Evidence of meeting #26 for Public Accounts in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was passports.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Yes.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you very much, Ms. Faille.
That concludes both rounds, members.
What I'm going to do now is to invite the Auditor General, Mr. Edwards, and Madam Desloges to make any closing remarks they want to make.
Ms. Fraser.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
I would like to thank the committee for their interest in this report, especially since it was a favourable report. We were very pleased to see the progress that Passport Canada has made in addressing what was a very difficult situation. Obviously, they did a really good job in learning from that and in implementing the corrective action that was necessary.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs, Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade
Well, I guess it is very pleasant to be part of such a positive review by the Auditor General, for which I take no personal credit, because I think it really was the people in the passport office who did the work.
I would only say in response to some of the questions we've had that we continue to believe that the role of this committee is important in our work. We may have had difficult times in 2007, but we're quite prepared to come here every year and talk about what we do, because we're trying to do it well and we need to have the experience of this committee and the questions of this committee to help us do the job better.
Finally, as to the earlier questions about services to members of Parliament, I just want to assure you that we will continue to be providing that service. I'm sorry if some folks don't have the number. We will make it available on the website, if it's not there already. Last year, I think almost 2% of the passports we issued were in fact routed through MPs' offices. So it's a significant service that we're prepared to continue.
Chief Executive Officer, Passport Canada
I want to thank the committee members for listening to us and for offering suggestions. To complete what Mr. Edwards mentioned, let me add that we also provide briefing sessions to the personnel of MPs and senators to inform them about the functioning of passport services and other services that are offered. These briefing sessions are normally extended twice each year.
It's a real pleasure. We organize sessions for members of Parliament and their staff on passport services at least twice a year. It's really a pleasure to organize other sessions, if they are needed in order to look at better serving you.
Merci.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you very much.
Just to make a few closing comments, I first want to congratulate Passport Canada for what I consider to be sound management. I'm certainly pleased that we did this chapter. The way the public accounts committee works is that we do get a report from the Auditor General, but for time reasons, the committee usually doesn't do a hearing on every chapter that the AG's office does. We usually pick out the worst of the worst. Normally in the hearings this committee has, there are problems.
But I'm glad we did do this chapter, because it does reflect the reality, as the auditor would agree, that the vast majority of transactions done here in Ottawa are done correctly and Canada is well served by a non-partisan, professional, competent civil service, which we've seen today. I just want to indicate that this reflects the reality. So again, it's a little different from what this committee usually deals with, and we'll be back to the normal run later this week and next week.
Anyway, the committee has other business to do, so in closing, I just want to thank the witnesses and the members.
I'll ask the members to stay on because we have the steering committee minutes to deal with.
Thank you very much.
The item of business, colleagues, is the adoption of the steering committee minutes...that were held earlier today. They've made some recommendations.
With the steering committee minutes is the draft schedule. I can go over it with you in summary form.
The meeting on Thursday at 3:30 is on the Governor in Council appointment process. The witnesses have been confirmed, and that's set.
What the steering committee is recommending is that on June 16 we hear from the Comptroller General of Canada regarding the motion on vote 35 for one hour, and then go to draft reports for the final hour.
Then, on the 18th, we hear for the first hour from a designated individual from Public Works and Government Services Canada on the audio cassettes. This relates to Madam Faille's motion. As you recall, there is an issue whether the Department of Public Works and Government Services...still maintain that the Privacy Act applies to this motion. This committee and our legal counsel are of the opinion that it does not. We want to resolve that issue. I think it's important to resolve it before we adjourn for the summer break.
What the steering committee has recommended is that from 4:30 to 5:30 we invite senior officials from Public Works and Government Services to deal with the procurement process for the integrated relocation program. That's what we refer to as the Royal LePage issue, which we studied and wrote about a couple of years ago.
On the 23rd, two weeks from today, we go to Natural Resources Canada. This comes out of the spring report of the Auditor General of Canada. Then we receive briefly a delegation from Russia at the same meeting.
That is the draft agenda for the rest of the month. Before we deal with it, I want to deal with a technical issue.
I want to insert in the minutes--I hope no one has any problem with this—that we've been requested by Norm Sterling, the chair of the Ontario public accounts committee, to get together, just the chairs, the analysts, and the clerks, to talk about follow-up. They want to talk about what we do. To pay for this lunch, I need authorization from this committee.
I would insert: That the Chair, Clerk and analysts of the Committee be authorized to meet over lunch with the Chair, Clerk and researcher of the Public Accounts Committee of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, to discuss the Committee's follow-up processes.
That would be added to the steering committee minutes.
Do we agree to insert that amendment?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
It is so agreed.
Is there any discussion on the report from the steering committee?
Mr. Saxton.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
With regard to inviting the Deputy Minister of Public Works and Government Services to come before us, I want to point out a couple of things.
First of all, this is an ongoing process. It hasn't been shut. Normally this committee responds after the fact, after the process has already been completed. We take what is like a forensic look at things. This is still ongoing; it hasn't come to completion yet. For us to become involved in something that is still ongoing—this Royal LePage matter—I think is unprecedented, and it's something that I don't recommend.
Secondly, with respect to Public Works, also Royal LePage, a letter was sent to us on June 3. It's a three-page letter, fairly extensive, that goes into great detail about the explanation. Having somebody come here.... He is only going to be verbatim, probably, discussing this letter. I think the letter is a pretty comprehensive letter. What more are we looking for, beyond what's in this letter? Is this letter unsatisfactory to the committee, then?
This is a letter to our chair.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Mr. Saxton is referring to the letter of June 3, which was circulated to all members of the committee.
Liberal
Liberal
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I hear Mr. Saxton's concerns and I share them, in that—again, to bring Mr. Williams into it—we are a committee of accountability, not of management. We are walking a fine line here; I accept that. I'm repeating what he has already heard at the steering committee, so I apologize to Mr. Saxton, but having been involved in this from the get-go....
And we held so many special meetings. We even set up a video link so that we could have Mr. Gagliano and others testify. We had a whole Russian army involved in this thing. What's going on now is, to my mind, really an extension of that review, because the department accepted our recommendations, but there is now a concern that in enacting those recommendations they're not meeting the ultimate goal, which was a fair process.
Having said what I've said, I'm leaning towards seeing this as more of an ongoing file. I see this as continuing the work we first started out doing. Having said that, I'm still comfortable that we're within our mandate and are not slipping into another mandate.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Let me make just a minor correction of Mr. Christopherson's point.
He talked about video and Mr. Gagliano. Actually, in that case everything he said is correct, except that the case was about Place Victoria. We had a hearing and a couple of meetings on Royal LePage and wrote a report.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
I think the Russian army was not involved either—another correction.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
It's an expression, Conservatives. Don't get all upset.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Mr. Chair, I want to refer my colleague, Mr. Christopherson, when he says....
First of all, I want to quote from the letter, on page 2 at the bottom. This is François Guimont speaking. He says: I am confident that the procurement process is being conducted in a fair and equitable manner and that appropriate actions have been taken to attract multiple bidders.
So if that's our concern, he addresses that concern specifically in the letter.
