Public Accounts Committee on March 8th, 2011

[Bill Matthews]

The court's rulings were around whether there was a loss. To the best of my knowledge, the judgment on the likelihood of recovery is based on analysis that they've declared bankruptcy and they are no longer solvent. That doesn't mean there aren't efforts to recover—those go on—but this is the best estimate of the amount we expect to be recovered.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Do you think there's more outstanding money than this?

[Bill Matthews]

There are still more cases before the courts. I believe that Public Works continues to maintain a website that actually offers updates on hearings before the courts.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you. That was helpful.

Now, Chair, we're going to get into a situation...and for the life of me, I can't recall what we've done in the past; we've probably done it different ways. I'll seek your indulgence, Chair, because at some point I'm going to ask a question, or others will—it's already happened—and you won't be able to provide the answer. We have a question on a line item and we need some kind of process. I would suggest we at least have a written dialogue going on with the departments, or if there is enough agreement here, then we'll haul somebody in.

For instance, it's not a huge one, but on page 2.26, under “Human Resources and Skills Development”, “theft of laptop computers”, I thought that was a big number. I get that there was theft of a computer—there was one case of it. Theft of monitors--I get it. Theft of a BlackBerry--I get it. That was one case. But the theft of laptop computers is 20 cases.

Again, this may be specific to the department and you can't answer it, but can anyone help?

[Bill Matthews]

I can likely help.

Laptops, by their nature, are more “stealable”, if I can use that word, than desktops. They're easily transported.

What you'll find with the losses of laptops over history is that departments allowing greater access to the public because of the nature of their services are at greater risk of theft.

If you look here, I don't suspect you'll see much for the Department of Finance in terms of loss of laptops. However, there's a greater security risk for departments that are open to the public for business. Typically, you'll see greater losses there in the area of laptops.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

All right. I would just point out that Indian Affairs and Northern Development dropped down loss of computers to 126 cases. Those aren't laptops. Those look like desktops, which are a little tougher to lug away.

If I can, I'll go back to volume 1.

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

You have ten seconds, Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

How much? Ten seconds? I'll just say goodbye.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Joe Volpe]

You'll see him in the next round. You'll get another round, Mr. Christopherson.

Mr. Saxton.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

David, I'll use your extra five seconds, if that's okay.

Thank you, witnesses, for coming back and being so patient last time as well.

My first question is for the Office of the Auditor General. In your opening comments, you mentioned you had an obligation to draw Parliament's attention to significant changes to the accounts for the employment insurance program as a result of amendments to the Employment Insurance Act. You go on to say that one such amendment was the closure of the employment insurance account with a surplus of $57 billion.

I would like to know if there was an actual separate physical account used to hold the EI funds when they were deposited and withdrawn.

[John Wiersema]

Mr. Chair, there was a separate tracking account to keep track of expenditures and collections vis-à-vis the EI account, but there was not a separate bank account in which the funds were maintained.

As the member has indicated, this tracking account that was closed had a surplus of about $57 billion as a result of changes to the Employment Insurance Act, which were passed in 2009-10. That former account was closed, and the new account reset, established, and started off at zero. It was reset to zero.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Thank you.

[John Wiersema]

But there is no separate bank account.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

So it all went into the Consolidated Revenue Fund?

[John Wiersema]

Correct, Mr. Chair.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

When money enters the Consolidated Revenue Fund, is the government restricted in how they use that money?

[John Wiersema]

In the case of the EI program, no, there was no legal restriction on how the government uses this money. Those moneys were recorded and kept track of in a tracking account only. There's no legal prohibition on how the government spends it.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Essentially, money that enters the CRF can be spent on anything the government chooses.

[John Wiersema]

My answer, Mr. Chair, was referring specifically to the EI account. There may be other moneys collected and deposited in the CRF that are not allowed to be spent for general purposes. With respect to the EI account, there was no restriction.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Okay. Thank you.

In other words, the previous Liberal government would collect EI premiums and have discretion over whatever way they wished to use those funds. Is that correct?

[John Wiersema]

The legislation was such that the government can collect the premiums, and there is no legal restriction on how those funds could be used. That's correct, Mr. Chair, and I believe that's been confirmed through a Supreme Court of Canada decision.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

That's how the previous Liberal government used $50 billion from that fund on non-EI-related expenditures?

[John Wiersema]

That is how governments, Mr. Chair, have used those EI funds for non-EI purposes.

[Andrew Saxton, Conservative, North Vancouver, BC]

Specifically, I'm referring to $50 billion that was spent by the previous Liberal government.