Government Operations Committee on April 30th, 2026

[Matthew Shea]

I can only comment on the fact that we have a communications group that gives advice on that. I can't speak to what their advice would have been in this particular case, but they would have given advice, absolutely.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Are we not concerned, though, that somebody is breaking Treasury Board guidance by allowing partisan campaign language to be used in government documents?

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

I'm sorry. I have a point of order, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We have a point of order. I'll stop the clock.

Go ahead.

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

The term “Canada Strong” is not necessarily a partisan term. To just start making this characterization is definitely a stretch, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

It is debate.

I will note that it was the campaign slogan, and the Treasury Board—I think it's in 3.1—specifically states that campaign slogans cannot be used in government communications.

It is debate, but I will correct you on that. The Liberal campaign slogan is “Canada Strong”, and it literally violates the Treasury Board rules. It specifically states that you cannot use slogans. We brought this up with Treasury Board. You cannot use slogans in government communications or advertising.

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

Okay. However, saying that it....

I know we're getting into debate, but—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

It is debate.

We'll go back to Mr. Patzer.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Thank you very much.

I can pull up the Liberal website that says, “Canada Strong” right on it. If you look at the budget document, it says, “Canada Strong”. If you look at the Speech from the Throne, it says, “Canada Strong”. There are several TV ads that have run all across this country using the tag line “Canada Strong”.

Again, if PCO is non-partisan.... I understand that you are not directly responsible for communications and marketing, but you have to tell me and this committee—you have to reassure Canadians—that there is somebody in your department making sure partisan language is not being used in government communications. It violates the trust of Canadians, let alone the standards set by the Treasury Board.

[Pauline Rochefort, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We have a point of order.

Go ahead.

[Pauline Rochefort, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

The witness has answered the question, so—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

This is debate. It's the member's time.

Go ahead, Mr. Patzer.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

That was the point of my question. There has to be somebody.

Is there not a—for lack of a better term—quality control person in PCO to make sure the rules are being upheld?

[Matthew Shea]

I will reiterate that we are a non-partisan organization. We provide non-partisan advice. Our communications team would absolutely provide advice on that.

From what I've heard in this committee, I think there may be different interpretations of that particular issue. I'm more than happy to bring this back to our communications folks, if you would like to have something back to the committee.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley, SK]

Sure. If you could respond back to this committee with that, it would be greatly appreciated. You can follow up with that.

I'm just going to read it one more time for everybody at home. It's section 3.1.1 of the policy on communications and federal identity.

Government of Canada communications are non-partisan, effectively managed, well coordinated, clear and responsive to the diverse information needs of the public and Government of Canada employees

If they're “effectively managed” and supposed to be non-partisan, the fact that this is partisan shows me that there's a coordinated effort. It's “effectively managed” to be partisan. I strongly advise your department, if it's non-partisan, to make sure this does not happen, going forward.

Thank you.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

On a point of order, Chair, it's extremely unprofessional and inappropriate for a member—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Danko, that's not a point of order. Thank you.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

It is a point of order because it's badgering the witness.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

No, it's not a point of order, Mr. Danko.

We will now go to Ms. Rochefort.

[Pauline Rochefort, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here this morning.

I have two questions.

I was delighted to learn that you use a GBA+ lens in the work you do at PCO. As parliamentary secretary for rural development, I am interested in knowing whether you also apply a rural lens in your work.

[Matthew Shea]

I apologize to the committee. I am the chief financial officer, so I'm not involved in individual parts of the department like that. We have a GBA+ team that looks over every memorandum to cabinet and government policy. I can certainly ask them if there's a specific rural lens built into it.

Certainly, the goal of the Privy Council Office is to ensure that every product that goes to cabinet or the Prime Minister has that fulsome government advice, educated by all parts of the government. One of the beauties of our cabinet discussions is that they include all ministers. We have a minister responsible for rural matters. Therefore, I would surmise that this person would give advice, in addition to anything the Privy Council Office does as part of its analysis.

[Pauline Rochefort, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

It's good to know that there would be data and metrics involved in gauging the support for rural Canada.

I have another question related to rural Canada. It's an issue in northern Ontario. I want to frame the question more about how the information from within Canada flows through to the PCO. This question is also for the Major Projects Office, if I may.

In the north, Highways 11 and 17 not only are important to northern Ontario communities, but also are critical components of the trans-Canada network that supports national supply chains, economic growth and the development of critical minerals.

Recently, in Ontario, an NDP motion was unanimously supported by all government parties and was passed. It claimed that Highways 11 and 17 were critical to our national corridors. How would such information from various legislatures within Canada flow through to the PCO?

This also has significance from a national project perspective. How would it flow through to the Major Projects Office?

[Matthew Shea]

In general, we pull together information from across government departments. Many of them have direct relationships with individual provinces and territories, and even with municipalities in some cases. Within the Privy Council Office, we have an intergovernmental affairs team that works closely with all of the provinces and territories. I can say with confidence, because I'm in some of those meetings, that the people responsible for that would give updates on the legislation that's being passed in individual provinces and territories and the implications it may have on government policy. That lens is certainly there.

We also have regional development agencies that support the needs of individual parts of the country. When combined with, as I mentioned, robust cabinet discussions, where you have ministers from across the country, that helps to ensure that we have that lens.

My colleague may want to add a bit from an MPO perspective. She also benefits from having worked in the intergovernmental affairs world.

[Pauline Rochefort, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

Thank you.