Public Accounts Committee on May 1st, 2008

[Ian Shugart]

I can answer that.

The federal house in order program was originally established for a period of time with set funding, and it was one of the sunsetted programs, if I can use that common terminology. It was a decision by the government of the day to follow through on the sunset schedule for that program.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Has it been replaced by another program?

[Ian Shugart]

There is no program that has specifically been given that kind of title or program objective, but the policy objectives my colleague has spoken of, in terms of procurement and so on, continue through the normal funding of the government departments involved.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

A very specific target--31%--had to be reached by 2010. What new targets have been given to departments?

[Ian Shugart]

Well, I think, Mr. Chairman, that goes to the heart of the issue that government departments have before them, which has been outlined in the commissioner's report. As my colleague from Public Works has said, that is precisely what we need to be grappling with in terms of the measures that are appropriate, and where the targets and regulatory action should be, and so on. As a general matter, I would say that is precisely the issue we have before us in responding to the commissioner.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

At page 3 of your document, Ms. Meredith, you state that Natural Resources Canada will offer its expertise relating to greenhouse gas emissions reporting. Is there in the strategic plan of Natural Resources Canada a target aimed at reducing greenhouse gases in Canada through policies, subsidies or incentives? Is emissions reporting the only requirement for the Department or is it also required to have a reduction strategy?

[Daphne Meredith]

NRCan, or that department, is the repository of a lot of expertise in the area of energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions. They are our best experts in the federal government in that area. We rely in large part on their expertise to advise us on what can be achieved across federal departments, what's realistic and what are good ambitious goals to be achieved in different areas, and whether the technology exists to make good progress, and if so, at what rate. That's their role. It's largely as a technical adviser to us, as leaders, to help departments be ambitious in their own plans and in setting their own targets.

My colleague, Mr. Shugart, mentioned that establishing those targets is important. I think he referred to the 31% target that was set out. Actually, in our guidance in 2006, we didn't move away from that target for GHG emission reductions in federal buildings. In fact, it was the target we endorsed at that time to build on the progress, as you mentioned, that we achieved through to 2004, reaching a 24% reduction since 1990.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

At page 4 of your document, Mr. Thompson, you state that OGGO was set up in 2005. From what I understand, its annual budget is now 10 million dollars and its role is to make recommendations without however imposing any type of constraints.

Do you believe that this 10 million dollars is money well spent, considering that very often those recommendations are ignored by departments?

[Ron Thompson]

Mr. Chairman, to Mr. Lussier's question, whether it should be $10 million or some other amount, I don't know, but I can assure you that I'm glad there is an organization created within PWGSC like this—these are my words, not the department's words, I guess, but a centre of excellence to begin developing the thought as to what good green government targets and policies might be. Without having an organization like OGGO in place, one would have to set about trying to figure out how to do that.

So the organization is in place; it is funded. The next step is for that organization—working with others in the government, of course—to develop clear and aggressive targets, working with other departments in a way of ensuring that departments understand that they are expected to meet those targets.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Merci beaucoup, monsieur Lussier.

Mr. Sweet, you have seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to read from the text of this report, at page 6, paragraph 10.9, where Mr. Thompson writes:

The focus of this follow-up audit was to assess the progress selected departments have made in responding to the underlying issues derived from certain recommendations, observations, and commitments made in prior years with respect to certain aspects of greening government operations. The selected issues were derived primarily from our 2005 audit of green procurement while taking into account related points we have raised over the past 10 years.

I think that's what the real concern is here now in the committee, that there have been so many years go by, so many missed opportunities, and now we arrive at a situation. I know that I, for one, am going to look for real signs that change is going to happen now, because obviously there have been numerous times in the past where people have had good intentions but they've gone really nowhere.

I just want to refer to one other thing before I ask you a question. On page 9, in paragraph 10.22, the greening officials, the OGGO officials, stated at the Standing Committee on Government Operations:

As a result, we noted that of 28 mandatory departmental sustainable development strategies tabled for 2007, seven had included all the government-wide greening....

They had made it very clear that they had no capability of forcing any department to actually fulfill its obligations.

First of all, so we can understand how we arrived here, why was the guidance on greening provided by PWGSC so non-specific, and what's going to change from today's date, based on the fact that you've agreed with the recommendation, so that we have some confidence that there's going to be significant development in the path forward?

[Daphne Meredith]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.

We have the guidance that we issued in 2006, prior to the departments and agencies developing their sustainable development strategies. It was somewhat specific in the case of their treatment of buildings and treatment of fleets.

In regard to buildings, I'd just mention the fact that we were asking them to reduce their GHG emissions from buildings by 31% relative to 1990 levels. In the case of fleets, we were asking for, I believe, a 15% reduction in GHG emissions.

Excuse me, I'm going to ask Ms. Burack for clarification on the actual target there.

[Ellen Burack, Director General, Office of Greening Government Operations, Department of Public Works and Government Services and the Canada Lands Company Limited]

It was a 15% improvement in energy efficiency of fleets.

[Daphne Meredith]

Those were two quite definite targets.

We did not have definite targets in the case of greening procurement. It was more aspirational towards departments to green their purchases of goods and services, working on it with PWGSC as we were working with suppliers to determine what could be available in the market and what was realistic for departments to buy. We were not specific in that regard.

That did not mean departments were not establishing specific targets of their own. One can imagine, for example, our situation as leaders in this area. Do we, through our guidance, start specifying for individual departments what they should be doing and what levels they should be setting? We feel it's a careful balance in exercising the leadership role that we have to achieve without interfering with their accountabilities to achieve their programs.

While greening is something we're aspiring to do, it's a continuous improvement endeavour. It's still exploratory, we're still pioneering in the area, and I think we'd be cautious about being too hard and fast in dictating targets to departments. We'd rather work with them. We'd rather share what's been done in other jurisdictions or elsewhere in government and work with them so that they can determine what's appropriate for them, as opposed to having us dictate it.

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

Benchmarking with other jurisdictions was one of the questions I was going to ask, but I don't want to ask it right now.

My concern is that you did mention two specific targets. I'm not going to read it, because I've already read enough into the record, but on page 13, number 10.37, one of the things in the audit is that this loose relationship with the departments has meant that people have used different baselines. They have different targets, their measurements are different, and there's no congruity, so there's no way for Parliament to have an accurate oversight and have some level of scrutiny about this.

Who's going to be the ultimate authority to make sure the departments act, and are we going to have some increased transparency in the sense that departments will clearly identify their targets and their measurements and their progress in their regular DPRs?

[Daphne Meredith]

I couldn't agree with the member more. We need to provide that transparency to Parliament.

We need to, first of all, ensure that there is progress and that it is reported in a meaningful and understandable way. The challenge is considerable in this area. There are problems of measurement, as the member pointed out. There's a difference in baseline data that we have to deal with across 28 departments and agencies. There are differences in location. How do you compare, for example, energy use in Quebec, where it's likely to come predominantly from hydro, versus energy use in Ontario, where it comes from nuclear or coal-based facilities?

It's quite difficult to achieve. We realize we should try to do better; in the meantime, without perhaps having a totally uniform base, we're trying to find ways of giving parliamentarians meaningful information on progress that's being made.

In our own case, for example, in PWGSC, it can be measured in part by our progress on super-energy-efficient buildings that we're developing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Sweet.

Thank you, Ms. Meredith.

I'm just going to remind members that we'd like to see the questions and answers brief, to the point, relevant, and succinct. Then we can move along a little more quickly.

Mr. Comartin is next. You have seven minutes.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, officials, for being here.

Mr. Thompson, could I start with you? As you set out in chapter 10, this analysis has been going on for 10 years, and obviously results are less than satisfactory. Understanding how the Auditor General's office works, are you planning a further audit review in the next year or two to go over the same material and see if in fact we are making any significant progress?

[Ron Thompson]

Mr. Chairman, through you to Mr. Comartin, we have done a status report, as you know. We do that from time to time.

In terms of looking at progress on this file, I don't have any particular audits on the books right now that would address that--it's a little early to do that, I suspect--but we would be monitoring and watching very closely activities that are under way in the coming year as the government puts the guidance together for the next round of sustainable development strategies. If we find the guidance perhaps not quite what we think it should be, we will probably have a comment at that time, probably through comments on the sustainable development strategy process that we report on every year.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Ms. Burack, when did you become the director?

[Ellen Burack]

I became the director general of the Office of Greening Government Operations in August 2007.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

How many staff do you have in your directorate?

[Ellen Burack]

When I began we had fewer than 10 staff, and now we have just over 20 staff.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

What is your status within the public service? Are you an assistant or associate department head? What level are you at?

[Ellen Burack]

I am a director general.