Government Operations Committee on Oct. 5th, 2017

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

I will respond really quickly.

The Prime Minister's cabinet today is the same size as it was, but it continues to be able to respond.

On your earlier comment on bilingualism and the two official languages of Canada, it's something that this government will continue to fight for.

We are very proud of the fact that Canada has two official languages. It is essential to make sure the voices of both language communities are represented.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Thank you, Minister.

Minister, you are now excused. Thank you for your appearance.

I understand Mr. McCowan and Madam Boyle will be staying with us for the next foreseeable amount of time.

Thank you.

We will suspend for a couple of moments while the minister leaves.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Colleagues, we will reconvene.

I'm not sure who we have on the government side, but we will go into our normal rounds.

Madam Ratansi.

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

Questions of a technical nature would help the process move forward. We don't have too many questions for the department. From an administrative perspective, will these people who are going to be elevated to ministerial levels, for example, the secretaries of states, experience any monetary impact? Will they create more departments for them? If they don't, that's fine by me, but how will they work? Do you see any conflict in the way that they intertwine—the minister for science, the minister for small businesses, and the minister for innovation?

[Ian McCowan]

This legislation doesn't create any new departments. As for the cost of the ministers themselves, it's just a question of the same amount of money being paid through a different vehicle. It will come through the Salaries Act rather than coming through appropriations for the group of ministers in question. There's no change, however, in the number of departments that come as a result of—

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

So you're making it more efficient. I guess what people don't seem to understand is this whole-of-government approach.

[Ian McCowan]

There are basically three things the legislation does.

First, it puts into legislation what's in practice in the ministry. This is something earlier governments have done; it's not an unusual thing. It also solidifies the one-tier ministry approach where everyone is on the same footing, and it resolves the issue of federal, provincial, and territorial relations in that ministerial title.

Second, it creates three new positions. If at some point in the future a prime minister were to decide to make a change, there would be a little more flexibility in those three spots.

Third, it allows the ministers in question, when they become full ministers, to get the support and the services to make the delegations required for them to do what's in their mandate letter. We have other mechanisms when they're ministers of state, and it allows for some flexibility there.

[Karen Ludwig, Liberal, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

In formalizing this legislation, what would be the impact on other jurisdictions such as the provinces and the municipalities? We recently had our fourth first ministers meeting. What type of impact will this have on discussions and collaboration at that level?

[Ian McCowan]

You may be thinking of a dimension I'm not aware of. It will solidify the existing practice of how ministries are structured, but I don't see a significant change in the area you're describing. Perhaps if you could direct me to a specific point I'm missing, I'd be able to respond.

[Karen Ludwig, Liberal, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

I was listening to the discussions this morning—the testimonies and the questions. There's equality across the board, certainly at the cabinet level, for conversations, for investment, for listening, and for output. If any of those five new ministers now taking a whole-of-government approach was working with the provinces, the municipalities, or the chambers of commerce, how might this change the whole-of-government or Canadian approach?

[Ian McCowan]

It formalizes the Prime Minister's idea of a one-tier government and solidifies the structure of the ministry, which was stood up with the available legislative frameworks on day one. This formalizes the foundation and the structure.

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

We're done, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

You have about three minutes left.

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

I've asked. From my side, I don't think there are any more questions for the departments.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

I have a quick one.

Ms. Boyle, maybe for my own interest, you compared the U.K. model a little bit. You alluded to the fact that they have a two-tier... It had 21 ministers, I believe, and up to 100 junior ministers or ministers of state. Is that a legislative reality in the U.K. or is that some sort of convention they use? How do we compare to other Westminster jurisdictions on the one-tier/two-tier analysis?

[Martha Boyle]

As I said, the U.K. does have a two-tier system. In every Westminster system, the salaries have to be set by law. That's a statutory requirement. In Australia, I think it is one tier, also in statute. However, again in every jurisdiction, the Prime Minister has the responsibility and the opportunity to structure the cabinet in the way that he wants. There may be statutory amendments, as are presented here, that happen in those jurisdictions as well.

[Kyle Peterson, Liberal, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Mr. McCauley.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you very much for taking the time to come out.

As a privy councillor, what responsibility do you have to the Prime Minister?

[Ian McCowan]

First of all, I'm not a privy councillor. I'm a public servant who works in the Privy Council Office. I do a number of functions within the PCO. Did you want me to run through those?

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

No, it was just in general.

In terms of advice, I want to go back and follow up. Mr. Drouin made some comments about a previous government and the numbers. In fact, on the efficiency with which the government operated, he missed that point. The minister talked about the whole-of-government approval and the whole-of-government approach, but we forgot to talk about or I didn't hear her talk about responsibilities and also I didn't hear her talk about the efficiencies.

This comes from an excerpt from the federal Liberal Atlantic caucus subcommittee on innovation, in May of this year, concerned about how “processing times dilute business growth, and create inefficiency and uncertainty. Some businesses have had to obtain bridge funding while waiting for ACOA funds.” It says, “These circumstances are disruptive to business development.”

Then the concerning part to any government should be that the “...perception among some that standard processing times”—because this is now centralized—“at ACOA have increased approximately threefold over the past year and a half, and that requiring Ministerial approval unnecessarily delays the process. For example, a 30-day processing time is now taking 90 days.”

It then says, “...centralized decision-making is viewed unfavourably as impeding the agility of programs.”

Knowing that, in your position, what would you suggest to the minister regarding centralization, in terms of making these improvements, so that we get back on track and the regionals actually have some influence nationally?

[Ian McCowan]

As a public servant, I'm not sure how far I can go commenting on a caucus statement. In answer to your question, I think the minister laid out the rationale for the integration of the RDAs earlier, which I think is what you're getting at, about them having one minister. On that front, I think her rationale was around a coordination of national economic development. I'm not sure I can add to that. I think the minister gave you her rationale, regarding why that change was included in the legislation.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Also, in the mandate letters that went out, we didn't find anything about change of responsibility, only the monetary change.

Does anything in the current law prohibit the Prime Minister from appointing a gender-equal cabinet?

[Ian McCowan]

I'm not familiar with any such limit, no.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Does anything in Bill C-24 add new responsibilities or power to the current ministers of state who are to be listed by this legislation as full ministers with full salaries?