Industry Committee on April 13th, 2017

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Thank you for that, and I appreciate the question. We've been clear on the matter of how this is done. It's really up to the chief statistician. With regard to 4.1, looking at that specific provision, I think it was Munir Sheikh who brought that particular item up for discussion.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Yes, that's correct.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Our view on this is that we believe that as minister I am accountable in the House for Statistics Canada, accountable to Canadians. Our objective was to reinforce the strength and the independence. That's the objective of this bill.

With regard to operational know-how, we believe that should be the domain of the chief statistician and the experts. If there are unique cases where the minister believes he or she should get involved, we have a transparent process to deal with that through an order in council and by tabling that change in the House. We looked at the 2011 experience and realized that was what really caused this issue to emerge—where the minister was saying one thing, the chief statistician was saying another thing, and there was a lack of transparency.

We believe those measures adequately deal with any kind of intervention by a minister, because a level of accountability and transparency would be clear. I can tell you right now that our intent is clear. We want the chief statistician to focus on how the data is collected. What do we want to determine? For example, we're committed to the environment. We're committed to clean technology. If we need data on how to collect more information on clean technology, we'll determine what we need. How that's done will be determined by the chief statistician.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Since you've raised the environment, I think the number one thing, if you were committed to it as a government, would be to prohibit the OPG from storing nuclear waste next to the Great Lakes. This is opposed by my American colleagues in the U.S. Congress, so a stat won't be necessary for that.

At any rate, I want to highlight a difficulty that I have. I understand that there will be some more connections back to the House, but on Bill C-36, which is still in the House right now, your government has moved closure on an amendment I have for that bill. What confidence can we have that there is going to be improved independence when, for example, an amendment related to gender, race, and equity on a previous bill is now subject to a motion for closure? Truly, what openness is there in this government to actually accept amendments?

We've had testimony on Bill C-36 and on Bill C-25, specific testimony from chief statisticians. I want assurances that there is going to be a serious evaluation of those potential amendments. Bill C-36 received some of those suggestions. We went through the process, and now we have the House closing debate on them. The amendments of former chief statisticians are fairly significant. They're not partisan. Is there going to be an openness for amendments from your government?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Just as a point of clarification, I believe you're talking about Bill C-25, are you not?

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I'm using Bill C-36 as an example, as it's been raised.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

No, this is Bill C-36 right now, but you're talking about changes to Bill C-25.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Yes, I'm sorry; I am confusing it with this.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Don't worry about it; I just wanted clarification on it. The changes you proposed, then, are to Bill C-25.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Yes.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

You're well aware that on Bill C-25 a process took place in the committee. The changes were reflected in the legislative agenda, and there's a legislative process that would deal with them. It's very clear how that process works; it's very open.

From my perspective, however, on the specific question around the order in council and taking it to cabinet, we believe that doing so clearly provides transparency and accountability, and puts a spotlight on any changes the minister wants to make or that the chief statistician needs to undertake on matters of operational know-how. I think that level of accountability and transparency is unprecedented.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I think it's going to be a real challenge to see whether your government is actually open to these changes.

Lastly, I want to move towards Shared Services. What is the reason to move the independence of statistics to Shared Services? What is the actual objective at the end of the day versus what we have heard as testimony, that it would be more advantageous and more secure if in-house operations for Statistics Canada remained the same and did not have to be outsourced? What is the advantage to the public of using Shared Services as part of StatsCan's repertoire of discussion with Canadians?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Overall, I think the objective of Shared Services is to have, from a StatsCan perspective, good-quality, reliable data with integrity. Isn't that right? I think this is what Canadians want, and it's the objective.

The operational IT issues related to that objective, however, are something in the domain of the chief statistician. He or she will determine how that arrangement works and whether they can secure the data and make sure the data is of good quality and high integrity. Those are the operational know-hows that the chief statistician needs to determine.

I believe the interim chief statistician, Anil, came before this committee and talked about meaningful progress that had been made in respect to some of the issues with Shared Services.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

We're going to move to Mr. Longfield.

You have seven minutes.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Minister, for being here. It's always good to have you here, and thanks to Mr. Knubley for joining us as well.

I want to build on what Mr. Masse was putting forward about Bill C-25 and the impact of that legislation on Bill C-36 and the way we would look at building the advisory council to have diversity within it. We had testimony about the number of people, but we haven't really addressed how we make sure that this strategic body has adequate diversity.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

First of all, thank you very much for that question, Lloyd. I know you've had extensive experience sitting on numerous boards and understand board governance structure very well, and even the role of advisory committees.

Clearly, with Bill C-25 we were promoting and are promoting diversity on boards—diversity of thought, diversity of perspective. That diversity allows for better decision-making and better outcomes. There's clearly data around this, many studies demonstrate it, and it's good for the bottom line for many companies. Clearly it constitutes a strong value proposition.

We want to emulate what we preach in Bill C-25 and deploy it in a meaningful way as we move forward with the advisory council. We want to promote diversity of perspective and thoughts and regions and ideas in a very thoughtful way. This provides another opportunity for the Governor in Council process to be very open and transparent and to engage the greatest number of people we possibly can.

I believe a fair amount of excitement and attention will be given to this process because of our government's commitment to Statistics Canada and good-quality data, the fact that we reintroduced the mandatory long-form census, and the fact that we're reinforcing and strengthening the independence of Statistics Canada. This will encourage many people to become involved in the process, and therefore, we'll have many good people to choose from.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

How does this advisory council or advisory board relate to other government departments? How do we leverage the assets we have at Statistics Canada to help other government agencies make good decisions based on data and statistics?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Are you talking about the advisory council?

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Yes.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

The advisory council is going to have a very clear strategic focus, providing advice to the chief statistician and me or the minister responsible at any given time. They'll produce an annual report that demonstrates the level of accountability and transparency. In that report, I think clearly they will work with and engage other departments to determine how best to use the data.

If you take a step back, one area our government is looking at is open data. We're looking at how we can make more data available, how we can take data from other departments. When it comes to open data and issues around that matter, I think Statistics Canada can and will play a leadership role. I believe that's where the advisory council can make some meaningful suggestions.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

You pulled out the nuance of my question. We use open data internally as well as externally. This group could help advise in that process.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

That's correct, yes.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

That's within our legislation...?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Correct.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

With the legislation, we had a couple of testimonies around sections 21 and 22 in regard to which would be subservient. They said there was some conflict between the directions from those two sections. The Westminster system allows for the minister to have input on decisions, but as you said, going through Parliament, going through an open process.

Could you comment on sections 21 and 22? We heard that a few times.