Industry Committee on April 13th, 2017

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Welcome back, everybody, to meeting 57of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology.

We are continuing our study of Bill C-36. Today we have appearing before us the Honourable Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development.

We're just going to get right into it.

Minister, you have 10 minutes.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I'm pleased to be here to address this committee regarding Bill C-36. I'm here accompanied by my deputy minister, John Knubley. If you have any difficult questions, feel free to direct them towards him.

Today I would like to outline the elements of the legislation that is before the committee, explain the intent behind some of the provisions, and address some of the concerns raised during the committee's study of the bill.

We all agree on the importance and value of impartial and high-quality statistical information that responds to stakeholder needs. Statistics are a public good.

Governments have a responsibility to ensure statistics are of the highest quality possible. People from all walks of life—individuals, businesses, non-profits and governments—depend on them.

High-quality statistics are necessary to properly plan services, improve social outcomes, and help businesses grow. Obviously, we know the benefits are very important, and as we've heard from many in this committee, statistics should not be a partisan issue.

Clearly, there's need for formal independence, and currently Statistics Canada is treated by convention as an arm's-length agency with little direct involvement by the minister overseeing it. However, the agency's independence is not formally legislated. The decision to replace the 2011 mandatory long-form census with a voluntary service exposed a vulnerability in the Statistics Act. That's clearly what prompted this discussion. This was obviously a platform commitment, and hence we're here today. It allowed the government of the day to make a decision on a statistical matter with little openness or transparency.

This decision compromised the quality of data and the level of detail about the Canadian population. It deprived smaller communities of the information they needed to make informed decisions at the local level.

That's why the government quickly reinstated the mandatory long-form census, but more action is needed to ensure decisions on statistical matters are made independently and based on professional considerations.

The proposed amendments respect that Statistics Canada is recognized as a world-leading statistical institution. They enshrine into law the long-standing convention of independence conferred to Statistics Canada, and they will safeguard the quality and impartiality of the information produced by Statistics Canada.

Let me outline the amendments proposed in this bill and provide more detail on certain aspects on which questions were raised during the committee's study of the bill.

Under the current act the minister responsible for Statistics Canada has overarching authority for decisions about the agency's operations and its methods for gathering, compiling, producing, and disseminating statistical information, but in practice, this authority is delegated to the chief statistician. The bill will amend the act to formally make the chief statistician responsible for all operations and decisions related to statistical matters. This is a key important feature of the bill. This is the essential element of meeting our commitment to strengthening Statistics Canada's independence and bringing our legislation into alignment with the United Nations' principles and the OECD's recommended practices.

Given that statistics are a public good, however, the minister will remain accountable to Parliament for Statistics Canada.

The amendments have been drafted to balance independence, quality, and relevance while increasing transparency to ensure the government can be held accountable. Again, it really is about independence, transparency, and accountability. They ensure that the responsibilities of the minister and the chief statistician are clearly defined. They also ensure that these responsibilities come with the requirements for transparency and accountability to Canadians, and that the minister will retain authority to issue directives on statistical matters or programs. This is an important power that must remain with the executive.

Information and data needs are constantly evolving with societal and economic changes. This reality highlights the importance of why governments must be able to work with Statistics Canada to collect information on topics that are important to Canadians.

However, the bill ensures greater transparency around these directives, and it empowers the chief statistician to request written and public direction before acting on them. The bill clearly assigns to the chief statistician the responsibility of deciding what methods to use to collect data, including whether surveys will be mandatory or voluntary. Because mandatory surveys can be intrusive on respondents and are tied to penalties, the bill also requires that decisions to make a survey mandatory be published for transparency purposes.

It also requires that the minister be advised of such decisions before they take effect. Should the minister deem it to be in the national interest to make a decision that directly affects statistical matters, the bill requires that such decisions be authorized by a Governor in Council and tabled in Parliament as well.

As you can see, this bill ensures that independence does not come at the expense of transparency and the capacity to hold the government to account for decisions that impact Canadians.

The bill also proposes to create a new Canadian statistical advisory council—I know there's been a fair amount of discussion in this committee about that as well—which would replace the existing National Statistics Council. The new council will provide advice and will help ensure Canada's statistical system continues to meet the needs of Canadians.

During the committee's study of the bill, we heard questions about the council's purpose and how it differs from the existing council. We also heard concerns about the representativeness, or the number of representatives on the new council, and the potential for partisan appointments.

First, I would like to thank all past and current members of the National Statistics Council.

Their contributions to Canada's statistical system are an important reason why Statistics Canada is recognized as one of the world's best statistical agencies. I would especially like to thank the current members of the National Statistics Council for their recent contributions. This includes consideration of options and advice on how to strengthen Statistics Canada's independence.

As for why we're creating a new council, the rationale is simple: transparency and strategic focus. Entrenching the new council in legislation will increase transparency around the work it does and the advice it provides.

I'm told that it's difficult to find out who the current members on the National Statistics Council are, and that it's difficult to find out what issues the council has considered and what advice it has given to the chief statistician. This will not be the case with the new council.

The members of the new council will be asked to provide advice on specific issues related to the overall quality of Canada's statistical system. And the bill will require the council to prepare an annual report on the state of our statistical system.

Having 10 members will enable the new council to provide depth and strategic focus to the advice that it will be asked to give. The new council is meant to be highly strategic, and I fully expect it to formulate its evidence and advice based on a variety of sources, including the chief statistician and Statistics Canada's extensive advisory structure.

The new council will compliment the comprehensive advisory committee structure already in place at Statistics Canada. As you heard in previous testimony, this includes the seven provincial and territorial committees—including the federal-provincial-territorial consultative council on statistical policy—and ensures that all provinces and territories have an effective voice on statistical matters.

There are also 13 advisory committees in various subject matter areas, which include nearly 200 members from every province and territory, and a cross-representation of Canadian society. Council members will be appointed by a Governor in Council in an open and transparent manner, based on merit. This process will limit the potential for partisan appointments.

Colleagues, I read with interest the comments of Mr. Ian McKinnon, chair of the existing National Statistics Council.

He said to the committee, “The advisory council fills a new role, one which would be difficult for the current statistics council to perform, frankly, and the creation of that new entity is I think an essential and pivotal part of the promise that this bill holds in transforming it from just letters into a well-operating and successful change to the Canadian statistical system.”

Clearly, colleagues, I agree with Mr. McKinnon's assessment.

The bill will also change how the chief statistician is appointed. This is another area that I know has come up for discussion. The position will be a renewable term of no more than five years, and the appointment will be made through an open, transparent, merit-based selection process, in accordance with the government's new approach to Governor in Council appointments.

The chief statistician will serve during good behaviour, and may only be removed by the Governor in Council for cause. This will strengthen the independence of the chief statistician in his or her decision-making capacity.

Mr. Chair, let me highlight a few more amendments.

This bill addresses situations in which Canadians refuse to provide information related to the census and other mandatory surveys.

It will remove from the act the penalty of imprisonment for those who do not comply with a mandatory request for information. Again, this was an issue that was discussed extensively in the media when the previous changes were made. Canadians who do not comply will continue to face the possibility of fines of up to $500.

The bill will also allow the transfer of census records after 92 years. This is consistent with our commitment to open and accessible data. This will benefit researchers and historians, as I mentioned before.

Obviously, the response rate to the census has been very successful. In 2016, we saw that, and we want to make sure that we share this information in a timely manner.

Finally, the bill updates some of the language in the act as well, which is important.

The amendments in this bill were developed based on consultations with many Canadians as well as with international experts and bodies.

As I mentioned, they include the guidance and the principles of international organizations like the OECD, the UN, and other jurisdictions. We worked very closely with many other bodies as well.

In conclusion, Mr. Chair, we understand that trusted information is essential for making informed decisions.

I would like to thank all the individuals who took the time to appear before this committee to offer their advice and input to the important work you have undertaken in the review of Bill C-36. The amendments contained in Bill C-36 will enhance and protect the independence of Statistics Canada, increase transparency, and support evidence-based decision-making.

I look forward to the swift passage of this legislation.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you, Minister.

Before we jump to questions, I failed to introduce Mr. John Knubley, the deputy minister of the Department of Industry.

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

For the record, I introduced him as well, so we're all good.

Thank you very much for reinforcing that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

We're going to jump right to Mr. Arya.

You have seven minutes.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for coming here, and for bringing this excellent legislation that delivers on one of the campaign promises.

One of the most important organizations closely associated with Statistics Canada, and which knows the workings of Statistics Canada, is the Statistical Society of Canada. Their representative at the last meeting said they had almost unanimous approval for this legislation, which is a very good thing.

Their recommendations were quite limited. One was that they wanted a search committee. The other was that they wanted one of the Statistical Society of Canada's representatives to be on the advisory council.

I asked about the current system. Even before the changes you are proposing, the current system of appointing the chief statistician has worked well in the past, and the Governor in Council process, in my opinion, is also quite good. Would you like to address that?

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

Thank you very much for your question. You're absolutely right. This legislation does honour a commitment that we made, which released them from the issue around making the mandatory long-form census voluntary, which compromised the quality of data and which brought this issue to light in the public domain.

We honoured that commitment by reintroducing the mandatory long-form census on day one. This is to continue on that path to reinforce what existed in convention, the independence of Statistics Canada. I'm really delighted to hear that the Statistical Society of Canada was supportive. Obviously they were engaged. We had a robust engagement process, an outreach process through which we engaged many stakeholders, because, again, we wanted to be very thoughtful and deliberate about how we approached this legislation and we wanted to find that right balance.

Clearly, some of the comments they made around the search criteria for the chief statistician are important. This is a very important and prestigious position, and we want somebody who is really qualified. That is why, as you mentioned, we are proposing a Governor in Council process, which is going to be merit-based, open, and transparent.

I can tell you right now the fact that we reintroduced the mandatory long-form census and the fact that we're bringing forth legislation to strengthen the independence of Statistics Canada have really positioned this organization in a much more positive light. There is a great deal of excitement around this organization going forward and there will be a lot of interest from very highly qualified individuals from around the world who would want to take on this role. We're very confident that a Governor in Council appointment, which will be very open and transparent, will attract the best and brightest to be part of that process to apply. We think that is good for the organization, and I'm confident that we will have somebody very capable going forward as well.

On the advisory council, as you know, that's going to be again a Governor in Council process as well. So, for anyone who expresses an interest we would—

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

In fact, I have a question on that advisory council. I know it's a very strategic body. As you mentioned and as we all know, we have some 13-plus committees with about 250 people trying to advise the chief statistician, and obviously he can't have a one-to-one relationship with all the committee members. However, I think eight to 10 members at this strategic level, where he can have regular, personal, one-to-one interaction, is quite good. There were some suggestions that this number is low.

In my view, the number appears to be good; eight to 10 is good. The moment you start increasing the number, then the chances of the chief statistician being able to interact on a personal level will be diminished. What do you say about the comments that this number is low and it has to be increased?

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

I think we have to understand the mandate of the new Canadian statistical advisory council. It's going to publish a report. It's going to report to the chief statistician and the minister. It's going to provide strategic advice. It does not, by any means, undermine the current Statistics Canada professional advisory committees. There are 13 of them with specific subject-matter expertise. If you look at the federal, provincial and territorial consultative council on statistical policy, those comprise roughly 200 individuals. There is a lot of subject-matter expertise and a lot of volunteers that will still be part of the process.

I think for a member body, 10 is a good working number. As you know, many boards comprise that number, give or take. It's a workable number that allows for robust conversations and more focus around the strategic advice they will be providing. I'm confident that number finds that right balance between being an effective body and being an accountable body.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

I'm glad that you guys consulted OECD and some of the countries like the U.K. and the Netherlands. Of course, each country has a different system. The Netherlands, for example, doesn't do a census. The last time it did one was in 1971. It uses information from registers.

How does our proposed bill on Statistics Canada compare with those in other countries?

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

It's interesting that you mention 1971. I was speaking to my officials before, and as we were drafting this legislation, I was talking about the timelines of some substantive changes that were made to the Statistics Act. There were some changes in the 1980s and some in the early 1970s, I think in 1971. This, again, really emphasizes our commitment to strengthen the independence. It is long overdue but it was in convention, so this is a very important step.

How does this compare? We looked at a lot of equivalent peer countries—Australia, the Netherlands, the U.K., Ireland, and New Zealand. As you mentioned, we looked at the UN's fundamental principles around official statistics and the recommendations of the OECD Council on Good Statistical Practice. These changes put us in a much stronger position. They align us with those international practices, policies, and principles, and further strengthen the reputation of Canada's statistical body, which, again, had world recognition. It had a great reputation. This further enhances that.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

On the term of the chief statistician, I think the current bill allows for one renewable term. Somebody asked, why limit it to that? At the same time, the former chief statistician, Munir Sheikh, said that they don't go for any fixed.... What happens if he or she may not perform as expected?

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Very briefly, please.

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

The objective of the term limit is, again, to have that accountability mechanism, to be transparent, and to be merit-based. The reason that we have a renewable term is, again, with regard to the census, to have the ability to execute the census and see it through properly. Also it's good for succession planning. It's good to have new leadership come in. I think the maximum 10-year term limit potentially provides ample opportunity for a new chief statistician to come in and make a meaningful impact.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Nuttall, you have seven minutes.

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Minister, for joining us today—to Mr. Knubley, as well.

You started out by saying any tough questions should go to Mr. Knubley, so perhaps I should direct them all that way at this point.

All kidding aside, thank you for taking the time to be with us today. I was hoping I was going to get to spend a couple of hours on the court with you in a month, but that's not going to happen.

I just wanted to take some snippets from your presentation today and apply them to some of the questions that I've been asking. I think other witnesses who have been giving testimony have been bringing this forward as well.

I'm just going to read a couple of pieces out. “As we've heard...in this committee, statistics should not be a partisan issue”, and in the past there have been statistical matters dealt with with little openness and transparency. Also, “more action is needed to ensure decisions on statistical matters are made independently and based on professional considerations.” More directly to the point we've heard “concerns about the representativeness” of the new council and the “potential for partisan appointments”. Finally, “As for why we're creating a new council, the rationale is simple: transparency and strategic focus.”

I guess what I want to get at is that I understand the words on paper. I also understand there are some things in this bill that do provide more power to the chief statistician. There are also movements that are taken away from that. This isn't a one-way train to openness, transparency, and keeping government out of the process in terms of statistics.

When I look back at previous appointments to the innovation committee, I see that five out of the 10 people were Liberal donors. We've had the president of MaRS on that committee, who then came back and made a recommendation to give clusters funding. I'll be interested to see what happens with that.

While I understand what you're putting on paper, I question whether the partisanship is not embedded directly into this bill to begin with. I think that the record shows that when these people are appointed there's already been a tinge of disappointment. It resulted in a $800-million fund brought forward in the budget. That's a huge concern when we're looking at statistics going forward.

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

Thank you for that question.

On basketball, I hopefully look forward to the opportunity in the near future to play with you and our other colleagues to raise money for charity.

With regard to the fund you're talking about, obviously it's not within the scope of the conversation, but I'll quickly speak to it. Then I'll get to the specific matters pertaining to Bill C-36. The $800 million in terms of the super clusters investment was actually a campaign commitment that we had made. It was not a reflection of who we appointed as innovation advisers. That was a campaign commitment that we honoured in our first budget, a while before we had identified innovation leaders across the country.

With regard to this bill, you're absolutely right, we're very sensitive to the fact that we want to end political interference. We learned some hard lessons in 2011, when a voluntary form was brought in which compromised the quality of data. Hundreds of communities did not receive data because the sample size wasn't sufficient. Particularly in our rural or remote communities, which need this information for planning purposes—to build schools, for social services—this really undermined our ability to proceed forward in a meaningful way to address those issues.

The quality of data has a significant and direct impact on Canadians. Based on those challenges, based on those issues, we took immediate action by reintroducing the mandatory long-form census. That's why, for our going forward now, what we want to accomplish is taking what's in convention right now in terms of Statistics Canada and enshrining it into law.

We have a very balanced approach to this.

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

But you're doing the exact opposite of that in removing the chief statistician's ability to name the advisory committee. I know it's a changed committee, it's a transformed committee, but you're doing the exact opposite of that. The convention is that it's the chief statistician. In fact the convention in many jurisdictions around is that it's either a third party body or a chief statistician and not the Governor in Council, but now you're taking responsibility for that.

When we look at strategic direction, if I'm the cabinet, I appoint the right people to get the right strategic direction to get the right answers that I'm looking for and the right survey going to the right people. To me, and I may be cynical—this place may make you cynical—what's happening here is that this is the place to start if you want to set up the data.

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

In think in terms of the selection of the advisory committee, clearly it will be done through a Governor in Council process that is very open and transparent and merit-based. As well, in terms of the mandate of this council, they will provide strategic advice. They will not get into the operational know-how. That is something that we have clearly outlined is the prerogative of the chief statistician and the experts at Statistics Canada. They will determine how to proceed on the operational side of it. That will not be compromised. There will be no political interference in that.

That's something we learned from the 2011 experience. We do not want to interfere in the matters with regard to getting good-quality data, reliable data. I think this legislation clearly deals with that and provides that assurance to the chief statistician.

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Okay.

This may be a little tongue-in-cheek, but this a question I've wanted to ask.

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

Sure.

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

This is in terms of a bailout of Bombardier before...or a loan, or investment, or whatever language you want to use.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Surrey—Newton, BC]

I have a point of order.

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

I'd like to know what statistics—

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Excuse me, Mr. Nuttall.