Government Operations Committee on Nov. 30th, 2020

[Jean-Yves Duclos]

Not at all.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

And yet, that's what you're saying.

At the beginning, Ms. Chagger was said to have had responsibility but did not exercise it. She did not deem it necessary or appropriate to conduct this analysis, even though it was among the essential factors to be taken into consideration. Then you told me that the officials determined it wasn't important to conduct this analysis. You said that they had recommended to the minister not to do it. That's what you're saying.

Is there such a serious systemic decline in French within the machinery of government, that Treasury Board directives are ignored?

Not only that, but you are a Quebec francophone. You should have found that appalling.

[Jean-Yves Duclos]

You, Mr. Paul-Hus, as a former military man, are no doubt well aware of how important it is to separate responsibilities.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Yes, but ultimately, Minister, command responsibility always falls to the general. If there's a problem with operations, the general will end up as the person held accountable. Soldiers in the field do what they are told. If there's a problem and the soldiers haven't done their work, it's the general who pays the political price afterwards.

Minister, you are the person in charge. You simply have to tell us whether you're accepting accountability for the problem that occurred. Are you going to do that, yes or no?

[Jean-Yves Duclos]

I am the general of the officials at the Treasury Board Secretariat, and I make sure that they do their work. In this instance, they did their work.

If you would like to question the general of Diversity and Inclusion and Youth, you can do that too.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

I would be happy to speak with Minister Chagger.

I will now set aside the subject of the WE Charity and return to the Treasury Board.

My colleague, MP Luc Berthold, as the Treasury Board spokesperson in our shadow cabinet, made an access to information request in September to obtain the briefing book, and received an English-only version of the briefing book. He then made an access to information request for the French version, and never received a reply. This was three months ago now.

Can you explain this situation? Why would a Quebec colleague be sent a document in English only from the Treasury Board, and was apparently unable to have it in French?

[Jean-Yves Duclos]

The answer to that is quite clear. This Quebec colleague, and anyone who requests a document in French, is entitled to have it in French. So if something or other is not working, you know how to reach me, Mr. Paul-Hus.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Exactly. As he had received the document in English only, he submitted another request to have it in French. He is still waiting for a reply. Someone at the Treasury Board is not responding. I simply wanted to point this out to you.

[Jean-Yves Duclos]

You know how to get in touch with me. Ask your colleague Mr. Berthold to follow up with me.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

I would be happy to do so.

Thank you.

That's all for me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

We will now go to Mr. MacKinnon for five minutes.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If I'm laughing, it's because I truly enjoy being able to spar every day alongside Mr. Duclos to defend the French language and the right of public servants to speak in their language within the federal government, whether in English or in French. I am heartened that Mr. Duclos is the President of the Treasury Board. He is someone who ensures respect for Canada's official languages every day.

Thank you, Mr. Duclos, I'm keen to continue to do battle by your side.

My questions concern a matter of particular interest for Canada's public servants, particularly those in the national capital region.

When we came to power in 2015, the entire public service had been without collective agreements for several years. In some instances, it was four years. In our first term, we negotiated and signed agreements with all public servants and unions. In some instances, we needed two rounds of collective bargaining. In the current term, we closed the loop by signing agreements with the Public Service Alliance of Canada and other unions in the second round of bargaining. Canada's public servants were thus able, twice over, to benefit from renewal of their collective agreements, which eliminated a number of uncertainties for them.

I would like you to comment on this and to explain how you undertook these negotiations. In a pandemic, when people are seeking reassurance wherever they can, what can public servants expect so that they can look to the future with confidence?

[Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you for this very good question and for your excellent comments.

I would like to remind everyone that in the fall of 2015, after a decade of neglect under the previous Conservative government, the 27 collective agreements with the core public administration had expired. In some areas, bargaining had been blocked for years.

Our government quickly took up the task and worked hard to restore and rebuild a culture of respect for the Canadian public service. We signed agreements with bargaining agents representing more than 99% of employees. We all know that not only in politics, but also in the public service, respect is the key to quality services for Canadians.

In the last round of bargaining, we signed collective agreements that covered over 80% of public servants. We also participated fully in the work of the Public Interest Commissions when negotiations reached that phase.

I would like to assure you of one thing, Mr. McKinnon, and of course this is for all colleagues in the national capital region, in addition to all other MPs who are fortunate to have public servants in their ridings, and that is that we will always work with public servants respectfully, because they have extraordinarily important work to do to serve Canadians from sea to sea, particularly during the pandemic.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Duclos.

As there is not much time remaining, I would like you to tell us more about what the public service went through for several years without collective agreements. It may have had an impact on the organizational culture within the public service or led to a number of failings in the workplace.

[Jean-Yves Duclos]

Definitely.

We need to sign agreements not only because it's a matter of respect and recognition for the work of public servants, but also because it's all about their ability to serve citizens. We're all in the same boat. To succeed in getting through the storm we are experiencing now, we need to work together. If some people are rowing backwards and others forwards, then we'll go around in circles and never get through the storm.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Once again, minister, I'd like to thank you for your work. I also thank the public servants for whom you are the general, and those for whom you are not the general. Everyone in the Canadian public service is serving us very well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. MacKinnon.

This concludes our questioning.

Minister, I would like to thank you and your officials for coming back here for us on the supplementary estimates. I appreciate your time with us. You are welcome to leave at this point.

I'm going to ask the committee to hang on for a couple of minutes here. I have a quick question I'd like to ask as others leave the meeting.

Committee, I just want to bring up very quickly the issue of voting on the supplementary estimates. Basically, we've heard from two ministers at this point in time. We have not heard from the Minister of PSPC. We have requested and invited that minister to appear, but we've not received a response. At this point in time, basically, the order of reference for the committee to study the supplementary estimates (B), 2020-21 will be expiring soon. The committee can wait to see if the Minister of PSPC can appear, or we can vote on the estimates now.

I'm going to ask the clerk to briefly explain why we're bringing this up now, so that you understand the procedures. Then I will ask you if you want to vote on the supplementary estimates (B) now.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Paul Cardegna]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The Standing Orders state that the order of reference for the supplementary estimates will expire three days before the last designated allotted day in the period. Unfortunately, we don't know when the last allotted day in the period will be, because the government hasn't yet designated it. However, the government must designate it by December 10, which is Thursday of next week. Because of the three days before it is deemed reported back, it is more than likely that the order of reference will lapse sometime at the end of this week, or very early next week. That is one of the reasons the chair has decided to bring the question to you now.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you.

Does the committee wish to vote for the supplementary estimates (B) at this time?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Agreed.

[An hon. member]

No.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

I do not see a consensus for this. We will need a motion to move forward, or we will suspend this conversation until the next meeting.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Let's suspend.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I would suggest we move to suspend.

[Pierre Paul-Hus, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Let's suspend