Evidence of meeting #43 for Government Operations and Estimates in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was spending.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Irek Kusmierczyk Liberal Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Fair enough. That's a good answer.
In your opinion, comparing, for example, the federal public service in 2010 to the federal public service today, are we asking our federal public servants to do more, would you say?
I mean, we live in a much more complicated world. There are a lot more programs out there that this government has introduced. Are we asking, as well, the staff to do more, would you say? Is it fair to say that?
3:55 p.m.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
That's a broad question. I don't think I am the best-placed person to answer that question.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Irek Kusmierczyk Liberal Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Okay, got you.
Taking that into consideration, under the Conservative government, we saw dramatic cuts to the federal public service. I've heard the word “gutted” being used in terms of the cuts to full-time public servants.
Does that have an impact on the level of service that the government is able to provide to Canadians—when you see dramatic cuts as we saw under the Conservative leadership?
3:55 p.m.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
I wouldn't say dramatic cuts. It's true that the number of full-time equivalents went down from 2012-13 to, I think, 2014-15. It went down by a few percentage points. That doesn't necessarily have to translate into cuts to Canadians if the government, in reducing the number of FTEs, decides to reduce its operations in some very specific areas—for example, letting some programs sunset. It doesn't necessarily mean that services to the population that we expect to get as Canadians will themselves be cut. However, it's sure that if you reduce the number of FTEs, something has to give at some point. It may not be direct services to Canadians. It might be grants and contributions to some groups or some sectors. It can be internal services that the public service provides to itself. However, it's obvious that something has to give.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Irek Kusmierczyk Liberal Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Gotcha.
Okay.
I want to ask you as well.... We've heard, as well, concerns from some areas regarding the strategic policy review that the government has indicated that it will be taking up. There are some who are concerned that it might cause some job losses and whatnot.
In talking about the fact that we've seen growth in the public service, are you able to speak about how you understand the goal of the strategic policy review?
3:55 p.m.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
It's difficult for me to answer that because there haven't been that many details regarding the strategic policy review. That was mentioned in the budget. It was barely mentioned, if at all, I think, in the fall economic statement. We were told to wait for more details to be announced in the coming months, probably in budget 2023.
It's hard for me to say more than that because I don't have any more information.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Irek Kusmierczyk Liberal Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Fair enough, Mr. Giroux.
How much time do I have Mr. Chair?
3:55 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kelly McCauley
Thanks, Mr. Kusmierczyk.
Next we have Ms. Vignola, please, for six minutes.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Giroux, thank you for being here.
In your report, it is noted that lapses in budgetary spending authorities have more than doubled compared with previous years. You also point out in the report that not receiving departmental results reports somewhat undermines the analytical work.
My question will be simple for you, but it is more complicated for me.
We know that lapsed funding has more than doubled. How does not having the departmental results reports impact our work? Departments have not tabled their reports. Is this a lack of transparency on their part? Is it common for those reports not to be tabled on time? Should there be legislation to impose a deadline for the tabling of these reports?
4 p.m.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
Those are very valid questions.
Such a delay in the tabling of the departmental results reports is unusual. To my knowledge, they have not yet been tabled, even though the fiscal year ended on March 31. By April 1, departments should have already prepared a good draft, with missing numbers, of course, since the year is not over. One would expect these reports to be released a few months after the end of the fiscal year, allowing time for translation and quality assurance measures.
But you don't have these reports; no one does. This deprives you of information that could be important. If, for example, a department is asking for a lot more money each year, but is not meeting its own result targets, you would be entitled to rigorously question the officials and ministers involved about why they are asking for more money when they are failing repeatedly. This deprives you of critical information about departmental results when the government is asking you to approve funding for these entities. So there is a glaring information asymmetry.
The government has the information and has access to it, of course. As parliamentarians, you don't have that access, but you are the ones who have to approve the funding. There is a significant information imbalance.
As for legislating a deadline for releasing departmental reports, I would say that is a great idea. It would prevent departments from stretching the rubber band, every year, for the release of this information. There's nothing like a firm deadline to get people to work.
4 p.m.
Bloc
Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC
One of the responsibilities of the members of this committee is to approve appropriations, and we can also request that they be reduced.
Is it possible that departments are not submitting departmental reports on time so that we can't reduce their appropriations, given that they haven't used them all in the past? We could find that a particular department does not need new appropriations and should use its lapsed funding.
Could this be a more or less unconscious tactic to divert the committee from its duties and responsibilities?
4 p.m.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
That is an assumption, and I believe it will likely prove true over time.
It is important to remember that departmental results reports are for parliamentarians, and they are approved by the ministers responsible for government organizations. So it should be fairly straightforward to get these documents approved.
Are you knowingly being deprived of information that may be useful to you in asking departments uncomfortable questions? That's possible. Is it just nonchalance or laziness? That's also possible. Is it a combination of all three? It is quite possible. Either way, these concerns are entirely legitimate.
4 p.m.
Bloc
Julie Vignola Bloc Beauport—Limoilou, QC
Departmental reports are nothing new. As far as I know, they have had to be produced for decades. They are normal accounting reports that are part of a completely normal process.
Is it understandable that a government that has been in place for seven years is still not able, at least this year, to deliver departmental reports in a timely manner?
4 p.m.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
Absolutely not—
4 p.m.
Conservative
4 p.m.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
This is absolutely not normal, Mrs. Vignola, because the government is used to publishing these reports. Even if this was the government's first year in office, it would not be normal, as it's a pretty straightforward process for any government. In fact, I can give you an exclusive: there are going to be departmental performance reports to be published next year. So public servants can start preparing them.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Thank you.
First, thank you for your important work, Mr. Giroux and Ms. Vanderwees. We really appreciate your being here.
One of the votes being referred to this committee relates to the Department of Public Works and Government Services, which is seeking just under $136 million for supplies for the health care system.
Can you speak about the economic benefits that can be generated by spending if the focus is placed on procuring supplies from domestic manufacturers?
4:05 p.m.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
It can certainly generate and support a domestic industry, which, as we saw in March and April 2020, can be desperately needed at some critical periods in Canadian history. There are clear benefits to the economy, but also to the security of the country, in having these supplies produced domestically.
From that perspective, that's one aspect in which I could answer your question.
December 1st, 2022 / 4:05 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
It's an important answer.
We had a supplier in my riding, Wayward Distillery, that pivoted and supplied PPE to first responders and health care workers, and then the government had a flood of foreign hand sanitizer come in and it stepped in. They ended up losing $400,000 at the end of the day, because they got wiped out there. They were trying to help, and it was pretty sad.
The PBO had a framework for monitoring COVD-19 spending, which seems to have been last updated in June 2021. From the beginning of the pandemic until now, do you know how much has been spent on procuring personal protective equipment?
Do you have any sense of what portion of that spending benefited Canadian companies?
4:05 p.m.
Parliamentary Budget Officer, Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer
No, I don't. I don't have that information.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC
Okay. Thanks.
I think it's important for us to try to figure that out in terms of economic leakages.
Again, you talked about safety and security, and the importance of that. I hope that our committee will take time to study it. I'll be bringing forward a motion next week in that regard. I'll give some time to my colleagues to look at that.
Earlier this fall, I tabled a motion that was adopted by this committee, which recommended the Auditor General conduct a performance audit to assess whether the Treasury Board provides adequate guidance to departments on developing credible cost estimates in make-or-buy decisions. In situations like the ArriveCAN app, we've seen that the cost of a project can balloon over time, and this has ballooned over time.
Can you share your thoughts on whether you believe departments are currently able to generate credible cost estimates?