Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to thank you again for all of your work on this.
I'm going to go back to a couple of things you said. You referred to this in the editorial that I talked about earlier, which you were quoted in.
You told APTN News about the fact that “five years after...the two new federal bureaucracies aren't meeting their own targets for improving the lives of...Indigenous people..”. You said, “They cannot meet their own targets, which is surprising...they're also failing to keep their targets consistent over time.”
Earlier on in your comments, you also referred to the fact that out of the 42 performance targets set by the ISC, “a quarter or less of the results are consistent with the targets... the department” set for themselves.
I want to drill into a solution-based idea for a second here.
We have an Order Paper question that we received an answer to not too long ago, which indicates that 95% of the ISC executive level or above and 92% of CIRNAC at or above the executive level received bonuses totalling about $5 million in 2021-22. In the response, it clearly states that “Individual performance pay holds executives accountable for individual results and is not related to Departmental Results, which measure organizational goals.”
I referred earlier to an organization I was part of where I have this history of working with the management system that we're talking about here. In my experience, the executive compensation component at our organization was 85% based on the organizational goals and 15% based on the personal performance goals.
This is bigger than just ISC and CIRNAC. I think this is across government, right? Do you think there's some merit in suggesting that we should tie performance, at-risk pay and bonuses, to organizational achievement rather than individual achievement?