Government Operations Committee on Nov. 27th, 2025

[Bill Matthews]

The performance report for Treasury Board Secretariat, in many cases, is a roll-up of other departments' results. That's just its role as a central agency.

The member has highlighted an area where the department is doing pretty well. There are others where there's clearly some work to do across the system. TBS would focus on where gaps and objectives are not being met. We would work with the department around improvement plans, and they would then go forward and try to reach those.

I will say that there's a frustration in the system, including my own, around performance reporting. In many programs in the government, there's just not sufficient data to report on whether the program is meeting its objectives. That's one of the things that my colleagues and I, with the minister, would like to improve upon: making sure we actually get the relevant data to measure the program and that we can truly go out and get it when it comes time to do an evaluation. There's some homework for us to do on the reporting of results.

[Vince Gasparro, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Can we drill down a little bit on that? How are you going to try to get the data you're looking for?

[Bill Matthews]

The place to do that is to really push hard when a program comes in with its performance objectives and measures and ask, “How are you going to get this data? Can you get it?”

We have a very elaborate regime, in many cases, that has layers on it, but it turns out that in some cases, departments are not able to report in the way they intended, and you end up with an evaluation on program performance that is inconclusive. When you get one of those evaluations, it's a trigger to go back to the department and say, “Okay, rethink your performance metrics.”

I'm probably making my friend Antoine squirm here, but he knows how I feel.

[Vince Gasparro, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Would you like to add to that?

We don't want you squirming too much—just a little.

[Antoine Brunelle-Côté, Assistant Secretary, Expenditure Management Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat]

No, I'm not squirming at all.

As Bill explained, when we review proposals that come before the Treasury Board, we set ambitious goals, but when setting ambitious goals, it's always a challenge to measure results and ensure that the departments promote things they can measure. We're pushing them hard to put forward performance that can be measured.

[Vince Gasparro, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I want to drill down on one social policy matter.

In my riding of Eglinton—Lawrence, there are quite a few seniors who rely on the Canada dental care plan. Just a few days ago, the Minister of Health announced that close to six million Canadians overall, or about 15% of the total population, use this plan. How will the new spending build and expand the Canada dental care plan?

[Bill Matthews]

There is funding in the supplementary estimates (B) for the dental plan, and that is largely because the take-up on that plan has been greater than initially forecast. The take-up has been terrific. Maybe it's because there was a backlog of people waiting for these types of services that you've seen this initial wave, but there are additional funds for the plan to make sure that those who are eligible can receive the services they're entitled to.

[Vince Gasparro, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Great. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

We're now going to the top of the order again with Mrs. Block.

Go ahead, Mrs. Block, for five minutes.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

I'm looking forward to hearing from you, Mr. Matthews, and from those sitting at the table with you, your responses to the questions that we, as parliamentarians, have for you.

I'm looking at your website. It states that for the year 2024-25, the Government of Canada met only 53% of its departments' mandated goals. What are the consequences, if any, when departments continue to fail or barely reach their goals? This may follow up on Mr. Gasparro's questions, but when 47% of departments don't meet their mandated goals, what is the recourse of the Treasury Board Secretariat?

[Bill Matthews]

When we are establishing goals for departments, or when they are establishing them with our help, we do want stretch goals, because you do want to aim high.

That number is low. I'm not entirely sure which figure the member is looking at, but I know of two that are on TBS's departmental results report that jump off the page. On high-volume services, the system as a whole is down around 52%. Also, on the number of IT systems that we would view as being healthy, again, we're I believe below 50%. Those are two numbers where you have to dig in and find out why.

With the health of IT, it's a question of resourcing and prioritizing the spend in IT. On the high-volume services, you can't really be generic about it. You have to look at each one and ask what's going on there. Was their take-up bigger than we expected? Were they unable to hire staff? What's the background on this? It really is on a case-by-case basis.

To answer the question of what the recourse is, the Treasury Board Secretariat, with the support or endorsement of the Treasury Board, can put conditions around improvement on departments or put additional reporting requirements on departments as a way to try to keep an eye on things, but it starts with, what's your plan to improve?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you.

The Department of Citizenship and Immigration failed to meet 55.6% of its departmental targets in 2024-25. Now, it is requesting an additional $624 million in funding through the supplementary estimates. Why is the Government of Canada rewarding departments with more funding when they fail to meet more than half of their departmental targets?

[Bill Matthews]

Again, you have to really look into the detail of which targets are not being met and why. In some cases, the answer to meeting more of the targets is indeed resources, and it's not really an effective punishment to hold back resources if you have a department that is not in general meeting its goals. You have to really understand the reason.

I think more detailed questions about which ones are being met and which ones are not are probably more appropriate for the department in question, but I would reiterate that the instinct to withhold resources for those departments that are not doing as well as we would like may not be the right instinct.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Well, one could make a number of guesses as to what is going on in the Department of Citizenship and Immigration in not meeting their departmental targets.

I'll move on.

Regarding the operating expenditures for the interim federal health program, less than a week ago, the Standing Committee on Health called for the Auditor General to investigate this program amidst rising concerns over the ballooning costs.

This year, an additional $598 million in funding will be added to the program through these estimates. Why is Treasury Board looking for approval to give a program $142 million more than last year when there is an audit pending for allegations of abuse within it?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Give a brief answer, please.

[Bill Matthews]

Certainly.

The request has been made for an audit, but obviously, until there is an audit done and there are conclusions, they are not proven. The recipients of the funding in this envelope are entitled to it—there's a backlog of cases—and other measures are being looked at to possibly better control the growth in this area as well. Also, I've not spoken to the Auditor General about a planned audit yet.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks very much.

We'll go back to Mrs. Romanado, please, for five minutes.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Thank you very much, Chair, and through you to the witnesses.

This may sound like a bizarre question, but it's something that I'm actually quite interested in. It's with regard to the expenditure cycle for the Government of Canada. What is the impact on it with respect to the change in when we table our budget? We made the decision to do a fall budget now so that it would allow provinces, territories, municipalities and so on to be able to do their planning. They often do their budgets in the spring, but they need to know what's coming down the pipe, really.

Would it be possible to elaborate a little bit on what that impact is in terms of the expenditure cycle for the Treasury Board Secretariat? As well, what does that mean in terms of any additional changes that need to happen?

[Bill Matthews]

There are two main benefits to tabling in the fall. As just mentioned, one is around giving provinces and territories more clarity about the federal government's plans while they develop their own budgets. I've already spoken to a few provincial colleagues who are quite pleased with that.

The second one is that parliamentarians have often expressed frustration about the lack of alignment between the budget when it's in the spring and the main estimates typically tabled around the same time that reflect nothing of the budget. Tabling the budget in the fall, as has been done this year and will happen going forward, gives departments a chance to get budget measures into their main estimates, which Parliament will see in 2026 before April 1, and allow better alignment there. Departments are going to have to work very hard to get their submissions for new funding into the main estimates. That will be our job over the next few months with departments.

The other piece will be investments but also reductions. There has been some dialogue this afternoon around the CER and when the details will show up. The full details will be in the main estimates and the departmental plans that go with it when they are tabled in 2026. The reductions we've been talking about don't actually take effect until April 1. That's where you will see the traditional parliamentary reporting with those details, outside of PBO requests, etc., which has already been discussed.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

In that regard, with respect to those departmental results reports, would it then take us an additional fiscal year before we're able to see those? If we're shifting that, I'm curious to know when the reporting will be, and the planning, because we're kind of off cycle at the moment.

[Bill Matthews]

I actually think it works better. For the main estimates, the good companion piece is the departmental plans. You get the high level, and the departmental plans will still go with those. They should reflect the same things the main estimates reflect in terms of investments.

The companion piece to the departmental results report is the Public Accounts of Canada. They both happen in the fall and they will continue to do so.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

To go back to some of the programs you talked about in terms of the CER, or the comprehensive expenditure review, when we do the review next year to see how we did in terms of the cuts that were made or forecast and so on, is there a plan to do an updated training session for parliamentarians to understand a little bit more about the impact of these changes? This is pretty new for parliamentarians, in terms of the CER. Is there a plan to provide parliamentarians with a little bit more of an in-depth update on how this is working?

[Bill Matthews]

I'm not aware of any plan for tailored briefings to parliamentarians in terms of the plans. I will say that the format of the reporting that departments use in their departmental plans and the results will be standard across the board so that parliamentarians will have an easier time to digest them. Obviously, committees are free to dig into those. We are certainly open to receiving any requests through the minister and his office around additional training that might be needed.

[Sherry Romanado, Liberal, Longueuil—Charles-LeMoyne, QC]

Okay.

I'm good. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Madame Gaudreau, go ahead, please.