Evidence of meeting #5 for Public Accounts in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was transformation.
A video is available from Parliament.
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
I understand that, but it's an appropriation centrally to Shared Services. The customer doesn't pay for a service in a normal customer-service provider relationship.
9:15 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
Yes. Mr. Chair, the appropriation that we receive annually pays for the core services that the clients were receiving when Shared Services was stood up. The clients made a one-time transfer that effectively created the appropriation that Shared Services Canada receives.
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Okay. Was that one-time transfer in addition to costs that the customer had to pay for the transformation as well? The reason I ask is that it says in the report that the costs associated with transformation, the costs borne by the customer, were not figured into the calculation of savings that Shared Services' plan foresaw.
9:20 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
Mr. Chair, the transformation costs.... Take, for example, the new email system. The client will incur transitioning costs to train staff in the new methodology. They may possibly need to acquire some licences for their staff. It was a mixed bag in terms of the costs that were included.
For example, we estimated the licensing costs, but all of the other costs that you get from a change management perspective were not included in the original base case estimates of client transition costs.
9:20 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
They have not since been calculated, Mr. Chair.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
9:20 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
Mr. Chair, we're planning, for the rollout of the new initiatives, to ask the clients for their estimated transition costs.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Okay.
In your remarks, you said that the department aims to deliver one email system, and that right now, according to the report, only a small minority of email inboxes have been transitioned into that central system. What percentage is it as of today?
9:20 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
Mr. Chair, I don't have the exact percentage. It would be about 10%. About 52,000 mailboxes have been transferred.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
That would be 52,000 of maybe 500,000. That must include all of government, because 500,000 people must include military personnel and everyone.
9:20 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
Mr. Chair, yes, the entire public service is included.
It's also important to note that there are many mailboxes that are not necessarily association exercises. Those types of mailboxes are quite common.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
But it's basically every single work-based email of every single person employed by the Government of Canada.
When will that be consolidated into one system?
9:20 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
Mr. Chair, as I said, the vendor had to suspend the migrations in November 2015. They've developed a plan to stabilize the system. We're working—
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Do you have a date when you expect to have the migration done?
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
Will it be in the plan that you're releasing at the end of March?
9:20 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
The plan will be finalized in the fall, Mr. Chair. That's about the time that we'll know. We will communicate the revised migration plan when we have it from the vendor.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you very much, Mr. Parker.
We'll move to Mr. Christopherson please.
9:20 a.m.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thanks, Chair.
There is a highly technical term used when something is this complex involving this many billions of dollars and has this much ineptitude and inaction, and that highly technical term is boondoggle. That's exactly what we have here. I'm not satisfied at all that this department has a handle on this. I think the proof of that is in front of us.
I want to follow up on where some of my colleagues have been on this business of the draft plan is going to be “complete”—is the word in the action plan—by March 31, 2016. It then goes on to say that it has to be approved. It seems to me that the March 2016 draft has no more status than the June 2013 draft, simply because it wasn't approved. Let's remember, this is three years they've had the draft plan. The best they can come up with as a resolve is a year ago they said they would update the draft plan from what was then two years before, and we still don't have a final date.
What we have is a game. We have a shell game telling us March 31, 2016, is looking like it's some kind of a deadline where we can start expecting action. All that is, is the completed draft which has no more status than the June 2013 draft, which didn't get acted on either. Then I hear that sometime this fall there's going to be approval. It's not good enough, not good enough.
I want a date. When will this be approved and when will it be implemented? No more of this draft stuff. That's just dodging. When is this report going to be adopted and when will it be implemented?
9:25 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
Mr. Chair, may I ask a question for clarification?
9:25 a.m.
President, Shared Services Canada
It's not clear to me if the member is inquiring about the strategic plan that Treasury Board has been asked for the IT strategy overall or some other deliverable.