Public Accounts Committee on May 2nd, 2007

[Sheila Fraser]

We have developed I guess more rigorous follow-up of audits. As well, I think departments and agencies are now much better in developing action plans with clear timelines. The RCMP is working on an action plan to address our recommendations. They've agreed with all the recommendations.

We will go back and re-audit this issue—obviously depending upon their timelines—but I think it would also be advisable for the RCMP's own internal audit function to be following up on a more rigorous and perhaps timely basis than we can. Obviously, we can't go back in and re-audit every department every year; their own internal audit function should be doing that.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

But is it not part of your mandate, or does it need to become part of your mandate, to be able to do the follow-up on the various departments? It seems like they all say, “Well, we agree with 98% of what you told us and we will put in an action plan”. It sounds good, it satisfies those of us sitting at this table, and it gets them away from the table and they're off. So they hope not to have to come back here for another seven or eight years. In the meantime, do you have the mandate currently to be able to follow up on all of the—? You may not have the manpower, but do you have the mandate?

[Sheila Fraser]

We can, yes, and we do I guess a very kind of preliminary review every year in which we ask the departments to provide us with information on their progress. The issue there is that we don't actually go out and audit all of those. We kind of look at the possibility of what they're telling us.

We do not currently have the capacity to go and audit continually what is going on with these actions and if they're making progress. I truly believe that that is a responsibility that should be given as well to the internal audit functions within departments. And now with the introduction of audit committees and external members on audit committees, they too will be tracking this and ensuring that progress is being made.

We will tend to go back, in line with the action plan the departments have made, to see if they've actually lived up to the commitments they've made.

It's often very difficult for us to go in, say, after a year. They may have only started things. Things might look all right, but we really have to wait to see if it has come full cycle on them.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

But in relation to the RCMP, it was a 1990 audit and a 2000 audit that pointed out exactly the same things you're pointing out again in this one. Do they think they can simply tell you that things are under control and they're following through and that you'll not go back at some point?

[Sheila Fraser]

In the RCMP, after the 2000 audit, they did do a reorganization of the labs. They did undertake a number of steps that they thought would resolve many of the issues. Obviously, that was not the case. Quite frankly, they weren't managing it. They didn't have the management information.

I think we will be going back on this one, but I think in order for the management itself to ensure that things are proceedings as they should, senior management should have the RCMP internal audit look at this as well.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

If I'm not mistaken, the commissioner in 2004 defended the forensic labs and said they were the best in the world and so on and so forth.

[Sheila Fraser]

Yes, we have a table at the end of the report, on page 31, where we indicate the government response to a report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts—that was from the 2000 audit—as well as other statements made to the justice committee in 2004-05, a comparison with our findings.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

On the issue of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, you make mention about the need for there to be strategic planning and so on, and also the issue of security on locally engaged staff.

[Sheila Fraser]

The problem there was that when we looked at the files in the missions abroad, all of the documentation was not in place. This does not necessarily mean that those people did not receive security clearances. It's that there was no evidence on the file that they had had them.

As we were trying to point out, with the rotation of senior managers, Canadians, through these missions, they need to have really good information on hand to know who these locally engaged employees are, have they done all the training they should, do they have the security clearances they need, etc. So the documentation in the files was incomplete.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

What was the department's response as far as what they're going to do on the security files? Simply because that's an extremely important thing, I would have expected that everyone who was locally engaged, clearly, in their files of the security certificates and so on—What was their response?

[Sheila Fraser]

Again, generally, I believe their response was that they agreed that that was incorrect, that they should have all that documentation. When the teams, of course, left the specific missions, that would have been brought up with the head of mission, with an expectation that that would be corrected.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Who follows up on that?

[Sheila Fraser]

Well, I guess we will eventually. But again, it would be the internal audit unit. And departmental managers have a responsibility to make sure these issues are being dealt with.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

I hope they do it and we don't have to have you come back in seven years and say they still haven't done it.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Ms. Sgro.

Mr. Fitzpatrick, for seven minutes.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

I want to welcome you back, Mrs. Fraser. We've missed you and your staff. It's great to have you back here and good to have your excellent reports.

Government is about making policy choices. I know you're not in the policy area. The previous administration, in terms of law enforcement, decided to put hundreds of millions of dollars into a long gun registry, which has been a matter of much debate in our society, about the utility and the effectiveness of this gun registry, and so on.

The opposition party, one in particular, argued that money could be better spent by putting it into DNA analysis, better screening of people who do apply for firearms, and so on, real crime prevention and things that can clearly be demonstrated to be a very effective tool for making a safer society.

Would it be a fair observation that, in the past, one of the problems with the DNA labs is that they have been seriously underfunded and they are short of resources?

[Sheila Fraser]

We cannot draw that conclusion from this audit. We note in the audit that the labs did receive more funding, and in fact received proportionately more funding than the increase in the number of cases they were handling.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Did they get $1 billion?

[Sheila Fraser]

I think you're into policy issues now, Mr. Fitzpatrick.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Now I'm going to move to another area of much concern, and I want to thank the Auditor General again. It's the misappropriation of funds that we saw with the firearms registry, where we have the biggest law firm in the country, as the Auditor General said, 2,500 lawyers—and I know law firms in the private sector, and I'd bet my paycheque on it that if you had 10 people submit the issue to those law firms and seek their opinion on that, you would get opinions that were consistent and the same.

I am very disturbed. We have 2,500 lawyers in this justice department. We have a clear-cut answer that this is a misappropriation of funds. It's contrary to our Constitution. The people don't like the question, so they go running off and find another lawyer who says it's okay.

This is troubling to me, because I think if you get bad advice and poor legal advice, especially in government, it can lead to some very bad decisions and some very bad consequences. Am I off base to be somewhat concerned about the quality of the advice we're getting from this great big law firm?

[Sheila Fraser]

With all due respect, Mr. Chair, I think we're still into politics.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

I think you're right, Mrs. Fraser.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Okay.

[A voice]

[Inaudible--Editor]

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Don't get so worked up over there, guys. Come on, settle down a bit. Don't be so partisan.