Public Accounts Committee on May 2nd, 2007

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Could the closeness between Canada's Prime Minister and Mr. Bush help our relations? What do you think?

[Sheila Fraser]

I think that this is another political question, is it not?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Borys, I give you the floor.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Fraser, and your staff, for once again providing us with a little bit of work.

In regard to chapter 3, I've had the good fortune of travelling in some 50-odd countries, and I've had a lot of interactions over the past few decades—not while I've been in governmentvwith many of our embassies and embassy staff. Just as Mr. Christopherson has said, they're very courteous; they're friendly, very helpful. They get top marks for that. But one of the things that I noticed—

I've also had interactions with other embassies. For instance, at French embassies, usually their top staff have linguistic abilities that help them do their work on the ground. France, obviously, is a bigger country, with perhaps greater resources, but even smaller countries, their ambassadors often—very rarely do I find that the top staff don't have proficiency in the local language.

I saw in your report that ours may get 100% marks for friendliness and helpfulness, but only 16% of the people occupying positions that require a language proficiency have that language proficiency. That's a seriously failing grade.

Then I see the response from the department that they're going to look into this and study it and provide recommendations a year and a half from now. Do you find that response adequate?

We know what the number is, only 16%. I would assume they should be getting to work on this immediately. Do you find that particular response of waiting another year and a half adequate?

[Sheila Fraser]

Quite frankly, Mr. Chair, we would also like to see them respond to some of these issues much more quickly. The reality is that they have to get much better information in place. They probably have to do formal testing. We note in the report as well that a third of the people hadn't undergone language testing, so there may be more who do meet the language requirements.

So they need to get a much better handle on what the situation actually is. They have a number of priorities that they have to deal with in this. We leave it up to the department to establish its own priorities. I guess what we would hope is that if they do say the winter of 2008, they are being realistic in that and it will be done by 2008.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.

Mr. Poilievre, five minutes.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

On page 31 of chapter 7 you quote the Solicitor General of Canada in its “Government Response to the 17th Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts: RCMP—Services for Canada’s Law Enforcement Community, June 2001”—that's this committee, of course—as saying the following: “It is anticipated that new performance and service standards will have been validated and client consultation will have been completed by fiscal year 2002”, yet you found no evidence that performance and service standards had been validated.

Was this a case where a government ministry was making a commitment that it just didn't follow through on?

[Sheila Fraser]

That would appear to be the case, yes.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

It says further, in that same statement that came from the Solicitor General, that “it is the intention of the RCMP to publish these standards”. You indicate that new standards have not been published.

Would your description of the last contradiction apply to this one as well?

[Sheila Fraser]

Again, it's a commitment that was not met.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Okay.

I see on page 32 you quote a statement. Under “Government and RCMP Statements”, and this is exhibit 7.11, “Summary of findings on statements to Parliament”, there's a quotation in the bottom box on the left that says, “We have a negotiated agreement....”

Who are you quoting there?

[Sheila Fraser]

It would have been the commissioner at the time.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

The commissioner of...?

[Sheila Fraser]

The RCMP.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

The commissioner at the time says, “We have a negotiated agreement with the police forces on how much time they need—” You found that 82% of clients interviewed said there was no negotiation of the original due date. Was the commissioner stating a falsehood, or—? How do you explain that obvious factual contradiction?

[Sheila Fraser]

All we can say is that the statement was incorrect, based on the audit findings that we have. As to why that statement was made, you would really have to ask the RCMP or the person who made the statement.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

Okay. I'll read from that quote again. It goes on to say:

We have a negotiated agreement with the police forces on how much time they need: when does their case have to go to court? We negotiate to their satisfaction, each one.

20% of clients, according to your findings, however, said the original due date did not meet their needs, so I am baffled as to how these claims can be put in quotation marks, first of all by the Solicitor General and later in your report by the Commissioner of the RCMP, when your factual findings contradict them outright.

This is pretty clear. It says, “We negotiate to their satisfaction, each one.” And you say that 20% of the clients said the original due date did not meet their needs.

You've obviously discovered a problem. We also appear to have discovered some efforts to hide that problem through the pronouncements of past solicitors general and commissioners of the RCMP.

What do you think is the cause of the problem? Why is there a backlog?

[Sheila Fraser]

Unfortunately, we really don't know. The backlog in the DNA analysis is increasing, even though, as we mention in the report, there was additional funding given in a greater percentage than the actual increase in cases.

One of the explanations given to us was the case in B.C., the Pickton case, which obviously involved a lot of DNA analysis. But they received additional funding for that. The problem is that they don't have enough information to be able to substantiate the effect that particular case may have had on their backlog.

What we are recommending to them is that they really need to have a process study done to understand what is happening in their process: are there delays at certain points along the way, and what does it take to resolve this backlog, which has been an issue for many years now?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Nepean—Carleton, ON]

I'll just say in conclusion, because my time is up, that I think it is astonishing that a government would have been spending a billion dollars registering duck hunters and farmers when it was clearly failing to do this essential work to protect the public safety of Canadians, the basic nuts and bolts. The priority should have been on this, on getting these examinations correct for our police services, and not on wasting a billion dollars on a gun registry that doesn't work and doesn't protect lives.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Poilievre.

Monsieur Roy, you have five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think that Ms. Fraser replied that this was a political issue. Ms. Fraser, if you do not want to answer this question, neither do I.

Good afternoon. I would like to ask you a few questions about the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. You spoke of percentages, but that does not tell me much. There are 170 missions in 111 countries. How may people will have to be replaced by 2010? You said that this was conditional, inasmuch as these people would not have to retire immediately. However, if I understand correctly, they would be entitled to retire.

[Sheila Fraser]

The department has, all together, about 10,000 employees, and 5,000 of them are hired locally. Thus, 5,000 Canadian employees are working in Canada and abroad, and 26% of them will be entitled to retire by 2010.

Let me ask my colleague whether we have any figures regarding the management category.

[Richard Flageole, Assistant Auditor General, Office of the Auditor General of Canada]

Mr. Chairman, the figures tell us that there are about 1,250 persons altogether. We do not have the exact figures for the EX group. However, I think that we could eventually get them.

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

I have a specific question about embassies and foreign missions. By foreign staff, you usually mean less qualified staff, such as supporting staff. I am specifically referring to ambassadors, who are Canadian citizens mandated to represent Canada.

I would like to know how many of these people will have to be replaced. It is not clear. For instance, if we held a competition tomorrow morning to replace all these persons, would we be able to fill the positions, given the current situation of the labour market?

[Sheila Fraser]

This is an excellent question. Unfortunately, we do not have all the data, but the department should certainly provide it to the committee.

As I said earlier, according to the traditional recruiting process of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, employees rise in the ranks within the department. Obviously, this kind of recruiting process cannot provide all the candidates that we need for the coming years.

The department has begun trying to change the recruiting process by hiring people in higher positions. They did this for the first time about a year and a half ago. The decision was challenged by employees and unions. We think that the problem has been solved, but it must be reviewed. They do not know what skills they will need or how and where they can find such persons. This is why we state that they absolutely must have a strategic plan for human resources.