Evidence of meeting #75 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 million.
A video is available from Parliament.
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
There has been progress. We are working with departments, including on infrastructure, to strengthen results measurement and delivery. We're also working with other funding partners, other levels of government—
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Will this result in the PBO's having a more positive report?
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
Can we look forward to the PBO's having a more positive report?
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
Kelly McCauley Conservative Edmonton West, AB
How much of that is serious though? We want to see the money spent well.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
We want to get good value for taxpayers and accountability for these investments and good results.
The PBO's assessment of the importance of a results and delivery framework for the expenditure of public funds, is something we take very seriously—
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
Thank you very much.
Once again, the discourse between you two is fascinating to listen to, but we must move on.
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Tom Lukiwski
It's kind of a perspective thing, Minister.
Mr. Blaikie, you have seven minutes, please.
March 9th, 2017 / 9:10 a.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and thanks to my colleague Erin Weir for giving me some time to ask questions regarding the supplementary estimates (C) that I know are on the minds of RCMP members across the country.
As the minister should know, in January 2015, the RCMP pay council recommended a raise for RCMP members, and later that year the RCMP commissioner recommended a raise for RCMP members to the President of the Treasury Board.
Initially, when I saw the supplementary (C) estimates, just at a glance before we looked into them any further, there were some promising lines. There was a line under Treasury Board for compensation adjustments. There was a line that talked about pay list requirements. We see that the RCMP itself is requesting $70 million in the supplementary (C)s. We thought maybe this was finally the raise that RCMP members thought was coming.
When we looked into it a little more, we saw that it appears that those items under Treasury Board are not pay raise items for the RCMP. It looks like it may not be the case that the money requested by the RCMP under its own departmental plan is for the pay raise for RCMP members. I congratulate the government on the increase in platitudes when it comes to speaking about RCMP members, but as the minister knows, banks don't let RCMP members pay their mortgages in platitudes. It's important not to substitute increases in platitudes for increases in pay.
Is there a line in the supplementary estimates (C) that we've missed wherein there's a raise for RCMP members? If not, when is that raise coming?
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Thank you very much, Mr. Blaikie.
First of all, we have tremendous respect for the work of the RCMP and the safety and security that they bring to us, and—as we've seen this week—the sacrifices and the risk in their work and on an ongoing basis.
You're aware of legislation C-7, which for the first time will provide the RCMP with collective bargaining rights and representation opportunities. It continues to be subject to the legislative process, but we believe it will move forward.
The request you refer to is under consideration, and—
9:10 a.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
How long is it going to be under consideration? I mean it's been well over a year now that it's been under consideration.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Sure. It's under consideration, but when you speak to the pay adjustments that are in the supplementary (C)s now, those reflect.... When we were first elected, in terms of the public service, there were 27—
9:10 a.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Are any of those for RCMP members? That's really the substance of my question. What is in these increases for RCMP members?
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
9:10 a.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
Is the government waiting on C-7 to pass in order to pass judgment on the recommendation of the commissioner?
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
—and that is independent of C-7, but C-7 is an important step forward in terms of RCMP collective bargaining agreements.
9:10 a.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
When you're considering a raise, typically there's criteria of assessment in terms of whether you make a decision to go forward with a raise or not. If it's under consideration, what criteria are you using to evaluate the recommendation for a raise? Under what conditions would you approve that raise?
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
9:10 a.m.
NDP
Daniel Blaikie NDP Elmwood—Transcona, MB
So the raise isn't under consideration, but the criteria for evaluating the raise is still under consideration. Is that correct?