Government Operations Committee on Oct. 30th, 2025

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Out of respect, I don't see that here, but do you know what? I'll just leave it at that.

Actually, Ms. Reza, I mentioned that I had a few questions for you at the last meeting.

Last week the chief procurement officer told the committee that the government is moving to an environment “where there's more emphasis on creativity on the part of suppliers”. That's the vendor performance management project. The procurement ombud just showed us that the real problem was that the contracts weren't detailed enough. Departments weren't enforcing the fine print. People were being swapped out with no records or reasons.

I'm trying to understand why the government's response is to remove even more detail with this new thing from future contracts. If the problem is stated clearly—it's not the process; it's the lack of compliance—why are we responding to that by designing contracts with fewer specifics, less scrutiny and more flexibility? Isn't that saying that we missed the target so let's take the target down?

[Arianne Reza]

Thank you very much for the question. I really welcome it.

I don't think vendor performance management will in any way dilute the scrutiny and the emphasis we put on contracts. I listened to the procurement ombudsman's testimony, and of course I read his many procurement practices. I think we have to take a step back. Vendor performance is an important part for us to be able to tell you that you're meeting the mark or you're not meeting the mark, and to not do it post-contract, once finished. It's an ability to have a tool to be able to manage that and for the contractor to be able to communicate with us. We actually think vendor performance management will lead to much better value and a much higher capacity to get value for Canadians on contracting.

I can add a little bit more, if you want, or I can pause there.

[Tamara Jansen, Conservative, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

No, that's all right. I have other questions.

The report shows that departments weren't even checking whether the replacements met the qualifications they had promised. If the new system removes those details altogether, how will anyone know whether taxpayers are actually getting what they paid for? Wouldn't less detail just make it easier to hide another bait and switch, which is what we saw in that report?

[Arianne Reza]

I'll turn to Monsieur Laporte to describe the new system. It will no longer be based on qualifications of individuals. It will be based on corporate qualifications. We feel there will be less switch-out and more accountability.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm afraid we don't have any more time.

On the new system, Mr. Laporte, maybe you can provide it in writing.

Next is Ms. Khalid. Then we'll finish up with two and a half minutes for Ms. Gaudreau.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much.

I want to go back to our hiring in the public service. The 2025-26 departmental plans highlight the Treasury Board Secretariat's responsibility in determining the terms and conditions for employment for the public service. That includes collective agreements as well.

I want to focus a little bit on the changing nature of the economy. Post-COVID, things have really changed in terms of how employees expect to work. Our younger workforce is in what I think we haven't been able to deal with effectively—a gig economy, with people moving from gig to gig to gig. How does that impact public service? How does that impact the terms and conditions that the TBS comes up with? Is there innovation happening there? Are we meeting people where they're at? Are we thinking about how to change these regulations and rules?

[Bill Matthews]

Mr. Chair, I can say a couple of things.

One, in terms of what gets negotiated with unions and bargaining agents, obviously that's a negotiation. Anything that is subject to collective agreements will reflect the input of the bargaining agents. At the end of the day, an agreement is reached and changes are made.

In terms of the broader skill sets and the changes there, I think what you are seeing—I will turn to Francis momentarily—is a big focus on the public service's digital knowledge and awareness. Some of the job descriptions are changing along with the skill sets we need. You're seeing hiring that reflects that.

My friend Mr. Rochon has a role there as well, but maybe I'll pass it to Francis to talk about any other changes he's seeing.

[Francis Trudel]

Thank you.

I think he touched on the first point. The conditions of employment you're speaking to are actually negotiated at the bargaining table. We start with that. I think you're also referring to a change in generation and expectations for the workforce coming in. We're seeing it. There's no doubt that this is the expectation of the younger generation coming in. They certainly have the aspiration for a lot of movement and experimentation within the public service. I actually think the best offer the public service can give to its employees is exactly that. With 100-and-some institutions and a little bit less than 400,000 positions in the public service, it allows that movement.

Where I think we need to adjust, and maybe we haven't reached that, is that we have kept our definition, a little bit, of what specific employment looks like, which sometimes is a limitation on the ability of people to experiment with different types of jobs. There are things that should be negotiated at the table that actually would allow that movement to be a little bit more fluid.

I think I'm speaking to an asset, actually, that the public service has as the biggest employer in the country—the ability to experience all kinds of different jobs and move within it. I think we have to adapt to that.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much. I am very interested in that segment and how nimble we can be as a government to adjust to the changing requirements of the workforce.

I'll turn to Ms. Reza, please.

With respect to procurement and trying to be a bit more inclusive in SMEs trying to bid and participate in the public procurement process, how easy or how difficult is it for a small organization to navigate through the sometimes very complex procurement process? Are there any initiatives that procurement is taking to reduce some of that red tape?

[Arianne Reza]

I think there are two different lenses to apply.

One is how SMEs actually navigate the system. That are lots of signposts and a lot of work, and I'm going to talk about that.

The other area, too, is that they have to be able to meet the requirements of the Government of Canada and make sure there is an incremental.... For PSPC specifically, we do the really big procurements, so I'm often here talking about SMEs, but I talk about them in a supply chain, or I want to build them into that broader piece.

We look at it through two lenses at PSPC. The first is how we get them in the system so they can compete and get some economic benefit. You heard the minister earlier talk about the value of the first contract and being able to sell to your own government. The second is making sure that the requirements are designed in such a way that they're not so technical and high level, so we have that capacity to assure ourselves that we know who we're doing business with.

Dominic.

[Dominic Laporte]

Also, as part of buy Canadian, we're also going to have an SME program. We want to streamline the process for SMEs, making it even more easy to apply to be in our federal procurement in the future.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks very much.

Madam Gaudreau, you have two and a half minutes. Then we'll do quick budgets and then adjourn.

Go ahead, Madam Gaudreau.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Is it realistic to reduce accountability measures when we hear that, while being very onerous, they are already inadequate for preventing any loss of public funds or any other loss?

We're not talking about a private company here. I have doubts about certain decisions. If we want to be responsible and accountable, we need transparency mechanisms. Obviously, audits should be done within reason, but this is extremely important to me. For example, I don't know what it was like back then, but in my opinion, we should hear from you at least once a session.

Do you already know how many of the 360,000 public servants are expected to lose their jobs?

[Bill Matthews]

I thank the member for her question.

We can't tell you today what the results of the government's spending reduction exercise will be. We'll have to wait for the budget. However, as the chair has already said, we will provide you with details in the future.

That said, I would like to add one thing. When it comes to the environment, the risks and the controls, most of the problems are due to the fact that employees have not yet finished gathering documentation on the file. That's a problem.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I would like to put my last question to Mr. Laporte, since he wasn't here earlier.

In 20 seconds, can you reassure me about all the changes to the interpretation criteria? We have two official languages. What does that mean for service quality?

[Dominic Laporte]

I am the former CEO of the translation bureau, and I can assure you that the certification requirement, a process that sets a very high bar for interpretation quality, will remain the primary criterion in our future contracts. Quality is top of mind at the translation bureau, so we want to make sure we focus on that.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

Witnesses, thank you for being with us today. You're welcome to stick around for a couple of seconds while we discuss budgets. Otherwise, we've appreciated your being with us.

Colleagues, we'll try to get you out really quickly. We have three budgets that we need everyone's approval on.

The first is our briefing for our meeting we have with the procurement ombudsman.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Wonderful.

The second one was the briefing with the Minister of Government Transformation about PSPC, which we had last week—not this one.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Wonderful.

Last is our ongoing Canada Post one. It's a bit higher because of headsets for some rural folks who are difficult to get to.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Wonderful.

If there's nothing else, colleagues, have a wonderful Halloween. Go, Jays!