Public Accounts Committee on June 16th, 2009

[Rod Monette]

The $3 billion in vote 35 was actually just a very small part of the package, as I understand it. There was the Budget Implementation Act, which was several billion dollars, and a number of other pieces.

The actual job information is not information that I collect, so I'm afraid I don't have job information. The departments that do that work should be keeping that information.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Ms. Crombie.

Mr. Shipley, go ahead, please, for three minutes.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you very much for your attendance.

I'm just listening to all the comments that have been made. You say that you allocate the funds to a department. The department takes those dollars and they make some priorities for their spending. Concerning the information that you gave us the other day on, for example, the knowledge infrastructure program, shown on page 4, on which a number of announcements have been made.... In fact, an announcement I was a part of concerned an area outside of my riding, not in a Conservative riding. It put some millions of dollars of infrastructure into the trades, under transportation, at Fanshawe College in the city of London. I can tell you how important that is and has been.

When we get those allocations going out to departments, how are they going to be accountable? Can you tell us? I think there is some concern about the accountability for the money.

I have been fairly straightforward with my constituents. Actually, we have changed how we're doing things, so we want to make sure we track it so there is accountability for the funds, so that it is not the way it used to be. Can you help us understand how that money is actually going to be tracked and flagged, as you said at one time?

[Rod Monette]

Thank you.

When the money leaves vote 35, it basically tops up the votes in the departments. Once that money is in the departmental votes, it's in all the normal systems we have. For example, when it's in those departmental votes, all the work done around making sure there's the right documentation, that people are complying with the Financial Administration Act, and that all the sign-offs are done comes into play.

As well, we've talked to the Auditor General about how to make sure we have all the right audit criteria up front and that people are looking at the eligibility criteria and figuring out whether they have all the right processes to make sure that only things that are eligible are being funded.

We've also looked at the agreements being signed. One of the things you really want to do in a package like this is make sure the hook's in the money, as I call it, so that if there ever is a problem, you have recourse and you have ways of fixing things and of making sure taxpayers' interests are being protected.

So there's a whole set of mechanisms around financial management and audit that my office has been very involved with to ensure that this kind of management is in place.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Shipley.

Monsieur Desnoyers, trois minutes.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am a little overwhelmed by all this too. Three billion dollars were handed out in the House between April and June. This is what we call Vote 35. Money has been distributed. In your text, you said that, as Comptroller General, your focus has been to work with chief financial officers and chief audit executives to ensure that the accountability mechanisms are in place.

Does this let you get at those accountability mechanisms?

[Rod Monette]

Yes, in fact--

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

In other words, you are saying that the accountability should already should be there, say, for the amounts that went to VIA Rail, or for repairing the Champlain Bridge in Quebec, because money has already been spent.

[Rod Monette]

The chief financial officers in the departments have to ensure that all the mechanisms and all the accounting are in place in the department. Our office, on the other hand, tells the departments what the rules and the process are. They then have to follow the process.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

You told me that they have to be accountable to you. Would it be possible to provide us with what departments have provided you with on Vote 35?

[Rod Monette]

Yes, we have good accounting processes. Absolutely.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Did you understand what I was asking? Are you going to provide us with the information on Vote 35 that you received from the departments?

[Rod Monette]

Yes, absolutely. We would be happy to provide you with that management framework.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I just want to be sure that you understood my question.

You have told us that you have put in place accountability mechanisms for various departments. They have to report their expenses to you. Can you provide us with what you have already received?

[Rod Monette]

Okay. Let me switch to English, if I may. Excuse me.

We put processes in place that the chief financial officers must follow, and they follow them, but they're responsible for the accounting of their expenditures in their departments. That's not information I have. We expect them to do it at the departmental level.

Can I explain why that is, Mr. Chair? I apologize for taking extra time.

Normally our office isn't concerned with the rate at which an appropriation is used. It's not something we would normally be concerned about. We want to make sure it's done right and that people follow the rules and respect the Financial Administration Act. As to whether they do it at a certain speed, as long as it's done right, we let the departments do it. We tell them that they'd better not exceed their appropriation, because that's very bad. That is a serious offence. We also tell them that they have to comply with the Financial Administration Act. But the rate at which they spend it is usually their responsibility.

There are 150 organizations out there. We let them manage. The accounting officers in each one of those departments is accountable, so they must do it right.

The Receiver General does roll up information, but in this case—and I know you're interested in the budget expenditures—the coding in the system doesn't allow you, at the Receiver General level, to pull out all that information. Most of that coding is at the departmental level.

I'm sorry. It's a bit of a technical explanation, but I can't think of a better way to say it. I'd be happy to give you the frameworks and the work we've done with the audit community and the finance community and so forth. I'd be pleased to do that, Mr. Desnoyers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Weston is next, for three minutes.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I feel at a great disadvantage listening to you, Mr. Monette and Ms. Ratansi, as you speak in all of these accounting terms. That's my problem; it's not your problem.

Can we start with a simple question? You said a minute ago that the numbers for the June 11 quarterly report--which is annex A in one of the letters you sent, and which is also part of the Canada's economic action plan document--didn't come from your office. Can you tell us where the numbers would come from for this material, your annex A allocations from vote 35?

[Rod Monette]

Yes, thank you.

In Treasury Board Secretariat, there's a group called the expenditure management group. They report directly to the Secretary of the Treasury Board. They do the estimates. So they do, for example, the report on plans and priorities, the departmental performance report, and they're the ones who would actually keep track of those allocations. So I got that information from them. Those are the folks who do that.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Okay, so it's a separate government department under the Department of Finance?

[Rod Monette]

It's under the Treasury Board Secretariat. That's correct.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Now again, assuming I was explaining this to my 12-year-old son, there's a difference between expenditures and allocations.

What we have in your annex A is money that went to these departments. For instance, the first thing is, at Environment Parks Canada Agency, $9.9 million for improvements and upgrades to national historic sites and visitor facilities. Just correct me if I'm right or wrong. That doesn't mean the money was spent; it means the money went in an envelope to that department, which would then allow them to begin expending those funds. Is that right?

[Rod Monette]

That's correct. The money would be moved to them and put in their votes. So it's like a movement within government.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Right, okay. We saw a whole list of these things. A glance suggested about 25 different envelopes, if you like. Then my colleague Mr. Shipley just mentioned that, for instance, he was involved in an announcement, so that announcement would have been an expenditure. That would go from allocation to expenditure, when the money is actually being expended in the so-called shovel-ready implementation. Is that right?

[Rod Monette]

Yes, that's correct.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Okay. And if this hadn't been approved, if vote 35 hadn't passed, then the $3 billion wouldn't have allowed all these departments who received the allocations to start making the expenditures?