Government Operations Committee on June 16th, 2021

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Yeah, I read that line where it says businesses. What businesses?

[Glenn Purves]

That would be a question for the department to be able to answer. We do know that these are transfers that would be going through the regional development agencies to these organizations—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

But, again, my understanding—

[Glenn Purves]

—and it would be—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Purves, I'm going to interrupt.

I know we should ask the department, but of course the departments don't show up for the estimates half of the time. They refuse to. I know that ACOA and some of those have not shown up. It would go to the Treasury Board process. The Treasury Board's role is to, in a way, protect the taxpayer and make sure that the funding is used appropriately. Does anyone at the Treasury Board look and say, “Hold on. What's this money for?”

What's the point of the Treasury Board if we're just going to get, “Well, ask someone else”?

[Glenn Purves]

It's two years of support for regional businesses and airports, subject to contributions and grants that are defined by the regional development agencies. For me to know where the end result will be.... I don't have that information. That is something that the regional development agencies and Industry Canada would be better placed to respond to.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

However, it would be part of the Treasury Board process when they have their application process, I would assume.

Let me move on.

The Department of Finance.... This is more of a simple question, I think. There's $49 million for the International Finance Corporation. It's put as an L10a vote, so it's a loan.

I'm curious. Why is that as a loan? I think it appears elsewhere as buying a share.

[Glenn Purves]

Mr. Greenough can correct me on this one, but when you deal with international organizations, you're buying shares of these international organizations, and they—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

I'm just curious. Why does it show as a loan?

[Glenn Purves]

It's because it's funding that they would receive back. It's effectively money that you give to an international organization, but it's callable capital.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Let me ask a last question, and you can get back on this. I've asked this before, and we haven't heard a response, so I'll ask it again.

How many exemptions have been granted on Treasury Board submissions over the last year, and how does that compare to previous years? How many conditional Treasury Board approvals have been granted over last year compared to previous years?

The reason I'm asking is that—I'll be blunt—I don't have a lot of confidence that the Treasury Board is doing its role of oversight of taxpayers' money. We asked Minister Duclos very clearly about the oversight of the $100-billion wage subsidy that we saw go to wealthy hedge fund managers. We saw it go to share buybacks and company payouts. He's like, “Uh, I don't know. I didn't oversee it.” It's kind of like the Watchmen comic: Who is watching the watchmen? The Treasury Board is not watching. Who is?

Again, I'm out of time, but maybe you can get back to our committee on those four specific items, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. McCauley.

Thank you, Mr. Purves. As always—and I know I've repeated this to you many times over the years—when you reply, if you can send that to the clerk so that then he can distribute it to the members, it would be appreciated. Thank you.

We'll now go to Mr. MacKinnon for six minutes.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank all the Treasury Board Secretariat representatives who are here with us.

I'd like to begin by saying once more how disappointed I am with the questions from the opposition parties. We have had Minister Anand, the President of the Treasury Board, and Minister Murray here several times, and they are the three members of Cabinet whose areas of responsibility fall to our committee. Each time one of them is here, they are asked questions about areas that are someone else's responsibility, that person usually having been here the previous week. We see them repeatedly, so I'm guessing that's part of the opposition strategy. It's not very productive. I thought I might mention it.

I have also taken careful note of the fact that Mr. McAuley was critical of the assistance offered to businesses under the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy, which nevertheless made it possible for millions of Canadians to keep their jobs.

What I'm concerned about is all of our public servants. Human resources is of course a responsibility of the Treasury Board Secretariat. I will therefore ask a question that is appropriate for the officials here with us today.

The public servants I represent, and the entire federal public service, are concerned about returning to work. As this happens to be National Public Service Week, I would therefore like to thank and pay tribute to all public servants, including those here today.

Could you update us on the return to work? It's a question that's of concern to many public servants in my riding of Gatineau, and of course elsewhere.

[Tolga Yalkin, Assistant Deputy Minister, Workplace Policies and Services, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Thank you for the question.

I referred to this the last time we met. We work with all departments on return-to-work plans. The departments are responsible for managing their employees, and for their welfare. The support we give them consists of clarifying certain things and guiding the departments on how to envisage their working environment following the pandemic. In other words, the Treasury Board Secretariat's role at the moment is to clarify matters as required, so that the departments are in a good position to provide guidance, with a relative degree of certainty, on the return to work of their employees, and on how those who might continue to work remotely are going to do so. We are currently handling this with our partners.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

That happens to be what I was going to ask next.

How are these plans progressing, particularly the strategy for a remote work framework following the pandemic? Can you tell us a bit more about how this strategy is developing?

[Tolga Yalkin]

It's going very well. You might call it a strategy, but in fact what we are providing to the departments is support. This support focuses mainly on technical aspects, such as how to administer the various issues surrounding data security, or how to reach decisions about the workplace for every public service position. What we're doing now is developing guidelines for the departments so that they can implement their own plans for the return of employees to the workplace after the pandemic.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

The unions appear to be raising these issues as just as negotiations on collective agreements are approaching.

How are you going to handle these negotiations with the public service unions?

[Tolga Yalkin]

Thank you for that question.

It's difficult for me to discuss the approach taken by the bargaining agents, and the claims being made, but we know that it's a priority for the unions and we are proceeding collaboratively on this matter.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you.

That's it for me, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. MacKinnon. We will now go to Ms. Chabot for six minutes.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I agree with the last part of Mr. MacKinnon's comments. Public service employees definitely deserve to be congratulated on their resilience and their work throughout the period we have just lived through.

The other comments from my colleague will not really prevent me from asking questions. If we occasionally happen to address a question to the wrong department, it's certainly not meant to be devious, but rather intended to get some answers.

My question is a follow-up to one that I asked the President of the Treasury Board earlier, about the $7 million to pay compensation to former employees. You replied that for the time being, there was enough. That's what I understood.

Can you tell us how many employees covered in these agreements will receive compensation through these funds?

Could you also give us a breakdown for the 2019 and 2020 agreements?

And lastly, how many people will still have to be compensated?

[Karen Cahill]

Thank you for your question.

To begin with the 2019 agreements, we had estimated that approximately 17,000 former employees or public service retirees would request damages claims under 1B of the agreement. To date, approximately 9,000 have done so.

For the 2020 agreement with the Public Service Alliance of Canada, we estimate that 54,000 former employees or retired employees would make a claim. However, as you know, we haven't yet set the process in motion, so it's difficult to come up with a number.

It's important to note that claims under these agreements are on a voluntary basis. There are no automatic reimbursements. People need to file a claim. We are trying to contact as many former employees and retired employees as possible.

The $7 million is not the only amount that has been set aside. Funds have been earmarked in other supplementary estimates or in the main estimates. Based on an average of Technical difficulty per employee, we estimate that 5,000 employees would be covered by this amount.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

You said that 9,000 out of 17,000 employees have made a compensation claim for for 2019. Why so few?

[Karen Cahill]

As I said, making a claim is optional.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

It's important to be able to contact them, at least.