Government Operations Committee on June 7th, 2022

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

We talk a lot about this around this table, where there's confusion about the purpose.

The budget allocates the money in the fiscal framework for initiatives, and the estimates seek authority from Parliament to spend that money. The main estimates aren't meant to approve every item announced in the budget because it takes time to design the implementation plans that ensure good value for taxpayer funds.

In terms of setting a specific date for presenting the budget and the main estimates—and I know we've had that conversation before—it would unnecessarily restrict the government's flexibility to respond to global and domestic events. Look at what is happening with the war in Ukraine, which, as you know, began on February 24, just to give you an example. Therefore, new initiatives announced in the budget cannot be sufficiently developed to be included in the main estimates. Consultations are often required to prepare detailed implementation plans for review by Treasury Board and such consultations are not possible while protecting budget secrecy. Therefore, that is why we are presenting this way.

We are always very open and transparent. As you know, you can have access to many financial reports to better understand how the spending is done through our Open Government portal.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

How does the government prevent “March madness” spending, where departments try to blow through room in their budgets at the end of the fiscal year?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

I'm sure members will be interested to know that as departments can't overspend their appropriated limits, keeping some reserve funds until late in the fiscal year is prudent financial management. A carry-forward process allows departments to use up to 5% of their operating budget or 20% of their capital budget in a future year.

The carry-forward process was introduced over 30 years ago, following a recommendation by the Auditor General. That is how I can explain the question that you just asked.

Thank you, MP Bains.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, do I have more time?

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Yes. You have two minutes.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Okay.

Bill S-6 amends the Canada Lands Surveyors Act so that it harmonizes with provincial and territorial law.

How will this change reduce regulatory burden and improve efficiency?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Again, I will just inform you that this annual regulatory modernization bill helps us to reduce red tape. It helps us to make sure that businesses can function without that red tape.

I know that we have Karen, who might want to go into the details of those we are presenting right now in the Senate with Bill S-6.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In fact, Bill S-6 will also change the paper process to a more digital process. It will also enable business innovation through a regulatory sandbox. Finally, it will make changes to our zero-emission vehicles.

As the minister indicated, there are a lot of advantages to the regulatory process as it will enable our businesses to restart within the economy after the pandemic.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Okay.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bains.

We will now go to Mr. Lemire for six minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for your welcome. Indeed, I am here in place of my colleague Julie Vignola, who is listening, but who cannot be with us today.

Ms. Fortier, I am pleased to meet you. For me, you are a minister who represents the spirit of bilingualism well. You are probably the most articulate in both English and French, and it is very easy for me to understand you as a francophone.

On the other hand, this is not the case for all civil servants. We know that 81% of senior civil servants are English speakers, while 70% of new civil servants are English speakers. There is a disparity on this side. Wouldn't it be logical for the proportion of francophones among new civil servants to be the same among senior civil servants?

Why are only 19% of senior civil servants francophones, while at the bottom 30% of civil servants are francophones?

Shouldn't the proportion be the same at the bottom and the top?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you for your interest in official languages.

Since I am Franco-Ontarian, my mother tongue is, of course, French, and I am very proud of it. I even have the privilege, as President of the Treasury Board, of working in French with several of the francophone or anglophone members of the team, who are very proficient in both official languages. I am also very proud of that.

You know, over 40% of public servants are bilingual. So when we talk about bilingualism, we're talking about the ability to work in both official languages. I think it's important to continue to promote bilingualism and to increase the number of designated bilingual positions in the public service, as we will do in our department. I will let Ms. Girard outline some of our plans.

Assistant deputy minister positions, for example, are designated bilingual. Incumbents are therefore required to be able to work in both official languages. You can see that there is a willingness within the government to really offer, through our public servants, services in both official languages. We will also continue to improve that.

I don't know if Ms. Girard wanted to give other examples of what we do at Treasury Board.

[Marie-Chantal Girard]

Yes, I could add some points.

Posts are designated according to the nature of the duties performed. Therefore, all positions that require service in both official languages are designated as such, and incumbents have the opportunity to develop their skills in their second language. We want to improve this aspect as well. Through the legislation currently under consideration, the government is also seeking to increase its bilingual character across the country.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I'm glad to hear it. However, in several areas, we realize that it is more difficult for citizens to obtain services in French. We also know that several public servants confirmed that things are generally done in English and that francophones are even discriminated against when they speak French: their ideas are ignored and their opportunities to progress are limited. Obviously, the statistics on this subject tend to demonstrate this fact.

French speakers tell us that there are two official languages: English and translation. This is a quip you have heard before, surely. The reason is that English speakers often fail to understand the subtleties of the arguments raised by French speakers, and I see that this is indeed the case. As a result, francophones become discouraged from making interventions in French.

So here is my question. What explains why an idea expressed in French can be ignored, even discredited, while the same idea, expressed in English, could be put forward? Can anything be done to counter this within the various departments?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

First of all, I want to say how our government is making concrete efforts to increase the number of bilingual public servants. Efforts are being made in staffing to hire people who can provide services in both official languages.

I am also very proud that there are over 200 official languages champions in the public service who promote official languages to senior management. Of course, we are always looking for ways to increase the capacity within the various departments to provide services in both official languages.

At this time, our government is also developing a new framework for language qualification standards, for supervision and for evaluation, so that we support a culture of bilingualism in the public service. So there are a number of efforts underway by Treasury Board, among others, but also by departments.

I will let Ms. Girard add some more concrete elements to this.

[Marie-Chantal Girard]

The reform planned by the bill under consideration will also seek to strengthen these efforts. The findings have been made, and there is a desire to enhance and strengthen bilingualism. Under this reform, the Treasury Board would have more power to establish, with the Treasury Board Secretariat, oversight to verify the compliance of federal institutions and to evaluate the government's effectiveness in this area.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I'll take the liberty of asking one last question. I may come back to you in the next hour.

Minister, you mentioned at the outset that you were an open and transparent government. The Privy Council is asking for just over $28.5 million in supplementary estimates (A).

What will this money be used for, Minister?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Ms. Boudreau will give you the details of the $28.5 million that the Privy Council is requesting.

[Annie Boudreau]

Thank you.

I don't know if you've had a chance to review the Blue Book we use, where all expenses are detailed.

First of all, there is an amount that is set aside for the emergency measures inquiry. If you give me a moment, I will find the page. It is on page 6. I will be able to read it.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I think my time is up. You can send the information to the committee.

[Annie Boudreau]

The information can be found on page 2‑7. The amount of $28,518,211 is broken down there.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you very much.

I would also like to highlight an interesting initiative, the decentralization of jobs to the regions. This is a measure I would like to commend.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Robert Gordon Kitchen]

If you have anything further that you would like to provide the committee, by all means please do that, Ms. Boudreau. We appreciate that.

We will now go to Mr. Johns for six minutes.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Thank you, Minister, for being here.

We know that COVID-19 still remains present in our communities. New Democrats and I are continuing to support evidence-based health measures to protect the health of Canadians. I also encourage Canadians to continue to get the vaccine doses that they're eligible for to reduce their risk of severe outcomes.

However, some of my constituents, as you're aware, have chosen not to be vaccinated and are presently on leave from their jobs, including Canada Post workers, because of federal vaccine mandates. In March, Dr. Tam communicated to the public that the Treasury Board was reviewing federal vaccine mandates. It's been almost three months now since the public was informed of that review. In my home province, a lot of people are back to work, and in the public service as well, whom this would have affected.

I want to underscore that decisions about public health measures should be based on the most current evidence available, and transparency about such decisions is absolutely critical to maintaining public confidence.

With that in mind, when do you anticipate that the ongoing review will be completed, and when will the results be made available to the public?