Public Accounts Committee on May 7th, 2014

[Michael Ferguson]

Again, we would have to assess it. We haven't audited it, but what we would be looking for is whether they have something that, as you say, would be an ongoing approach to understand the needs of their users across the broad range of those users.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

And you would not rule out the possibility that there are alternative sources of data for small area and subpopulations than the national household survey, correct?

[Michael Ferguson]

Certainly that's something Statistics Canada would need to explore with their users, given what their users are asking for. Are there other ways to get the information on a cost-effective basis that would fulfill what the users are asking for?

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

If this data was for a small area or a specific subpopulation, would it be within policy even to consider generating it and providing it on a cost-recovery basis to the users?

[Michael Ferguson]

I guess I can't speak specifically to all of the cost-recovery rules, but if it's not within the rules now, it would be certainly something they could explore.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Sorry, your time has expired, sir. Thank you both.

We will go over to Madam Jones. You have the floor, ma'am.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Thank you.

I have some questions with regard to chapter 6 and the CanNor Agency. When I was reading through the report, I found it very unusual that there were several sections in which you indicated they had not followed the proper.... I don't know if it was the proper protocols, but they certainly didn't have adequate tracking, and they were not looking at some of the paperwork in detail that was coming in. Some of the final reports were late, and supporting documentation was inadequate to match the payments that were going out. There were a number of things.

I'm looking at this and seeing some of these payouts of $600,000 and others of $200,000, and one for a truck for $31,000 for which there was no receipt. All of this to me shows a lot of evidence of an agency or a corporation of the federal government responsible to taxpayers in this country before giving out money and signing off on those kinds of cheques failing to do its job appropriately.

What recommendations are being made to the government for it to conform to better standards, better regulations, and more accountability before allowing these kinds of Canadian taxpayers' dollars to be paid out to charitable and business corporations without proper documentation?

[Michael Ferguson]

In this particular audit, we were concerned with the fact that we found many cases where there wasn't adequate documentation, so that Treasury Board policies about transfer payment programs were not followed in all cases.

In terms of the recommendations that have been made, in this particular audit we have made, I believe, 12 recommendations contained at the back of the audit. I could read through all of those for the record if you want, but other than that, there are a number of recommendations here that talk about ways for the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency to make sure they're using good practices, are complying with Treasury Board policy, and are measuring whether what they are doing is having an impact on economic development in the north.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

This is where I see the irony, because one of the other mandates of CanNor Agency was to ensure that they would have a base of operations out of Iqaluit, that they would have the majority of their people there. They would be working out of the northern region, serving northern clients, and so on. Yet, they've said they have not been able to fulfill their mandate to the northern region because they cannot attract properly qualified people to do the jobs. Therefore, they've had to continue to station positions in Ottawa, as opposed to moving them out to the communities where the program should be applied.

When you made your recommendations to the agency, the responses all came back in terms of their recognizing they had a problem. They agreed with your recommendations, and they would conduct training for their program officers to ensure that there was more accountability or proper documentation being followed. To me, there's a lot of irony in that: you can't fill the jobs in the territories because you don't have people trained, but the reason the job is not getting done properly here is because people aren't trained.

I don't know, but the correlation does not jibe for me. This is obviously an agency where I'm seeing some major issues and problems that have not been dealt with, and the excuses they're providing are not jibing with the reality of what you're reporting.

[Michael Ferguson]

I think we did identify a number of cases related to the three transfer payment programs we were looking at, where the agency was not complying with Treasury Board policy around transfer payments, not adequately managing many of the payments they had made, and not tracking information about whether they have had success.

Also, despite the fact that the intention was to have the headquarters in Iqaluit, in terms at least of key corporate functions, whether it's a president, vice-president, policy planning, communications, or senior advisor for Inuit community relations, those positions were still located in Ottawa.

There are many different areas, and as I said, in this particular audit we made 12 recommendations that related either to the practices for handling these types of transfer payments, or the concerns related to where the staff were located. We made 12 recommendations to the agency.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Thank you. The time has expired. Sorry. Yes, it goes quick.

Colleagues, we had agreed on an order of the day that either at the end of our normal rotation or 5:30, we would deal with the issue of Monsieur Giguère's motion. There are a couple of minutes left before 5:30. This would seem to me to be an appropriate time to deal with this. I would hope that we don't need a lot of debate, maybe one or two, so that de facto we don't eat up the time debating whether we should eat up the time. However, I am in your hands.

I look to Monsieur Giguère. You wish to place your motion, sir?

Unanimous consent at the beginning would have agreed on a formal motion; a clear majority, 50% plus one, will decide the issue.

So, there's a motion duly before us. Does anyone feel the need to speak?

I see Mr. Woodworth's hand first, and then Mr. Albas.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Just very quickly, I wanted to congratulate Mr. Giguère on his chutzpah in proposing this motion after he, along with his colleagues, wasted close to a half hour in the House, time that we could have used in this committee.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Thank you.

Over to Mr. Albas.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We certainly got a lot out of today's discussions. Obviously, we will be able to ask the Auditor General to come back with the officials at some point on certain issues yet to be determined.

I have been informed by certain members that they do have other commitments, so we are unable to support it at this time. However, we are happy that most members—well, not every member—got a chance to speak.

We'll take our lumps. I appreciate Mr. Woodworth's comments, but we all don't get what we want all the time.

Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Thank you.

Is there anybody else on the motion?

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

I will be brief, Mr. Chair.

It is regrettable that the members of the government party are afraid of the questions and answers that we could have asked, but we are used to that unfortunate habit and we will accept it.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

You're welcome.

Therefore, there being no further debate, let's make a decision on the motion.

(Motion negatived)

With that, I will thank Mr. Ferguson and his staff.

Again, we appreciate the work that you do. You and your office are held in high esteem. Every time you come here, you reinforce why you deserve that.

Thank you so much for being here today.

[Michael Ferguson]

Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Colleagues, we now stand adjourned.