important to underline that there are different skill sets that are brought to bear on HR-to-pay solutions. There are the compensation staff who work on files, but there are also a number of very skilled technical people who are working on the system and articulating business requirements that are then translated into technical change requests that are implemented in the system.

What we have found with IBM is that by bringing on additional support with their help we're able to free up some of the more technical staff, who are then working on—

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

How many of the staff working on Phoenix would be in that category of technical staff, versus pay advisers?

[Les Linklater]

I would have to get back through the clerk with the specific number, but it's in the hundreds.

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

Yes, sure.

[Bill Matthews]

As one point of clarification, it's not abnormal in the federal funding model to get year-by-year funding. Phoenix isn't the only file where you will see this sort of thing in the departmental plan, whereby you come back to refresh the resources year after year. It's not out of the ordinary.

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

Although, we have heard from government that this is a long-term problem that's going to require a long-term fix and that it's an important priority.

I mean, if you were going to convert funding to a more regular basis, this seems like a perfect candidate for something that would enjoy long-term, sustained support, as opposed to an ad-hoc approach.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Mr. Peterson, you're up, for five minutes, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, and thank you to your team for being here today.

I'm going to talk a bit about Coast Guard ships to start off.

I think the average age of a ship is older than everybody around this committee table, except for maybe the chair.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

We're going to move on now.