Evidence of meeting #31 for Public Accounts in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fees.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Sheila Fraser  Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
Clerk of the Committee  Mr. Justin Vaive

11:05 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy

I'd like to call the meeting to order.

I want to extend to everyone here a very warm welcome.

This meeting, colleagues, is called pursuant to Standing Order 108. It is to receive the May 2008 report of the Auditor General of Canada. The committee is very pleased to have with us today the Auditor General herself, Sheila Fraser. She is accompanied by Mark Watters, assistant auditor, Doug Timmins, assistant auditor, and Ronnie Campbell. These people have been with us many times before.

Ms. Fraser, I want to welcome you to the committee. I understand you have some opening remarks, and I now turn the floor over to you.

11:05 a.m.

Sheila Fraser Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We are pleased to be here today to present our May 2008 report, which was tabled in the House of Commons on May 6.

As you mentioned, I am accompanied by Assistant Auditors General Ronnie Campbell, Doug Timmins, and Mark Watters.

The report addresses a variety of issues that affect Canadians. We have also presented an overview of our special examination practice for crown corporations and for the first time the key findings of recent special examinations.

In a special examination, any major weakness in a corporation's key systems and practices that could prevent it from safeguarding and controlling its assets or managing efficiently, economically or effectively is reported as a significant deficiency.

Since we last reported on Crown corporations in 2000, we have seen a marked decline in the number of corporations with significant deficiencies.

We are pleased at the improved results we are seeing in crown corporations, and we hope that presenting annual summaries of our key findings will be useful to parliamentarians.

Let me turn now to results of our performance audits, starting with the government's management of fees charged to the public and industry.

In 2006-07, federal departments and agencies reported collecting about $1.9 billion in fees for anything from a passport to a license for manufacturing pharmaceuticals.

The fee charged for a good, a service or the use of the facility must take cost into account. We found that Parks Canada is a good example of fee management. Its entry fees are based on the full costs of the related programs.

On the other hand, we found that some federal organizations do not adequately consider cost and, in fact, some do not know the cost.

As well, the total amount collected from a fee for a service should not exceed the cost of providing that service. In Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, however, we found that for a number of years, revenues from the consular services fee, which is part of the charge for an adult passport, exceeded the costs of the activities set out in the Treasury Board approval.

One of our audits looked at the support provided by National Defence for the Canadian Forces' deployment to Afghanistan. We found that National Defence has been able to deliver its equipment and supplies to troops in Afghanistan who need them; however, there have been some delays in moving supplies to Afghanistan.

We also found that some key equipment has been difficult to maintain because of a shortage of spare parts. Also, the supply system does not provide enough information to track the arrival and whereabouts of ordered items. This has resulted in losing track of some items needed for operations.

So far, the military has been able to adapt and adjust so that operations have not been significantly affected but, unless the problems we found can be resolved, the Canadian Forces could have increasing difficulty supporting the mission.

Another chapter of the report looks at Transport Canada, which is in the process of changing its approach to the oversight of air transportation safety, a requirement of the International Civil Aviation Organization. This means that Transport Canada's focus will shift from traditional oversight, such as conducting inspections and audits, to assessing the safety systems that aviation companies themselves have in place.

Although Transport Canada deserves credit for being the first civil aviation authority in the world to introduce regulations for this new approach, we found weaknesses in several areas.

We found that in planning the transition, the department did not formally assess the risks involved in the change or forecast the cost of managing it. Nor has it measured the impact of shifting resources from traditional oversight activities to the new approach.

The first part of the transition affected 74 airlines and aircraft maintenance companies. The rest of this transition process would be more complex to manage with over 2,000 smaller companies affected.

We hope our recommendations will help Transport Canada to complete this change successfully.

In this report, we also look at the first nations child and family services program of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. Government policy requires that services to first nations children on reserve meet provincial standards, be reasonably comparable with services for children off reserve, and be culturally appropriate.

Funding for the services needs to match the requirements of the policy. We found that the department does not take sufficient account of these requirements in establishing levels of funding for first nations agencies to operate child welfare services on reserves.

The Department's funding formula dates back to 1988. It has not changed significantly to reflect variations in provincial legislation and the way child welfare services have evolved. In addition, the formula assumes that all First Nations agencies have the same percentage of children in care and that the children all have similar needs.

In practice, the needs of children in care who are served by First Nations agencies vary widely. The outdated funding formula means that some children and families are not getting the services they need.

We turn now to the Public Health Agency of Canada, created in 2004, and now responsible for leading federal efforts in the surveillance of infectious diseases. Well-informed and rapid public health actions based on effective surveillance can prevent and contain outbreaks, reduce the economic burden of infectious diseases, and ultimately save lives.

We found that while the Agency has surveillance systems in place, weaknesses in some aspects of surveillance have remained since we last reported them, in 2002. For example, except for Ontario, the Agency has no formal protocols or data-sharing agreements with the provinces and territories.

Formal agreements would help ensure that the information that the agency receives is timely, complete and accurate so that it can better respond to a disease outbreak.

One of our audits examined the maintenance of official residences. These residences are more than housing provided to the country's senior government leaders. They are part of Canada's heritage and need to be preserved.

We found that the National Capital Commission has improved the condition of most official residences in recent years, although further work is needed at Rideau Hall. However, the Prime Minister's residence at 24 Sussex Drive has had no major renovations for 50 years. The National Capital Commission estimates that completing the needed work would require full access to the residence for 12 to 15 months. It has a schedule for the planned repairs, and delays are likely to result in further deterioration and higher costs.

Finally, let me turn to our chapter on the Canada Border Services Agency. Since its creation in 2003, the Agency has been responsible for detaining and removing individuals who enter Canada illegally or who pose a threat to Canadians.

We found that the Agency has made progress in certain areas but it needs better processes for detentions and removals to ensure that individuals are treated consistently.

The agency does not monitor its detention and removal decisions across the country to ensure that they are consistent. We also found that it does not collect and analyze enough data at a national level to properly manage detentions and removals. The agency has improved its tracking of individuals. It has established a database of 63,000 people with removal orders, and it knows the whereabouts of 22,000 people who have been ordered to leave Canada. Although a growing number of people might still be in Canada illegally, the good news is that the agency is focusing its available resources on the higher-risk individuals.

That concludes my statement, Mr. Chair. We would be happy to answer your questions.

We will now be happy to answer your questions.

Thank you.

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy

Thank you very much, Ms. Fraser.

We're going to have one round of seven minutes.

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj, you have seven minutes, please.

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

Thank you, Chair, and welcome back, Madame Fraser.

I'd like to begin with chapter 4.

It appears to be a heart-wrenching situation, as you have noted. Perhaps the most vulnerable in Canadian society are children, especially children on reserve. You've noted that this particular analysis looks at the 8,300 children in care. Does that 8,300 number encompass just those who are in the care of child welfare agencies run by first nations, or does it encompass all the children?

11:10 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Sheila Fraser

Mr. Chair, it would be all the children on reserve who are receiving child welfare services.

11:10 a.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

Okay.

That's the total number of children. It's also noted that the funding to provide the services for these children in care is $450 million. Is that $450 million for all children in care, or is it strictly what goes through Indian and Northern Affairs to the first nations agencies that are providing the care?

11:10 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Sheila Fraser

Mr. Chair, about $270 million of that $450 million goes to directly support children in care. The other $180 million is for the operations, including prevention, of the child welfare services for first nations.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

Perhaps I wasn't properly understood. Is that $450 million for all those 8,300 children? While a sizable portion--for instance, in B.C., you noted, it's 65%--are in the care of first nations child welfare agencies as opposed to provincial agencies, a significant portion are being cared for by provincial agencies. Is the $450 million for all, or is it strictly earmarked for the first nations agencies?

11:15 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Sheila Fraser

No. That would be the total expenditure for all those children, including expenditures that could be made by provincial agencies.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

When we do the numbers on this for last year, it turns out to be about $54,000 per child. That's a tremendous amount of resources being dedicated per child in care. Yet we look at the circumstances these children often find themselves in and it's troubling in the extreme. And we don't have any method to analyze the results.

Your report indicated that there is no follow-up on children once they leave care--how they succeed or don't succeed in society--or even, in fact, on how agencies compare to other agencies within provinces, the first nations agencies, and how they are performing in their provision of services. There is no data.

11:15 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Sheila Fraser

There are two elements in response.

First, for the 8,300 children in care, the comparable figure would be $270 million for their care. The $180 million is for operations, including, for example, operations of first nations agencies that can be providing other services to other families, without the children necessarily being in care. For example, it may be for preventive work with families and children, but the children still remain with their families.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

That drops the number to a minimum of about $35,000 to $36,000-plus, because a portion of that other amount would also go to this type of care.

What would be the comparable number if you compared it to other agencies that provide child welfare services to children in the general public?

11:15 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Sheila Fraser

I'm afraid we don't have that information. You might want to ask the department if there was a hearing on that.

In response to your previous question, you are correct that there isn't any good outcome information. I should note that this is not particular to INAC and first nations children. This appears to be a problem more generally across the country with these kinds of services. There have been reports. There was a report, actually, quite recently, in British Columbia, that pointed to the lack of good outcome information for these types of services.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

I'll continue with this chapter and then maybe move to another, if there is still some time remaining.

You had in particular noted in paragraph 4.22 cases that are problematic in the extreme. In one first nation, 14% of their children were in care. Could you provide us with the name of that particular first nation? What are the underlying circumstances? What are the underlying socio-economic circumstances in that particular first nation that have led to this horrific number? The number for all first nations is 5%. That is eight times the rate in the Canadian public. We're talking about a rate that is 22 or 23 times the general rate in the population. What is the particular situation on this reserve?

11:15 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Sheila Fraser

Mr. Chair, I would prefer that the department answer that question. They would have that kind of detailed information, which we don't have.

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

Chair, could we make sure we get some of that information? Perhaps we could discuss that a little later.

Moving on to chapter 7, if we take a look at table 7.5 within that chapter, we notice that between 2005-06 and 2006-07 there was a significant jump in the number of removals in Canada of 11.2%. At the same time, there was a 30% increase in detainees, so we're vastly increasing the number of people who appear to be rounded up and put in detention, but the numbers don't match. There is an 11% increase in removals but a 30% increase in detention.

I've come across particular cases. One that I feel free to mention is the Tabaj family, where a mother was removed from a hospital and taken to--

May 8th, 2008 / 11:20 a.m.

Conservative

John Williams Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB

On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, I'm not exactly sure where Mr. Wrzesnewskyj is going, but to bring some tragic situation of any particular family into the public domain at this point in time I'm not sure is appropriate.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy

Do you have permission, Mr. Wrzesnewskyj?

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

Yes, I do, and in fact this particular case has been widely reported in the media in Toronto. It is once again a horrific case and a clear example--

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy

I'll allow you to go ahead, but your time is up, so this has to be a brief question and a brief answer.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON

Okay, just to finish, because I was interrupted by Mr. Williams, in this particular case a mother was removed from the hospital. There was no space in the regular detention facility. She was taken to Milton, to a criminal facility, put into a cell with someone charged with assault--a woman who had tried to kill someone with a knife--and was detained there for weeks.

How many of these sorts of cases have you come across?

We have this huge surge in the number of people being detained. We don't have the detention facilities. What percentage of that 30% increase is being put into criminal facilities, such as the one I just mentioned?

11:20 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Sheila Fraser

Mr. Chair, in exhibit 7.2 we indicate the number of detainees who are held in municipal or provincial facilities, and that number has gone up just slightly in 2006-07. So there were 3,563 people who had been detained for some period of time in a municipal or provincial facility.

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy

Thank you, Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.

Thank you, Ms. Fraser.

Monsieur Laforest, vous disposez de sept minutes.

11:20 a.m.

Bloc

Jean-Yves Laforest Bloc Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In passing, Ms. Fraser, I want to congratulate you for strongly protecting your independence. You have had to postpone advertising for a hiring process because you wanted clearly to express your independence from the government. I thank you for having held to your position and I congratulate you.

My question relates to Chapter 2. At page 2, you refer to some of the concerns from commanding officers about weaknesses in the supply chain but you add that you did not find any reports of such problems in the supply chain. I find it troubling that there would be no such reports because, later in the document, you state that the military has lost track of $7 million worth of equipment, which is significant. I find it disquieting that there would be no reports on those concerns that were expressed to you.

What were the concerns of commanding officers?

11:20 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Sheila Fraser

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Obviously, commanding officers talked about some delays in getting spare parts as well as their inability to get some spare parts. They also told us that, in some cases, they have had to cannibalize other equipment in order to be able to carry out repairs and that some pieces of equipment were very old and difficult to operate. However, they did not mention any serious consequences on operations and we did not find any such mentions in the reports.

I should also mention that the team went to Kandahar and interviewed people there who told them that they were managing to muddle through, for example by manufacturing spare parts or by using parts that were not exactly those they would wish to use. As we mentioned in our report, that is not viable in the long run.

About the $7 million worth of equipment that they could not track, we believe that the problem is due to the fact that they are using a manual system over there. Parts and equipment are kept in containers, not in warehouses, for example. While carrying out their stock-taking, they could not find that $7 million worth of equipment but, on the other hand, they found $6.6 million worth of items that were not in inventory.