Government Operations Committee on June 8th, 2017

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

When the commissioner submitted the first yearly plan, how much time did it take for the monies to start to flow to hire staff, open offices, and pay travel expenses?

[Kami Ramcharan]

It would have had nothing to do with the plan. As soon as they hit the ground running, as soon as they wanted to.... For example, the first office we opened on their behalf was in Vancouver. We had staff go out right away and look at facilities within Vancouver to see what would be appropriate for the chief commissioner in terms of setting up their operations.

As they wanted to hire staff, it wasn't a question of whether they had the budget, the facility to do that, because everything they wanted to do within their request we were able to accommodate.

It's unfortunate, but we are in a government process, so in order to get accommodation, to do travel claims, we have a process we have to follow. We try to make that as streamlined as possible and do as much heavy lifting as we can.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

How long does it take for the PCO to arrange a payment once the chief commissioner has approved the expenditure?

[Kami Ramcharan]

Within days we can arrange payments.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Great.

There were also questions around the fee that comes out of the budget. Some of the budget for the inquiry has been spent to support the Privy Council Office and civil service staff.

I wonder how the PCO determines the fee that is charged to the inquiry.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

A very short answer, please.

[Kami Ramcharan]

Whenever we go forward with a Treasury Board submission to seek monies in order to deliver on a program, there is a piece that's internal services. That's for the underlying back office function that we provide. We're not going to charge them directly for the use of a financial system or for the services I would provide to them directly, but that's built into what we call a fee, but it's actually an internal services cost. That's typical with any Treasury Board submission that we would submit, and it's in line with a costing model we've developed over a number of years that we apply against our Treasury Board submissions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

Finally, we'll have Mr. Whalen, for five minutes please.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Following up a little further on those questions, when I go to the MMIWG website, it talks about the number of staff. It looks like there are about 41 there now. When we look at the briefing note we've received, it says that you're intending to hire 65 full-time equivalents in 2017-18. Would that include the 41 who are on the website? Is PCO the employer of all the support staff of the commission, or are these separate and apart, so you expect to have 115% of the employees that the commission itself has?

[Kami Ramcharan]

Maybe I can be a little clearer.

The commission will be hiring roughly 65 people during this year. They won't be employees of PCO, but it will be on our books, because all of the funds for the commission will appear in our main estimates. It's not a separate organization. It simply seemed best, for the sake of expediency and cost effectiveness, to have that attached to our organization.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

In order to make sure this procedure happens as seamlessly as possible, PCO is doing whatever it can to assist in the administration while maintaining the independence of the commission itself. Is that right?

[Kami Ramcharan]

Absolutely.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

That's wonderful to hear.

This is sort of a broader question. We have a letter from the Auditor General regarding fraud risk mitigation. It points out some issues regarding interdepartmental... Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Global Affairs, Health Canada. It singles out Defence Construction Canada for the level of risk assessment it is doing internally that might not be as proactive as it should be regarding fraud, corruption, and collusion.

I'm wondering what additional procedures might exist within Treasury Board to ensure that additional risk assessment is done in those areas, so that even if internal departments aren't managing their fraud risk appropriately, maybe Treasury Board is picking up the slack.

[Brian Pagan]

I'm aware, certainly, of the Auditor General's report. I'm not intimately involved in the response, but there was a management response and I will make sure that's forwarded to this committee.

It's important to point out that the Auditor General assessed the risk of fraud, and in assessing that risk he found no fraud. We have controls in place, and he made specific recommendations to improve those controls.

We have a range of activities currently. You mentioned Defence Construction Canada. They submit a corporate plan in which they identify proposed projects. They look at their existing management practices and skill sets to deliver on those plans, and the environments they're going to be working on. That's one view we would have of that department, and there are many others.

Secondly, when it comes to individual transactions, projects, as my colleagues mentioned, there is a challenge function at Treasury Board where we will be looking at the specific details of projects to understand terms and conditions—who they're going to be working with, the way service will be delivered, how contracting will be administered, and the geographic areas they're working in—and then there will be specific conditions or controls put in place to address that.

I will make sure you get the management response to the AG report.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

With respect to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, are they subject to the same controls? Have they gone through this fraud, collusion, and corruption analysis? What's the effect? Are there risks there that we haven't heard about yet, or are they all being appropriately managed?

[Kami Ramcharan]

I'm not certain exactly how to respond to that.

Within the controls of PCO, we will do our due diligence to make sure all of the transactions that happen are done in accordance. We have our own internal control framework set up to manage the resources of Canada, that are part of our responsibility, like any other resources within PCO.

In terms of the transactions that happen on the ground with the commissions of inquiries, they tell us what they want to do and we use our processes that are currently in place. We use our standing offers, our procurement vehicles, and our staffing processes to ensure those controls and frameworks are addressed.

I think there's an appropriate control framework in there for managing the risk of fraud, because we do our due diligence and we do follow up with regard to every expenditure that's made.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you very much.

Colleagues, before I dispense with our witnesses, there are a couple of questions I have for all of you with respect to the supplementary estimates (A).

Do I have the unanimous consent of the committee to call all the votes on the supplementary estimates (A) together?

[Some hon. members]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE

Vote 1a—Program expenditures..........$33,132,276

(Vote 1a agreed to)

TREASURY BOARD SECRETARIAT

Vote 1a—Program expenditures..........$26,392,686

Vote 30a—Paylist Requirements..........$625,000,000

(Votes 1a and 30a agreed to)

Shall the chair report the votes on the supplementary estimates (A) to the House?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

It shall be done, thank you very much.

To all of our officials from PCO, I thank you for your appearance here again today.

We will suspend for a couple of moments, colleagues, and then go in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]