Government Operations Committee on Nov. 4th, 2020

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Thank you, Mr. MacKinnon.

I very much enjoy hearing what you have to say because you are a member from the national capital region and are fortunate to have in your riding a large number of public servants who are always hard-working, and especially so under the strenuous conditions of the pandemic. Both personally and professionally, things have often been getting more complex since the month of March. I appreciate hearing you express this gratitude.

Unlike you, I do not have quite so many federal public servants in my riding, but I live in another national capital area in which there are also many public servants. In both Quebec City and Gatineau, I can assure you that we are extremely grateful for their work during the pandemic.

But in Ottawa, more so than in Quebec City, we are also responsible for affirming the right of public servants to work in the official language of their choice, particularly in French. That's why, as soon as I heard Mr. Théberge and others report some concerns and even complaints about the ability to work in French, I wrote to all my ministerial colleagues asking them to ensure that this right is exercised in designated bilingual areas, including the national capital, within their respective departments.

It's more than a right; it's also a matter of work quality. If we want information is to be conveyed properly, and if we want everyone to be able to develop and work to their full potential, then people need to be able to work in their preferred official language. In many instances, in Gatineau and elsewhere, this means working in French.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Minister, for attending to this matter so quickly.

Of course, in a pandemic which has forced us to work virtually, it may be difficult for employers to maintain the corporate culture, whether generally or in terms of official languages. It might be harder to motivate people, encourage teamwork and mutual support among colleagues, and to obtain interdepartmental collaboration.

Can you give some examples of things that would enable the Government of Canada to preserve corporate or workplace culture during the crisis?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Mr. MacKinnon, you have once again put your finger on something important. There is no doubt that we have been undergoing a major upheaval for several months now. Health and the economy come to mind immediately, but there is also technology. Over the past few months, the federal public service has made huge changes that would have been unthinkable in normal times. For example, the number of times people have securely accessed systems while working from home has increased by 72%. Out of 287,000 public service workers, 200,000 connect remotely to public service systems. The number of minutes public service employees spend teleconferencing with one another has tripled.

There have thus been many technological changes. Unfortunately, because of how rapidly everything has happened, some things were not handled as well as others and we need to fix them quickly. One such area is the ability to work in the preferred official language. We have to make adjustments there.

That is in fact what happened with the House of Commons. We initially had trouble finding the right button to press for interpretation. Even more substantial adjustments are required elsewhere in the public service.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Minister. It's—

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you, Mr. MacKinnon. Unfortunately, your time is up.

Ms. Vignola, you are next for six minutes, please.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you for being with us this evening, Mr. Duclos.

The Treasury Board Secretariat contributes $282,000 to the Open Government Partnership, and sits on its board of directors.

How is it possible for the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer, an independent organization, to have said in its report today on the 2020-2021 supplementary estimates (B) that “the amount of information that is publicly available to track this spending is lacking, thus making it more challenging for parliamentarians to perform their critical role in overseeing Government spending and holding it to account”?

For members of Parliament, everything is perfectly transparent. Why is this not the case for the government? This is one of the three aspects mentioned. How can the government fail to be transparent when it contributes to the Open Government Partnership, and sits on its board of directors?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Thank you for having asked that question Mrs. Vignola. It allows me to link these two aspects.

For many years now, Canada has been an important, and even a key, player in the Open Government Partnership, and we take great pride in this. Not only do we learn from best practices abroad, but we also give insights to other governments through our openness and transparency.

As for accountability, openness and transparency during this COVID-19 pandemic, you are absolutely right about the fact that things have been moving very quickly. And programs have been adjusting as quickly as the situation evolves. Just today, as you mentioned, measures have been identified. We will be called upon to vote tomorrow on a bill that would yet again change some key aspects of the government's economic response.

Information is nonetheless transmitted effectively and transparently. On the Open Government Portal, there are 316 postings exclusively about COVID-19 that can be consulted at any time. If you go to the GC InfoBase—

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Excuse me for interrupting, Mr. Duclos. We have indeed received all kinds of information on COVID-19. But I'm talking about budgetary transparency. As members, if we spend $50 on gifts at a Dollarama store, it shows up in our budgets. Now when ordinary mortals—and I include myself in that group—look at budgets, they wonder what that's all about.

I'm not talking about the COVID-19 budget here. We know now what PPE means because we hear about it all the time from the media. What I am talking about is the everyday grind of Parliament. We wonder what such and such a line item means. It's all so fuzzy. And yet the data are there. The problem is simply that the disaggregation process creates a lack of transparency somewhere.

How can there be so little routine transparency, except for the COVID-19 situation, when you are in the Open Government Partnership?

You have to walk the talk. In other words, you have to be consistent.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

I'm going to add two things to what I said earlier.

First of all, in addition to the Open Government Partnership portal, there is the GC InfoBase, which contains all the detailed financial information about COVID-19.

Secondly, we acknowledge just how difficult it is for committee members and members of Parliament to monitor it all. It is incredibly complicated. A lot is happening. Accounting methods are not the same at the Department of Finance as they are at the Treasury Board. Today, we are discussing the main estimates. These are estimates, not the actual amounts that will have been spent by the end of the fiscal year. The estimates and the actual expenditures have to be reconciled. There is the cash method of accounting and accrual accounting. It's very complicated for everyone, but we are doing our utmost with respect to transparency.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Duclos. As you put it, we can always do better.

I also noticed that the funds for the Public Service Health Care Plan were cut. Why were they eliminated and why were they not entered in the department's base expenditures? As these amounts can be forecast, I do not understand why only parts of them are in the main estimates, requiring the calculation of other parts for inclusion in the supplementary estimates (A), (B), (C), and so on right up to (Z) if you want.

Expenditures for the Public Service Health Care Plan can be estimated, can't they?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

On the contrary, the budgets were increased. They may have been arranged in a way that made them more difficult to understand. I was lucky to have advice from experts, including Ms. Hassan.

Ms. Hassan, could you give us some brief details about the health care plans and access to insurance benefits? Could you explain where they fit into the main estimates?

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

I would like to point out that it comes under vote 20.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Ms. Vignola, you have 10 seconds.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

This vote was reduced by $485.7 million, which is certainly a substantial cut.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

To avoid any confusion, I would like the assistance of the senior officials we are fortunate to have with us.

[Karen Cahill, Assistant Secretary and Chief Financial Officer, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Mr. Minister, I could answer that question.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Please go ahead.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Certainly. If you could do it in 30 seconds, I'd appreciate that.

[Karen Cahill]

Thank you Mr. Chair.

There has been no real decrease for the Public Service Health Care Plan. The plan had been funded for a period of three years.

However, I would like to point out that in 2018-2019, we allocated $3.1 billion to the plan, and it is now stable. That's why there are no additional funds. Over the course of the year, there will be an increase in the benefit plans in the supplementary estimates (B).

That, more or less, is why you could see a decrease.

As for planning, I totally agree with you. We make forecasts every year for the health care and benefit plans, and then adjust requests for funding accordingly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you for that response. I appreciate your comments. If you feel there's more you need to provide for that answer, kindly submit it in writing afterwards. That would be appreciated.

Mr. Green, you have six minutes.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to welcome back the honourable member Yves Duclos. I always enjoy your presence and certainly your leadership. Welcome to all of your staff here, as well.

I want to follow up on the Parliamentary Budget Officer's bombshell of a report on the financial and fiscal analysis of federal pay equity. You may recall—and I've shared this story before—that my mother used to work for Industry Canada. I can remember being a teenager and her explaining to me why she received an equalization payment as a federal member of government because, as a woman, she wasn't getting paid the equivalent to her male counterparts. Fast forward 20 years. Here we are today.

We know from the report that the “PBO requested information from the Treasury Board regarding the valuation of administering this legislation and implementing a proactive pay equity regime within the federal public service”, yet the Treasury Board “refused to disclose information or data regarding employee compensation.” This is on page 8 under section 2. Furthermore, “This included the number of employees who were impacted in each occupational group, and related increases in employee wages and benefits attributed to the Pay Equity Act. The information was deemed to be a confidence of the Queen's Privy Council”. It left the PBO to rely on “publicly available sources in its analysis of employee compensation for the federal public service.”

With a Treasury Board and a government that claims to be open by default, how do you justify not giving the PBO the critical information it needs to be able to provide Parliament with a critical analysis on federal pay equity?

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Green. I can certainly also say that it's a great pleasure to be with you—although not in person, but virtually. Thank you for your insistence, as always, on a society that is both strong and fair.

Certainly one source of fairness, as you said, is to ensure that people providing equal work are paid equally as well. It's something that we did achieve at the end of the first mandate. We were very proud to pass the first ever proactive pay equity law with the support of the NDP. We're grateful for your support, and certainly grateful for your continuing interest in this. This is an extremely important piece of the commitment that we want to continue.

Given that this is a bit complex, I did in fact talk about this to Sandra Hassan who is going to give you some of the details that you are interested in.

Sandra, you're still there, I believe?

[Sandra Hassan, Assistant Deputy Minister, Employment Conditions and Labour Relations, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Absolutely, Minister.

Thank you for your question.

As indicated, the Pay Equity Act has been passed, but has not yet come into force. The government is presently working on the regulatory package that is necessary to bring that act into force. One thing—

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you for that, but that does not answer the question on why you refused to provide this critical information to the PBO. It begs the question about this government's willingness to be open and transparent.

We're not even talking about the public. We haven't even gotten into the years that people have had to wait with ATIP.

I say this respectfully, Ms. Hassan, and to the honourable President of the Treasury Board and ask: what is your justification, sir, for not fully cooperating with the Parliamentary Budget Officer on this request?

[Sandra Hassan]

If I may finish the answer—