Public Accounts Committee on May 13th, 2015

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

Okay.

We've heard a lot today that there are some concerns. Of course, we should always be concerned to make sure that reporting is done correctly, but my impression from the witnesses on the government side is that we're all concerned about making sure that the right things are being done, but I get the impression that we also want to make sure that they're done as efficiently as possible so they can focus on the remainder of their activities, which is providing good service for Canadians.

Do I get that impression from everyone?

Okay. I just wanted to check on that.

Mr. Matthews, earlier Mr. Allen raised a point in questioning and he was able to get an answer from the assistant auditor general today on quarterly financials. I notice you had kind of motioned that you would like to speak to that as well. I'm curious as to what you might have to say on quarterly financials.

[Bill Matthews]

Thank you.

It was just to add to the answer given by Nancy. She'd mentioned the quarterly financials as a transparency report. What this means is that report was put in at Parliament's request through legislation for Parliament. Do I use the quarterly financials in my day-to-day job? No, I do not.

I do use the database that has come along. Frankly, it's more robust than the quarterlies. What the audit revealed is that the Auditor General couldn't find people actually using the quarterly financial reports. The question was, is it better served through the database? I believe that Nancy said that.

That's really the only point I wanted to highlight. They're clearly not being used. I don't believe that the audit actually surveyed parliamentarians, but in my time at committee, I don't recall discussing them very often.

We do monitor the number of hits we get on our Web pages. They are looked at, but very quickly. You might get 500 hits on the quarterly financials during a quarter, two minutes at a time type of thing. They do get some attention. The PBO did mention that they use them from time to time, but aren't always able to find the answers that they're looking for.

I just wanted to expand on it. It's clearly a report for transparency purposes. It's for parliamentarians.

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

Okay. Again, parliamentarians seeking that kind of information, that's who the quarterly reports are for. I do believe that you said it was a private member's bill that originally proposed—

[Bill Matthews]

Originally, but it was picked up into government legislation, yes.

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

Okay.

In regard to the recommendation by the Auditor General, paragraph 2.44:

The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, as it reviews existing policies or introduces new policies, should adjust required reporting on the basis of the sizes and mandates of reporting organizations.

I get the impression that there's a continuous process and I think it's been strengthened by reaching out to some of the smaller organizations, etc.

Mr. Scott-Douglas, how do you view this, not in lieu of what is currently existing, but when you look to add new policy or revise old ones, how does this recommendation...? Have you touched upon that in your action plan?

[Roger Scott-Douglas]

Indeed, it is a key part of going forward, not only mentioned in our management action plan that we've tabled with the committee but also embedded in the objectives of the policy reset that the President of the Treasury Board has launched the department on.

One point I think that is terribly important, just to play it out—and it is actually mentioned in the audit as well— is that in going forward we make sure that we properly understand the needs of small departments and agencies. There are a number of networks, there are the heads of federal agencies who meet. There is the network of small department and agencies administrators. Rita, as well, has a community that she connects with on security issues in small departments and agencies.

We're going to make sure that we work very carefully with those departments to ensure that we properly understand needs and capacities and that when we are designing requirements, most particularly reporting requirements in this sense, that we appropriately tailor them to those sorts of things.

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

How much time do I have, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

None, I'm afraid.

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

Thank you very much. I appreciate, again, all the work that all of you do. Thank you.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Thanks, Mr. Albas. Thank you, all.

If I might, I have just one very quick question before we close.

On the security plans, again, when the audit was done, something like 51% were done, and almost 50% not done. Here's my difficulty. Given the current climate, and given the current government's focus on security, and given the fact Mr. Scott-Douglas indicated that Treasury Board had provided guidelines, seminars, workshops and enhanced templates, and that Comptroller Matthews said that in addition to the obvious benefit of having a security plan, which speaks for itself, there was also the benefit of having to go through the exercise of the process, more efficient, less oversight by Treasury Board.... That was the main issue.

There were all kinds of benefits, and yet here we are now before the committee and at the time, 2012, you had almost less than half, about half, not done. Here we are three years later, and at best, you've got, and I'm not clear between the 80% and the 64%, but even if the 80% means completed, that's still one in five that's not done. If it's 64%, it's even worse.

My question is how on earth, given the importance of this and the amount of time that's gone on, can there possibly be any plans that aren't done?

[Roger Scott-Douglas]

You're absolutely right to ask that question. We're asking the same question, and we're going to make sure that the plans are done, that deputy heads as they are responsible under policy are having their departmental security plan signed off, and that the benefits of those plans you've quite rightly pointed out are taking effect within departments. I would point out importantly that this was not an audit of security practices, and there's no sense of this being conveyed in anything the Auditor General said, that in any of the departments there's any increased risk, or any concerns on that.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Neither did they say that everything is fine. They also said “no—

[Roger Scott-Douglas]

No.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

—yes/no, is the plan done”. That was the audit, correct? That was the audit, yes/no, and 50% was no, and we're still having some for which the answer is no.

[Roger Scott-Douglas]

An important point, and one of the benefits of having reports such as chapter 2, is that it helps motivate and focus the minds. We're going to use this to make sure that departments work with us and get this done.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

We're hoping this hearing has the same effect.

Thank you all very much for your attendance today. We appreciate the work that all of you do. We've had excellent answers. The action plan was on time; that's very good.

With that we thank you very much.

Colleagues, we stand adjourned.