Government Operations Committee on March 9th, 2016

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

So it is separate.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

The funding I'm speaking of here is to improve service delivery to veterans. I mentioned some of the areas, including improved mental health.

That doesn't obviate what we believe to be an important priority, and that is to reopen some of these offices.

We were told clearly by veterans that these offices, the physical location of these offices, and the capacity to go and to talk with people was very important to the services we provide.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I appreciate that and that's excellent. I think it's reflected as well in the extra $435 million. Is that $81 million for the cost of those nine offices, or is it for the extra pharmaceuticals you mentioned or extra services across the country?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

The number of disability benefit applications processed is a big part of this, as well as the mental health side.

There are also five years to improve service delivery to veterans and their families.

We're talking about the estimates now in supplementary estimates (C). In a couple of weeks we'll have a budget as well, which will have more—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I realize this is a question out of the dark, and if you haven't got the exact details, that's fine, we can—

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

These are not related to reopening those offices.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Yes. That's what I'm asking.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

No, it's not specific to the opening of those offices, but we are reopening those offices—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

That's what I'm asking.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Sure. Thanks, Mr. McCauley.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Okay. We're short on time.

I want to pull up another issue we had yesterday that we could not get a clear answer on. There was $1 million asked for shutting down Canada's economic action plan. We realize it's a controversial issue from the past, but seeking $1 million...I'm trying to figure out what that $1 million is for.

My understanding is they're looking for $1 million extra to shut it down. The answer we got was, “No, this is money already spent this year before the change of government.”

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I'm going to have to cut it off now. Perhaps your colleague Mr. Blaney, in his next round, would be able to pursue that line of questioning, and perhaps the minister would be able to respond at that time.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

It's up to you, Mr. Chair. I'm prepared if—

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

We'll move on if we can because I want to make sure everyone has an opportunity to question the minister before we have to adjourn.

We'll go to another five-minute round for Monsieur Ayoub.

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Brison, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for being here this evening to answer our questions. Of course, transparency is an important element, as is the new way of seeing things, and I am very proud of this.

I would like to ask you a question about the Service Income Security Insurance Plan. There is a call for new money, amounting to almost half a billion dollars, specifically $435 million. It is an enormous sum. I wonder what the initial budget was and what will be the percentage increase as a result of this request.

What are the main reasons for this request? Was the forecast wrong to begin with? How long has it been known that sooner or later such a significant increase would be required? Did someone bring this file to your attention right away and advise you that there was a shortfall of half a billion dollars in the forecasts, or did this happen suddenly, within the last few weeks ?

I would like to have some idea about the process used to determine that there was a shortfall of 435 million dollars.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Ayoub. I appreciate your question.

In the current economic environment, with very low interest rates, we must invest to make our public-sector pension plans stronger.

Please allow me to answer in English, since this is a very technical question.

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Go ahead.

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

There are a couple of factors here. One is the demands on the military pension and disability. SISIP and the SISIP disability have been increasing for a number of reasons. I mentioned earlier to Mr. McCauley's question some of the issues around investing in mental health, and supporting mental health is part of that.

The other thing is in the very low interest rate environment that we have now, pension plans have faced some challenges, and we are committed to first of all maintaining the prudential strength of our public pension plans, but also maintaining transparency around our pension plans. This investment reflects that.

I've been informed by my official Brian that there's been a 66% increase in benefits over three years resulting from Afghanistan veterans, as an example. This is something that whatever government was there would be faced with. There's a very real need to maintain the prudential strength of our pension plans during a time when, in the case of SISIP, as an example, payout will grow. We're in a very low interest rate environment. This investment reflects that.

[Bill Matthews, Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat]

I would just like to add one thing.

The minister already mentioned the factors of the low interest rates and the increasing number of claims because of the service in Afghanistan. The third piece is the amount of benefits that are actually being paid out has increased recently because of a settlement related to a lawsuit, the Manuge case. That's actually driving up the payments of individual claims.

I believe your first question was around what was the starting point of the fund for the current year. We started the year with about $370 million—I think $368 million to be exact. We're adding $435 million, so we're basically more than doubling what's there. But it's those three factors now that you have: interest rates, increasing numbers of claims, plus the Manuge settlement.

[Ramez Ayoub, Liberal, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Is there a way to plan those kinds of differences a little ahead?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

The answer to that is that we are taking a look at public sector pension plans across the board in the Treasury Board to try to be able to foresee and predict the need for these investments. Rest assured, as we're making these investments we will do so in a very transparent way, and we will be accountable to Parliament and vote for them, and explain them, and engage parliamentarians in them.

I think we would all agree that in terms of public sector pension plans we need to first of all maintain their prudential strength, but we have to do so in an open and transparent way. We also have to make sure that we are utilizing the best possible pension management approaches in terms of long-term pension security for pension holders and maximizing return in a responsible way.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Blaney, for five minutes, please.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Minister, I will repeat that it is truly a pleasure to welcome you this evening. As the saying goes, we must give people a chance. However, you have not convinced me yet that you will be the one to say no. Is there someone at the controls? Will you protect the taxpayers from this propensity to create huge deficits?

My first question is on an awareness campaign that appears on page 19 of the supplementary estimates (C). The overall advertising budget is $9.5 million. One of the goals of the campaign is to prevent illegal use of marijuana among young people. We are aware of the devastating effects of marijuana. A total of $1 million is provided for this purpose. Can you confirm that this amount will be spent on that goal?

If there is time, the people with you could answer my other question, which is about the shipbuilding program. There is a sum of $116 million. Would it be possible to have a detailed explanation for the additional cost of the ships?

I will repeat my first question. Out of the the total $9.5-million advertising budget, will the $1 million allocated to preventing the illegal use of marijuana, especially among young people, be invested for this purpose?

[Scott Brison, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Thank you very much.

From marijuana to shipbuilding, we run the gamut here.

Let me begin by discussing the marijuana legislation. For many years the Government of Canada's approach has failed to reduce marijuana use, particularly among young people. Our responsibility is to implement an evidence-based approach.

The evidence is quite clear. Nobody is condoning, supporting, or promoting the use of marijuana, Mr. Blaney. We want a legal framework in laws that are more effective. Some countries that have chosen to focus efforts on health promotion, prevention, mental health services, and addiction services have found that to be more effective in reducing the use of drugs, marijuana being one, than simply a criminal justice approach. We can differ on the approach, but I want to be very clear, Mr. Blaney, that nobody here is advocating or promoting the use of marijuana.

You've raised a question on shipbuilding, and I think you may be speaking specifically to the three offshore fisheries science vessels, the $116 million.

As you know, we are committed to a national shipbuilding program across Canada. For the funding of the three offshore fisheries science vessels, I've been working most recently with Minister Tootoo. It's part of replacing the aging fleet, which is important.

What's important is you're managing shipbuilding, which falls broadly between Fisheries and Defence, and also Public Works, which is now Public Services and Procurement, and Industry. As a government we seek to balance Public Services and Procurement, my old department. Their job is to have an open and transparent process that gets the best value for taxpayers. Industry seeks to maximize industrial regional benefits, IRBs, most recently called ITBs, or technology benefits, and then the departments, Defence or Fisheries, have their needs in that.

Treasury Board overall plays a leadership and coordinating role and works with all departments and agencies to have the most efficient procurement processes that address those three government objectives: jobs for Canadians, value for tax dollars, and the best possible equipment for our military and our Coast Guard, as examples.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you, Minister. That's the end of our time.

I'm sorry, Mr. Blaney, we're out of time.