Government Operations Committee on June 8th, 2017

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

You mentioned the trading partners, but can you tell us the specific types of regulations that will be changed with this money?

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

Oh, sure. For instance, we have had progress on railcar safety between Canada and the U.S. There has already been progress on that. In the wake of the Lac-Mégantic tragedy, the regulators in Canada and the U.S. have worked together to develop an enhanced standard for a new class of rail tank car for transport of flammable liquids.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

That would be a good example of moving regulations up to a higher standard. Can you provide some kind of assurance that this will always be the case? Could this ever lead to going to the lowest common denominator?

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

It's an excellent question. I can tell you, on behalf of our government, that we see the opportunity to strengthen the governance. Health and safety, as well as environmental protection, are all key. I gave one example of what has been accomplished already in terms of Canadian and U.S. regulators strengthening regulations around railcar transportation of flammable liquids.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Have you considered just having the budget earlier?

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

The principle of whether to have the budget earlier or the estimates after.... The sequencing is the key, and having the main estimates after the budget.... In terms of individual conversations I've had with members of this committee and members of the opposition, I think we all agree on that.

I take Mr. McCauley's point very seriously, that it's not good enough just to change the sequencing unless you do the important work of co-ordinating the work between the budget process and the estimates process, but I believe that getting the sequencing right is extremely important because otherwise all progress will be halting.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Are you open to setting the budget date earlier?

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Mr. Weir, I'm sorry. We're going to have to shut it down.

Minister, thank you very much for your appearance here today.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

I know we're going to have further discussions on this, particularly on the alignment, in the days, months, and perhaps years to come.

You are now excused.

I would ask the committee members that we suspend for a couple of moments while the PCO officials come to the table.

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

I'd like to thank the committee members very much. I have great respect for the work you do individually as parliamentarians, but also collectively at this committee.

This may be the last time I meet with the committee prior to the House rising in a few weeks. I want to wish everybody a great summer in their constituencies and with their families. All the best for a happy, healthy, and productive summer 2017. With Canada 150, it's an exciting year for all of us, individually and collectively, as Canadians. I wish each and every one of you a great summer, and that you rest up and come back raring to go and do great things for Canadians in the autumn.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much, Minister.

We will suspend for two minutes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Colleagues, we'll resume our meeting.

I have just a couple of quick comments before we start. As you know, we will be going in camera for about a 30-minute period following the presentation from PCO officials since we need to finish off, hopefully within that 30 minutes, the report on the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.

Therefore, as I mentioned earlier, we'll preclude the opening statements and go straight to questioning. In addition, I would suggest that we go to one five-minute round, rather than one seven-minute round. That will get us back on time and hopefully allow us to complete the report in camera.

We will start a five-minute round beginning with Madam Ratansi.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Thank you, all, for being here.

My question will concern the PCO asking for $33.1 million for the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. I know the PCO had laid out the money in September.

Number one, do you think that money is sufficient? Number two, are there any risk mitigation strategies that you have in place should the process not work out? Also, do you know if the inquiry will be able to complete its work by its given deadline?

[Kami Ramcharan, Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Privy Council Office]

On a couple of things, maybe what I can do is to preface what the role of the PCO is before I get into responding directly to your questions. Because the commission of inquiry is an independent commission, so a separate arm's-length organization in terms of the decision-making, the role that the PCO plays is really under the administrative support for the commission of inquiry.

We provide all of the financial, human resources, and procurement kinds of activities that they need in terms of making sure that the spending they do, the spending they intend to do, is done in accordance with the rules and the regulations within the Government of Canada.

To come back to your very specific questions about risks and do they have enough money, it's up to the commission to decide how they're going to achieve their mandate. In terms of looking at whether or not there's risk or if there's enough money, it's up to the commission to figure out within the money that's been allocated by government, the $53.86 million, how they go about addressing those terms of reference, how they structure the work plan, how they accomplish the tasks at hand. Up to this point in time, we have not received any formal request with regard to an extension related to time or any additional resources.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

So your role is just a facilitator's role? Okay, fair enough.

Then my question is to the department officials from TBS. The Department of Indian and Northern Affairs is asking for $174.7 million and this is in relation to the flood in Manitoba. This happened in 2011. Is this the first time your department is asking for money, and if so, why did they come so late?

Number two, what is the cost of rebuilding and is it sufficient for the four first nations?

[Brian Pagan]

We'll confirm previous funding provided. It is my understanding that when the flood occurred initially, there was an immediate government response in terms of evacuation and temporary resettlement, but I don't have that detail in front of me and we'll be happy to provide it.

Moving forward, these funds are related to building permanent accommodation removed from the flood plain zone for four first nations, first nations at Dauphin River, Lake St. Martin, and Little Saskatchewan, and the Pinaymootang First Nation. This funding covers both ongoing costs for temporary accommodation and the construction of permanent facilities in these first nations communities.

In regard to future costs, if there are any, it is my understanding that those would be reflected in subsequent main estimates. This is the government's bring-forward plan as it impacts this fiscal year. Any ongoing costs would be reflected in main estimates for subsequent fiscal years.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

You don't know whether the work has started or not, right? This is just a request for funding six years later to rebuild permanent residences.

[Brian Pagan]

Yes, the construction has now started.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Okay.

The department is also requesting—

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Madam Ratansi, you have less than 30 seconds left.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

Then that's okay. Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Clarke or Mr. McCauley.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Pagan, I have a question for you. Does the $625 million under vote 30a include the salary increases for the ministers without portfolio?

[Brian Pagan]

Thank you, Mr. Clarke.

Vote 30a exists so that the Treasury Board can allocate funding to departments to cover the costs of collective agreements and of certain obligations related to our employer role, such as maternity and paternity leave, and so on.

With respect to ministers of state, in your previous question, the vote wording provides the authority for departments themselves to make those payments until the Salaries Act catches up and provides that coverage.