Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 8th, 2017

[Brian Pagan]

I believe we can respond to that, Madam Chair.

Just to be clear, I'm far from an expert on the Westminster system of government. What I can speak to is the way in which we allocate resources in our system. I'm responsible for expenditure management in the estimates process, so I can speak to Treasury Board approval of money, Parliament's appropriations to departments, and the way in which we're reporting back, and then I will add some detail about the 29 initiatives that work across those vertical—

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Thank you very much.

Second, I will just go back to Mr. McGovern's issue about NEXUS. We've been doing a little bit of quick research. It started in 2002 as a frequent traveller program. When the beyond the border program started, it became a trusted traveller program. I think that's the nuance difference that was brought to the program, and that answers Mr. McColeman's question too.

Now we have a more open round of questions, and I would like to give the floor to Mr. Harvey.

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My questions are going to be short. I'm going to give the balance of my time to my colleague, Mr. Arya. They're going to be more reflective of comments than questions.

First of all, I want to thank you, Mr. Pagan, for providing us with that written response. I think it'll serve a good purpose. It'll allow us to use that in a constructive manner. It's important for us to understand where you're coming from, too, and I think that will help allow us to do that.

I just wanted to touch a bit on this idea of fiscal responsibility. I recognize that this is $1.1 billion over the five-year life of the program. I recognize that in some context within government it's not a significant amount of money, but to the taxpayers in my riding it's a significant amount of money. Government departments, and a lot of times politicians, are less concerned with the total amount and more how that money is best allocated within to ensure we get the best bang for our buck. I know the taxpayers in my riding are quite conscious of getting the best value for their dollar, but also ensuring that we spend just enough money to deliver the program and not a cent more. I'm not concerned with whether or not we have extra money to do something else that falls underneath this envelope, an add-on. I want to make sure we get what we've paid for, and nothing more.

To you, Ms. Cheng, my comments originate from a response that you were giving earlier, and I recognize the context you were giving it under, but I just wanted to highlight that because I know to the everyday taxpayer it's a significant amount of money. While the everyday taxpayer, as well as me, recognizes the value that we get from these, and I understand the tremendous difficulty that there is in measuring performance, I think we collectively need to do a much better job of ensuring we do a better job of not only being accountable but figuring out this measurability. I know that I'm measured and I have to be accountable for my actions, and increasingly over time, government departments are going to come under the same scrutiny. It's important that we drill down to the bottom of these.

I know oftentimes Mr. Christopherson seems very harsh and hard to deal with. I find him very difficult to deal with, too, but he has the right idea. We need to all do a better job of being much more accountable than we have been in the past.

I commend you all for being here today, and I wouldn't want to trade spots with you. But if I did, I would recognize that I'm going to have to be accountable for my actions and the actions of the people who work underneath me.

With that, I'm going to turn this over to Mr. Arya.

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

Thank you, T.J.

Mr. Pagan, you mentioned that recently you issued a guide on the management and reporting of horizontal initiatives. How are you going to ensure that this guide is interpreted and applied correctly by all departments?

[Brian Pagan]

Perhaps I may also respond to the preceding one about the importance of value for money. As I mentioned just a little earlier, we do have a new Treasury Board policy. It's called the policy on results. It came into effect in summer 2014. This is going to be a very important building block for us in terms of continuing the journey of ensuring that resources are allocated with a specific result or outcome in mind, with better reporting to parliamentarians and to Canadians about how those resources are being utilized and results are being achieved.

In term of going forward, on taking our existing guidance and our existing tools, as I said, we don't do this in a box, and this process here today is in fact part of the process where we engage—

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

I'm sorry, but I thought this guide was specifically for this horizontal initiative.

[Brian Pagan]

It is, but at the end of the day, the guidance is intended for departments so that they can report back to Parliament. What I'm suggesting is that the Auditor General's report, and this hearing, is part of the process of better understanding what the needs are. We heard both—

[Chandra Arya, Liberal, Nepean, ON]

No, my question was on how you will ensure that all departments.... Were they consulted in developing this guide? Were they involved in developing this guide?

[Brian Pagan]

Yes, in the version we have now, basically from April 2014, there had been a process of engagement and consultation to identify needs. There's always a balance. We want to provide that guidance. We don't want to foist upon departments something that they were not expecting and that they simply can't do because we're asking for the moon.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Mr. Pagan, I'm sorry to interrupt, but I know that Madam Cheng would like to complete the answer too.

Then I have to cut you off, Mr. Arya. We're over time.

[Nancy Cheng]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for giving me an opportunity to perhaps explain a little bit. My answer was a little bit long. I think what I was trying to get to was the importance of needing to get to the performance and outcome. At no point was I indicating or suggesting that $1 billion was not important and that therefore we should not be as diligent in terms of looking for the value for money.

I just wanted to clarify that this was not where I was going.

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

I recognize that. Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Jeneroux, you have five minutes.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

I'll cede my time, Madam Chair.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Thank you very much.

Now we'll go to Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

T.J., I just want to tell you that I think you're a great guy.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I'll leave that with you.

I'd like to come back...and I have to say that I'm still not real happy yet, Mr. Pagan. I would urge you to take a look at Mr. Brown's testimony yesterday, if you didn't see it. He got it in one, and reflected that, and sort of took his hits. I guess what's troubling me is that Treasury Board doesn't seem to be willing to stand up, take the hit, and then talk about how they're going to fix things. We're still stuck on a lot of defensive things. I'm going to spend just a minute on that.

You responded to me, when I read this quote, by saying, well, there wasn't enough clarity. But let's be clear on exactly what clarity we're talking about. This is the AG referring to the guide published in 2014:

In our opinion, this guide did not provide enough clarity to the lead reporting department to ensure that reporting was complete and accurate—

I'm going to tell you that “complete and accurate” data is kind of important to us, and even more so in this term. The AG continues:

—nor did it provide enough information to help departments and agencies report on progress and develop a costing framework for horizontal initiatives.

I remind you, sir, that the Auditor General's opening remarks in this regard were as follows:

The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat did not give departments and agencies specific guidance on costing and measuring program results.

This led to “different interpretations” and “inconsistent” financial information. The AG concluded that although departments and agencies met many of their commitments under the action plan, they “achieved limited results” toward the intended benefits. They also had few performance indicators to use in assessing results.

It's Treasury Board that provides them with those performance indicators, so if Treasury Board gets it wrong, everybody will get it wrong. That's why I've been focusing on Treasury Board. When you get it right, it works. When you get it wrong, it doesn't. You got it wrong, and I'm just looking for some kind of assurance, when you got it so wrong in 2014, just a couple of years ago, that we can be comfortable that you got it right this time, because I'm not hearing that.

[Brian Pagan]

I think it's now crystal clear what our misunderstanding may be. In your comments, you just said that it's the Treasury Board Secretariat that provides to departments the performance indicators, and that is not—

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

[Inaudible--Editor] department, though?

[Brian Pagan]

No. I'm sorry if I was not clear.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Well, if I have it wrong, please educate me.

[Brian Pagan]

This is why we genuinely welcome the opportunity to engage with the committee and with our partner departments, to make sure that we get it right.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Good.

[Brian Pagan]

This goes to Madam Chair's request for some information about our vertical accountabilities and horizontal reporting.

Mr. Christopherson, in terms of the guidance as it exists now, I talked about “end to end”. I don't want to bore you, but one of the key parts of the existing guidance is the Treasury Board approval. Departments will come together, they'll identify a need, and there will be funding in a budget or otherwise provided from the government to do something. Treasury Board Secretariat will work with departments to develop that Treasury Board submission that sets out the terms and conditions for what departments will do. It's quite granular.

Once that approval is in place, Parliament will vote the funds and departments will implement the initiatives. The responsibility for identifying your progress, the ongoing measurement and reporting, is with the department. What we do at Treasury Board Secretariat is that we provide the guidance. We specify that you must report, and here's where and when. We develop the templates that lay out how to present costing information, how to identify performance indicators—