Public Accounts Committee on May 2nd, 2007

[Jean-Yves Roy, Bloc, Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Besides, are our universities currently able to train the needed personnel? The Department of Foreign Affairs often needs very skilled people. Let me give you an example. Someone who knows nothing about Southeast Asia cannot be sent to Southeast Asia. This really requires very specialized people. Are our universities currently able to provide this kind of personnel?

[Sheila Fraser]

We have not studied this issue, but we expect the department to do so when it draws up its strategic plan.

[Jean-Yves Roy, Bloc, Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chairman?

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Just half a minute.

[Jean-Yves Roy, Bloc, Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Very well.

Does the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade currently offer working conditions that are competitive with the private sector?

[Sheila Fraser]

This is another issue that we have not studied.

[Jean-Yves Roy, Bloc, Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Very well. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Sweet, you have five minutes.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and welcome back.

Before I ask this question, I want to assure you that I have full confidence in your work, but I just want to make sure I get this answer on record.

On page 13 of chapter 7--you already referred to this earlier--this model comparing the RCMP forensic services with others, would you stand behind this with confidence that this was relatively objective?

[Sheila Fraser]

This is obviously not audited information so there could be differences of interpretation, and we can't be sure of the exactitude of it. But we did receive it, either through annual reports or others. Perhaps Mr. McRoberts could expand upon how we obtained the information.

[Hugh McRoberts, Assistant Auditor General, Office of the Auditor General of Canada]

Yes, Mr. Chair, we were in direct contact with the labs, and that's how we got the information in the first place. In most cases, we were talking to them, and we visited a number of the labs.

Obviously we can't audit the information because they're foreign countries, but one of the things we did do is, towards the end of the audit, as we were compiling this table, we wrote back to each of these labs and said, “Okay, this is how we're using the information. This is the reference we're making—comparison to the RCMP. Are we using your data correctly?”

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Okay. So you have a reasonable comfort that this is an accurate picture, a comparison—

[Hugh McRoberts]

It's probably not perfect, but it's fair.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Okay. The reason I asked that is that the cost of producing the same results is so blatant with the RCMP, compared with other forensic labs.

Was there any evidence at all that the management of the RCMP have done any due diligence around benchmarking, best practices, or research, or are they just doing their own thing? Certainly there's a lot more efficiency in the Ontario Centre of Forensic Sciences, with the output they're doing, the staff level, and the cost of operation. It seems to me that they're almost in two different leagues.

[Hugh McRoberts]

Mr. Chairman, this is an area we addressed in the report. We're concerned that they are not doing that, and it's one of the things we're recommending: that they look to benchmarking and look to best practices to understand both the work flow and cost structures of their work, so that they can make management decisions that I think are necessary.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Thank you. It's close to out of control, really, with this kind of expense.

In chapter 1—and I'm just going by your opening remarks, Madam Fraser—you mentioned the credit cards. Of course, we had the case a little while ago of 33,000 unaudited or unverified expenses with the military that were handed in and were not checked, so I'm a little sensitive to this. You said the travel cards and acquisition cards were used relatively well, but there was some lack of consistency in the application of verification.

Do you feel comfortable that after your audit that was addressed adequately, so that it will not be the case in the future?

[Sheila Fraser]

As in many of our audits, the departments have agreed with recommendations and have indicated that they will be taking steps to address the questions or the issues raised. We will have to ensure, obviously, at some future time or through internal audits, that this has in fact been the case. It's in testing it that we will see whether they've actually done what they said they would.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Thank you.

Also, in your opening remarks about chapter 4, you mentioned this practice: that the staff in the department were actually moonlighting as consultants while receiving a paycheque from the Crown. That seems to me to be clearly, blatantly unethical.

Did you find any evidence that the employees who were doing this were disciplined or let go? Were any kinds of corrective measures taken?

[Sheila Fraser]

No. To our knowledge there was no disciplinary action. I would say too that the department became perhaps a little more rigorous fairly recently in communicating to employees that this was unacceptable. Previous to that, even though I think the department was aware that this was going on, it was not communicating very clearly to employees that this was not acceptable.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

It's an extraordinary breach of integrity.

In chapter 5, again going by your opening remarks, you mentioned that the Department of Justice, which has 2,500 lawyers, a group on whose size others have commented—I'm wondering whether we could actually get 2,500 different opinions, but I don't have enough time to go into that right now.

If they require a CEO for administrative oversight, isn't that what the DM's job is, in fact ?

[Sheila Fraser]

No, we believe in a department like this the deputy minister has to be a very good lawyer, needs to be very aware of legal issues, and is often called upon to give and to validate very complex cases and opinions.

If you look at the major law firms—I suspect most law firms—they will have someone charged with managing who is not necessarily a lawyer. You would expect someone to come up as a lawyer who has that competence and who maybe doesn't have the time, either, to be able to focus on management.

We would suggest that there be a clear designation, perhaps of an associate deputy minister who is charged specifically with financial and operational management. This might be a practice that could be used in other departments as well, where the deputy minister is more focused perhaps on policy or the technical side of the department, leaving the administration up to someone else.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

On this question, is there an existing model in another department in the federal government?

[Sheila Fraser]

Not to my knowledge, no.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Sweet.

Mr. Christopherson, five minutes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In paragraph 4 of your opening comments on the forensic lab services, I am quoting from your remarks:

We examined the RCMP's system for ensuring the quality of lab results. On paper, their quality management system looks good, but we found it was not always being applied and could not assure senior management about the quality of DNA analysis. We did not examine the scientific methods they used.

I am an MP from Ontario. Given current events unfolding in Ontario—and I think even the provincial government has now called a public inquiry into that matter--I want to ask you whether we should just leave this as it is. Is further investigation warranted, or are we looking for trouble where it doesn't exist? Could you give me your thoughts on that, since you went out of your way to mention that you can't give your stamp of approval—? In the context of what's happening in Ontario, should we be doing something with this, in your opinion?