Public Accounts Committee on March 23rd, 2015

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

That's right.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Good. That motion is in order.

Discussion?

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

I don't think we'll be supporting this. However, maybe we can deal with the business at hand and maybe we'll suggest some sort of compromise.

Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Is there anybody further on the motion?

(Motion negatived)

The floor is open.

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

Mr. Chair, again, I think that the member had two opportunities to address questions today even though, again, she's one member on the committee. I certainly think she's had a chance.

Obviously in the last round we saw the two NDP members share their time. I would just simply point out that if she wants a five-minute slot or if she wants to share that with the opposition, that's fine, but our members seem to be satisfied with what we've had today.

I'll leave it to the opposition as to how they want to figure out that five-minute slot.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

The floor is open. Is there further discussion?

Is that what we're agreeing on? We're going to do another five minutes. We're going to do two and a half minutes, first of all, for Ms. Jones, and then another two and a half minutes for the official opposition. Correct?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

That's unanimous. Therefore, Ms. Jones, you now have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Thank you.

I really appreciate the support of the committee on this, but the point I want to make is in response to the 25% increase in the program.

I wouldn't attribute the changes to the fact that the program is a great program or the subsidy is reaching people. If you live in the north you're going to understand that the diet of northerners is changing. Our access to country food is changing. We have regions across the north right now where we have bans on caribou altogether. It's a huge part of the diet of northerners that is lost. The food chain has changed for our people. It has changed immensely. If I were to look at where the 25% increase is coming from, it would be attributed to the fact that it's much harder for many regions to be able to access their traditional foods, so they're forced into the grocery store and more dependent upon grocery stores to be able to feed their families.

In the address I noticed that you're doing some public meetings and that officials from the department are meeting with the public in various regions around the country. I think that is necessary if you're going to repair the trust with those regions and repair the relationship that's there.

Northerners are very skeptical. They do not believe right now that the subsidy of this program is actually reaching them. They do not feel that they're getting affordable food. There is a reason for that. When you live in a community like they do in my riding and you walk into a grocery store and in order to buy a chicken, which is what you have to buy when you can't get deer meat, and you know that you have to spend $40 and $45 for that chicken, it is really hard for families to believe that this is subsidized. When you have to pay extremely high costs for all other foods that you're going to consume, it's really hard to believe. You have to be in their shoes.

What I would say to you is that there are 103 isolated communities under this program right now. In how many of those communities are your officials going to visit and sit down and talk to people? How often have you actually sat and listened to the families that are dependent upon this program?

As good as we all would like to say that this works and that the money is reaching people, it is not. I think everyone here wants the same thing, and that is to make this program work. What the Auditor General has done for us here—

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Wrap it up please, Ms. Jones.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

—is blatantly put it in front of our faces that it's not working and more action needs to be taken.

So those are my questions and the point I wanted to make.

Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

All right.

Is there an answer?

[Colleen Swords]

Just briefly, one of the changes when we went from food mail to nutrition north is that a country food program is also eligible for the subsidies. That's online; you can read about it. That's our attempt to try to support country food.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

That's what I'm telling you, there is no access.

[Colleen Swords]

With respect to engagement, we're still working out the engagement plan. We don't have all the details yet. We're trying to do it in a way that will reach the most people possible and at the same time be as cost effective as we can make it.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Thank you.

Now over to the official opposition, Mr. Bevington, you have the floor.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

Thanks.

I have just one question. Most food subsidy programs are generally done by subsidy to the consumer. When you look at this program in the future, there's the opportunity to create an electronic card, some measure that would allow you to directly subsidize the consumer. Have you, at any time, considered a direct-to-consumer subsidy for the nutrition north program?

[Colleen Swords]

Sorry, I'm just checking with my colleague. I don't know the answer to that.

I do know that we looked at a few other countries and how they were providing subsidies to remote areas, but I don't know that we've looked at a consumer card. I do know that, for the federal government, if you're working in the north there's a salary supplement—so it's kind of the opposite—to account for the high cost of living.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

Yes, and of course, there are many people who visit communities and would take advantage of any subsidy that was to the retailer, so you're not always targeting the right people with a subsidy to the retailer. You're targeting everyone who eats in the north, rather than those who actually live there and eat. That's one thing you might take into account.

The concept of fairness would apply there, too, and the record of the sale of food would be much easier for the department. You would have food that was being delivered at cost in the community, so the cost of food would be well understood. The subsidy would be with the consumer. The consumers could then purchase the items they need to reduce the cost of their overall food bill.

Why would we necessarily want to stick it with the retailers so that we make an artificial system of delivering food into those communities?

[Colleen Swords]

I'm just going to ask my colleague to answer the question of whether or not we looked at that in the past.

[Stephen Van Dine]

During the review of the former program, a number of different areas were looked at in terms of the application of the subsidy. As the deputy pointed out, other countries have looked at the food subsidy or food assistance in a number of different ways. We didn't go too far down that path. We kept to the core of what was being offered in the north. Questions pop up as you determine who gets a card and who doesn't get a card. It's an area of query and fairness questions arise there too.

The program remains similar to the food mail program, which was a program of general benefit, so that means everyone gets access to the program. That carried forward into the new program, so we are not distinguishing between who accesses it and who does not. Those who are not eligible to get the program are mining camps. Mining camps that are operating in the north cannot go into a community store and pull everything off the shelf and move it out to the camp site. That's one of the safeguards we have in place.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Very good, thank you.

The agreed-upon time has expired. I thank colleagues for their cooperation.

I thank our guests on behalf of the committee for taking the time to be here. We appreciate the forthright answers.

One question, Mr. Ferguson, is process. Sometimes on highly sensitive or important files, you'll have already made a decision that you're going to be doing a follow-up, given the fact that any audits you do, of course, are your independent decision to make. You'll receive recommendations, but you make the decision.

Have you made that decision in this particular case or is that something you'll look at going forward?

[Michael Ferguson]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We have not made that decision yet, but obviously this is a file of a lot of interest to a lot of people, so we're going to be monitoring it quite closely and we'll make that decision some time in the future.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Very good, thank you, and thank you all again.

With that thanks, this committee now stands adjourned.