Government Operations Committee on June 20th, 2017

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Okay.

We've talked a lot about needing a plan for improving the processes. A couple of weeks ago we had the President of the Treasury Board here. We asked what the plan was, and we got.... We didn't get an answer, basically, other than, oh, we're improving, and then he pointed toward his four pillars discussion paper as his concrete plan to improve the processes.

You've read the four-pillar plan that he has. Do you think this is the concrete plan to improve the processes with the estimates, to get the spending done, to get the programs started, etc?

[Mostafa Askari]

The four pillars don't actually deal with the internal processes at all. Those are completely different. Certainly that's not part of that plan. There may be another plan somewhere else.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I agree. So we do need a real, true, concrete plan for how we're going to improve the processes. Right now it seems as though we're putting the cart ahead of the horse by changing the estimates date. But again, we do have these process problems. You identified that in the supplementary estimates (A) some of the programs are coming out six or seven months after the fact, and changing the date is not going to help one bit.

What improvements would you like to see in our processes? The big start obviously is Treasury Board and Finance actually working together.

[Mostafa Askari]

As I think I mentioned earlier, and as others have said, there has to be better integration of the two processes at Finance and Treasury Board to align budget items with the main estimates. That's really the bottom line.

How they achieve that is something that's internal. They have to decide how they are going to achieve that. That is the plan we are talking about, the steps that they need to take to better integrate those two processes.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

With regard to moving the estimates back to April 16, one of the complaints we have is that it takes away a fair amount of our oversight ability. Is that a valid concern for parliamentarians?

[Mostafa Askari]

As I said, you lose the possibility of authorizing spending that is required for the budget measures, because they won't come; if they can't include those in the main estimates, you won't see them until November. That's about seven, eight, or nine months after the budget.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Okay.

How much time do I have, sir?

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

You have about three minutes.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Thank you.

In those three minutes, I will open the floor to all four of you if you have any other comments on the date change and the other processes going on right now.

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

Perhaps I could quote from the evidence of this committee in 2012. This quote comes from Bill Matthews:

The estimates from the previous year are certainly used by my colleagues in the Department of Finance in formulating their next budget. That budget will then influence the main estimates for the following year. It is very much a circular relationship. You will never have complete alignment between the two.

I think what we're talking about is whether there is a way to strengthen the links between the two documents. You will never see a complete alignment. He goes on about this.

For me, this is not impossible to have stronger links between one and the other, the budget and the estimates. As we mentioned, this culture and this commitment from one department collaborating with another department is central to this plan that we have been talking about.

That would be my only comment.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

But the plan right now is to change the estimates tabling to April 16, and then being deemed reported June 10, I think. Without all the process changes needed, is this going to help spending oversight? Or is it going to help parliamentarians in any way, concretely, again without the needed process improvements?

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

Again, as to whether the documents will really help, we mentioned—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

We don't have the documents. We don't have the processes.

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

That's right. We don't know. Until we see these better aligned documents, it will be very difficult. That's why it's a matter of whether the two departments will collaborate and have a document that will be helpful for parliamentarians.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

We hope they will. As Ms. Shanahan mentioned, it's to all our benefit—Canadians, taxpayers, and parliamentarians—that the government succeeds. We hope they will present a clear plan on how they're going to improve their processes and properly align everything.

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

So do we here.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Yes.

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Mr. Weir, you have seven minutes.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Thank you.

I'd like to pick up on this point about interim supply at the beginning of the fiscal year. By going to April 16, there are least a couple of weeks at the start of the fiscal year where interim supply will have to be based on old information. I'm wondering if that problem is really worthwhile in order to just delay the main estimates by a couple of weeks or if it would be better to present the main estimates before the start of the fiscal year.

[Alex Smith]

The current practice and quite frankly the OECD best budgeting principles dictate presenting the budget prior to the fiscal year. Parliament should vote prior to the fiscal year, because afterwards spending is already taking place. Plans are already in place. It's really difficult to make any changes or commentary on things that are already taking place.

The current process does give an amount of money for government to operate by Parliament for the first three months. They will be doing that, just in a slightly different way. As they note, some other jurisdictions have a similar process. They need to have some funding to start the year.

The real issue for Parliament is the ability to analyze budget and estimates information. The interim estimates and interim supply are not given a lot of attention by Parliament currently anyway. Having interim estimates versus interim supply won't affect Parliament a great deal.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

But will interim supply perhaps require more attention under this proposal?

[Alex Smith]

One of the quirks of the way the standing order has been written is that the interim estimates will be referred to standing committees, so standing committees will be able to review those interim estimates. It's not quite clear what kind of questions this committee or others might have, because basically you're asking questions about information that's for the expiring fiscal year, not for the coming fiscal year.

Not all spending is smooth throughout the fiscal year, and sometimes you have to spend more at the beginning of the fiscal year. You might see a larger amount for some departments and some organizations, so you could ask questions such as why they are spending more than three-twelfths in these interim estimates.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Fair enough.

You mentioned the advantages of presenting the budget well before the start of the fiscal year, and of course, as we've already discussed, that was one of our committee's recommendations back in 2012. So far we've been talking about this in terms of the federal budget process, but might that also have an advantage for provincial budgets that really rely on the information they receive from the federal level?

[Alex Smith]

One of the advantages of aligning the budget and the main estimates, from a government perspective, is that you can implement things earlier in the fiscal year.

One of the things they talked about in their discussion document is that some things take from 15 to 19 months before Parliament approves them after announcement in the budget. If you are able to present things and implement them earlier in the fiscal year, it's easier. If you have to wait until December to get parliamentary approval to spend money, you have three months left to spend the money.

With respect to provinces, most of the transfers are under statutory authority and don't go through the estimates, so that particular thing might be less affected, but non-governmental organizations and first nations communities get money well into the fiscal year. They're told they have to spend it within a couple of months' notice. It's not really a good way to design a system.

[Erin Weir, NDP, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

I guess my thought with provincial governments wasn't so much that they'd benefit from better alignment between the estimates and the budget, but just that they'd benefit from seeing the budget sooner. Is that something we should be considering in determining when the budget is presented?