Public Accounts Committee on June 13th, 2006

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Wernick. Thank you very much, Mr. Bains.

We're now going to move to Mr. Lemay. Mr. Lemay, vous aurez cinq minutes, s'il vous plaît.

But before we get to him, is that you, Mr. Nadeau? We don't have a stranger in the committee, do we?

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Yes, it's me.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Good day to you, Mr. Wernick.

We met at a meeting of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. You were recently appointed the new Deputy Minister for Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. What is your professional background? For which department did you work previously? Were you with the public service or were you in the private sector?

[Michael Wernick]

I spent 25 years in the public service working for several departments, including the Department of Finance. I worked for almost 10 years at the Privy Council Office, where I held various positions. Prior to being appointed to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, I was the Under Secretary for Planning at PCO.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Let's get down to the business at hand. Two of the observations made by the AG in her report concern me. I have two questions to ask you.

First of all, who will take the lead to resolve the problem of mould affecting houses in aboriginal communities, not in three years' time, but over the course of the next year?

Secondly, I could give you the names of aboriginal communities that fill out 160 reports every year. One person works full-time on this task and must produce an audited balance sheet four times a year, at a cost of $3,000. Who's going to deal with that situation?

Can these issues be addressed within the next year?

[Michael Wernick]

I would say that both of these issues are my responsibility.

I accept full responsibility for rallying people to the cause and for mobilizing efforts to resolve the mould problems. This is a line responsibility entrusted directly to me by the department. The same holds trues for the President of the CMHC and the Deputy Minister of Health. I've asked my ADM to assist me, as I remarked in my opening statement. Meetings have taken place and more have been scheduled. I will do everything in my power to address this problem.

As far as reports are concerned, it will take a little longer, because we have to contend with contribution agreements under which taxpayers' dollars are used to finance the attainment of a specific objective. The donor department or agency must report back to the Canadian taxpayer on how this money was used. Has progress been made in the attainment of the stated objective? The department is working to reduce the paper burden and to automate processes. Hopefully, we will have made tangible progress in a few months' time or by next year.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I have a question for you, specifically about this subject. Are automated files kept for each aboriginal community? There are over 640 such communities in Canada and 640 separate files would need to be created. Do such files exists, or are you planning to create them?

[Michael Wernick]

If I understand your question correctly, we use a combination of paper documents and automated files. I can get back to you with the specifics later. Our goal is to automate our files as quickly as possible, in order to simplify procedures and eliminate duplication and overlap. There are community reports, regional progress reports and national reports to file. We've already simplified things and done away with many of these steps and we will continue to look for solutions. There's still a fundamental principle at play, namely an obligation to account for transfers of funds. Other mechanisms must be developed. However, in principle, Parliament, which approves these funds, must be able to see if they were in fact used to achieve program and policy objectives.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Moving along, I'd like to discuss the negotiation of treaties or territorial land claim agreements. There are currently over 740 separate files in progress. At this rate, we'll still be negotiating agreements into the next millennium. What progress can we expect to make in the short term? Is that a light at the end of the tunnel, or are we about to be hit by an oncoming train? How many New Caledonias will it take before the message finally gets through?

[Michael Wernick]

As you are aware, there are several categories of claims.

Firstly, there are comprehensive land claims. We have settled all claims north of the 60th parallel, with the exception of the Deh Cho First Nations claims. There is an offer on the table and we trust that claim will be settled shortly.

South of the 60th parallel, many claims actually overlap. The process is very slow and laborious and we seem to make very little progress. Often, provinces must be brought into the negotiations because the claims involve provincial lands. A combination of factors are at play: money issues, land issues, land use for fishing, rights, and so forth. It's no simple matter. I quite agree with you that it's unwise to have nearly 1,000 specific claims outstanding. The situation has become a source of frustration for aboriginal communities and a source of friction between them and neighbouring communities. Caledonia is a case in point, as are Oka and Gustafson Lake. There's no question that we must find a better way to settle these land claims.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Wernick.

Mr. Fitzpatrick, five minutes.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Welcome to the committee, sir. I don't know if I'll be around here in five years from now, but I hope if I tune in on CPAC and so on, you're still the deputy minister of the department, because I think everyone's agreed, this is one of the problems: there is no consistency in the leadership and management of the department; there are too many revolving doors at the top.

I want to compliment you on your report. On page 3, you identified seven critical factors. I really do believe that if you have a good system, good management, and if you have continuous improvement, you get results. The seven critical factors the Auditor General pointed out, for me, underscore that we have weaknesses in our system here, we have weaknesses in our management, and we certainly aren't into continuous improvement.

Contrary to what other members of Parliament may think, I actually believe these are more important than more money, in itself. There are people who believe you can pour money into something, and somehow if you spend enough the problem will get resolved. Unless these management issues are resolved, and we get good public administration and some discipline and direction.... That's probably more important than the money side of the issue. In fact, I can see that some of these things might even save money.

Would you concur with those sentiments, sir?

[Michael Wernick]

Without straying into what is cabinet and parliamentary prerogative, I work within the laws and the appropriations that Parliament gives us.

I agree entirely with the sentiment that money alone is not going to solve the socio-economic problems.

My advice to the minister—and I'm happy to put it on the public record—would be that more resources will be needed, but more resources without the structural renovations will not succeed. It's the combination of the two, and the capacity in first nations and aboriginal communities.... I'm actually quite optimistic that can be accomplished.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

On prescription drugs, for example, if we had a good system in place, over-prescriptions and all the harm that caused to people might have been prevented in the first case. Or if we a good system in place on the housing issue, then the mould problem might have been prevented. In both of those instances, a good system would actually save people money; it wouldn't cost more money. Are we in agreement on that?

[Michael Wernick]

I think the systems of public administration are incredibly important. I'm very glad that you and the committee would take interest in them. They're not often the most sexy things, but financial controls, information management systems, and how public administration is done in 2006—and applying those tools and techniques to these difficult issues—are very important.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

I would like to make one other comment. I think this looks like a pretty good report. It doesn't sound overly bureaucratic, which is a compliment to you.

[Michael Wernick]

I think that's a compliment, coming from you.

[Brian Fitzpatrick, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

I can actually read it and understand what you're saying. There's not much doublespeak; I haven't found any.

On page 9, I like your comments about basic principles as well. I think it's long overdue that we have some focus on bringing basic principles to first nations people in this country. Good first principles don't know any cultural divide; they apply to every society in our world. And if you don't have them, you have problems.

I'm pleased to see on page 9 that you understand and appreciate that. I think good leadership from your department might help improve the situation. So I compliment you on that.

That's all I had to say this morning. I wish you well with this important job.

[Michael Wernick]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Fitzpatrick.

We're now moving to Mr. Christopherson.

Mr. Christopherson, five minutes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you very much for appearing and for offering after, I would argue, without much doubt the loudest meeting last time and our being upset at your not being here, given the history of this ministry.

But I think you probably know that upon hearing where you were, I certainly felt it was the only decision you could make, because I knew the judge had called people into chambers that morning and that it was likely or possibly going to cause some problems. So I extend my apologies to you personally and accept very much where you were and why.

My comments are going to be a little harsh; I can't help it. I've been dealing with this for a number of years now, and it always just eats at me how poorly we as a Canadian government are doing in this regard. You're new, so obviously they don't reflect on you personally, and please don't take them personally.

That, of course, is one of the problems: we keep getting new deputies and we start fresh. But I have to tell you that I just have no confidence; that sometime within the next 18 or 24 months, if you follow history, we're going to have some other highly intelligent, highly motivated, highly caring individual who's new again, and it's going to leave us starting all over. I'd like to be wrong in that regard.

You mention the mould, and I appreciate that, because we spent a lot of time on it, but can I take from this that you or your ministry are accepting the lead? One of the problems was that nobody was saying, “I'll take responsibility for making sure these things happen.” So I would ask you that.

I only have five minutes, so I'll just load my other question in here, and then let you respond in whatever way is appropriate.

The biggest concern overall, Deputy, is that we've had 37 recommendations coming out of two reports. The Auditor General, in her observations, has concluded that 22 of the 37 were implemented, although 19 of those were not completely implemented in their totality, and the balance haven't been satisfactorily addressed. The concern is that the issues that got addressed were the paper-shuffling, efficiency, administrative side of things—which, mind you, are important, but they're not as important as the people issues and the quality-of-life issues. The Auditor General's report is telling us those are the exact recommendations that are sitting all but dormant and not moving in a satisfactory fashion.

On a macro level, because we've been through this in detail with your administrators and your staff earlier, the question is about getting some assurance from you, and maybe assurances that take us beyond where we've been before, because predecessors of yours have also given us assurances.

I leave it with you. We sit here frustrated. These reports come time and time again. It's always “unsatisfactory”; it always seems to be most unsatisfactory in the area that affects the actual Canadian citizens and their quality of life. Please, help me and the rest of us feel better and more positive about this, that after you leave here today we can expect some real, positive change, sir, because we desperately need it in this area.

[Michael Wernick]

Thank you, Mr. Christopherson.

You missed my apology to the committee for any inconvenience that was caused to you. The situation was rather hot last week, and as you probably saw in the news coverage, today's a better day—

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

You were where you should be.

[Michael Wernick]

—which we're all grateful for.

On the mould issue, as I said to Monsieur Lemay, I accept responsibility to use my convening power to bring the energies together. I have my vertical accountability; so does my colleague at Health, and so does the president of CMHC. I will do what I have to do to bring people together to create the tables and the meetings and the collaboration that'll make progress on this issue.

Without going into the details, we have meetings and processes under way, and we have the Assembly of First Nations involved, so I hope to be able to come back to the committee with a better story, on the mould issue in particular.

In terms of the recommendations, I'm not quite sure which piece to comment on. I believe the effort to enunciate the seven factors of success is important. I accept that stability in leadership is important. I accept that a lot of the criticism is entirely valid.

I can't do much about the government appointment system. I will be here as long as the Prime Minister and the Clerk of the Privy Council want me here. It's a great job and a huge challenge, and I'm quite happy to stay here for the rest of my career, frankly, but it's not my call.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I understand.