Evidence of meeting #71 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 billion.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Michael Ferguson  Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
Bill Matthews  Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat
Paul Rochon  Deputy Minister, Department of Finance
Karen Hogan  Principal, Office of the Auditor General
Diane Peressini  Executive Director, Government Accounting Policy and Reporting, Office of the Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

8:45 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

This is meeting number 71 of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts and it's Tuesday, October 17, 2017. This meeting is televised.

This morning our committee will continue our consideration of the Public Accounts of Canada 2017.

As our witnesses we have, from the Office of the Auditor General, Michael Ferguson, the Auditor General of Canada, and Karen Hogan, principal.

From the Treasury Board Secretariat, we have Bill Matthews, comptroller general of Canada, and Diane Peressini, executive director, government accounting policy and reporting, office of the comptroller general of Canada.

From the Department of Finance we're pleased to have Paul Rochon, the deputy minister, as well as Nick Leswick, assistant deputy minister, economic and fiscal policy.

We have opening statements this morning from the Auditor General and the comptroller general before we proceed to questions from the members of Parliament on our committee.

We welcome back our Auditor General. We look forward to your comments, sir.

October 17th, 2017 / 8:45 a.m.

Michael Ferguson Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to discuss our audit of the consolidated financial statements of the Government of Canada for the 2016-17 fiscal year.

I am accompanied by Karen Hogan, the principal responsible for the audit.

The consolidated financial statements are a key government accountability document that can help parliamentarians understand the results of the government's financial transactions.

The consolidated financial statements for the fiscal year ended 31 March, 2017 showed that the government's operations resulted in a deficit of $17.8 billion. They also show that the government's 31 March, 2017 financial position included a net debt of $714 billion. Net debt is the amount by which the government's liabilities exceed the value of its financial assets.

The comptroller general will answer questions about the preparation of the consolidated financial statements and about the Public Accounts of Canada. We will answer questions about our audit opinion and our observations.

Our independent auditor's report—or audit opinion—is on page 2.4 in volume 1 of the Public Accounts. We assessed the consolidated financial statements against generally accepted accounting principles for the public sector. We found that the statements conformed in all material respects, which means that you can rely on the information they contain.

Not many national governments receive an unmodified audit opinion that its financial statements conform to an independently established set of accounting standards, but the Government of Canada has accomplished that for 19 years in a row.

Volume 1 of the Public Accounts also contains other financial information, such as the audited financial statements of the employment insurance operating account in section 4, and of the Canada Pension Plan in section 6. I would like to draw your attention to our observations, which are on page 2.42 of volume 1.

In our observations, we bring three matters to your attention: pay administration, discount rates used in estimating long-term liabilities, and National Defence's management of its inventory. I will briefly address each of these matters.

The first is pay administration.

The government's Phoenix pay system processed approximately $22 billion in salaries and benefits in the 2016-17 fiscal year. As you may have expected, we found deficiencies in the government's internal controls for pay expenses, which meant that we had to do more detailed audit tests of those expenses. Instead of relying on internal controls, we had to recalculate 18,000 pay transactions for 263 employees across 48 of the 101 departments that use Phoenix.

We found both overpayments and underpayments to employees, and 62% of the employees in our sample were paid incorrectly at least once during the year. Although there were a significant number of errors in the pay of individual employees, these didn't result in a significant error in the amount the government reported as its total pay expense in its consolidated financial statements. This was because the individual overpayments and underpayments nearly offset each other and because the government recorded year-end journal entries to improve the accuracy of its reported pay expenses.

Even though the accumulated error wasn't significant, the extent of the errors that affected individuals and the time it takes to correct errors in pay are unacceptable. We are conducting two performance audits of the government's initiative to transform pay administration. We plan to present the first of these audits to Parliament in November 2017.

The second matter in our observations is about how the government determined discount rates in estimating certain long-term liabilities.

In our opinion, some of the discount rates are at the high end of the acceptable range. Higher discount rates mean lower estimated values for long-term liabilities. We expect the government to complete a review of its discount rates in the 2017-18 fiscal year.

The third matter in our observations is about the recording and valuation of National Defence's approximately $6 billion of inventory. We have brought this matter to the attention of Parliament in each of the past 14 years.

In the 2016-17 fiscal year, National Defence presented this committee with a long-term action plan that outlined the steps it would take to improve its management of inventory. We found that, while problems remain, National Defence appears to be on track with its action plan.

This year, our annual audit of the Government of Canada's consolidated financial statements took more than 60,000 hours of staff time, which is longer than it takes to complete seven performance audits. This financial audit matters because it supports parliamentary oversight of the government and promotes transparency.

I would also like to remind the committee that as part of our spring 2017 reports to Parliament, we issued a financial summary commentary that provided information about all the financial audits we do.

Mr. Chair, I would like to thank the comptroller general, his staff, and the staff of the many departments, agencies and crown corporations involved in preparing the government's consolidated financial statements. We appreciate their effort, co-operation, and help.

I would also like to acknowledge the leadership of Mr. Matthews himself and his significant contribution as a champion of government financial management as he moves to his new role as senior associate deputy minister of National Defence where, I'm sure, we'll still have the chance to work together.

Finally, Mr. Chair, I would like to say that I am pleased that the committee has, again this year, decided to hold this hearing so soon after the release of the consolidated financial statements, while the information is still current.

This concludes my opening remarks. We would be pleased to answer the committee's questions.

Thank you.

8:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you very much, sir.

We'll now move to Mr. Matthews, please.

8:55 a.m.

Bill Matthews Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

Good morning Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the Public Accounts of Canada for 2016-17. As you said, with me today is Diane Peressini.

The public accounts include the audited consolidated financial statements for 2016-17 fiscal year, which ended on March 31, 2017, in addition to other unaudited financial information.

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to note that, for the 19th consecutive year, the Auditor General has issued an unmodified audit opinion on these financial statements. A great deal of work goes into these financial statements, which are prepared under the joint direction of the Minister of Finance, the President of the Treasury Board, and the Receiver General for Canada. I would like to recognize the excellent work of the financial community across the Government of Canada in realizing these results.

They deserve much of the credit for the fact the government's consolidated financial statements are consistently presented fairly every year.

I would also like to thank the Office of the Auditor General for their continued cooperation and assistance.

Mr. Chair, I would also like to highlight a recent report issued by the OECD on rationalizing government fiscal reporting. The report notes that Canada's fiscal reporting framework employs many best practices, with a notable feature being Canada's use of websites, and in particular the Treasury Board Secretariat's InfoBase, to give access to a wide set of information. That being said, based on best practices noted in the reports and in other countries, I believe there is more we could do to rationalize fiscal reporting. If it is of interest to members of the committee, I would be pleased to discuss this report.

Mr. Chair, I do have a short deck, which I am happy to walk the committee through, if it is of interest, to provide some background on the public accounts of Canada. If you would like me to do that, I'll just take your guidance in terms of how much time you want me to spend on that, and then move us along as need be.

Before doing that, I have two quick things. As already mentioned, going through the Public Accounts of Canada, the page numbers

in English and French are very different,

so we will be pausing if members have questions on specific page numbers to find the equivalent in English and in French so all can follow along. We would like to be a little disciplined on that, and we have staff here who can help us with that.

Finally, to draw your attention, Mr. Chair, an email was sent to the committee clerk yesterday, as is normal practice, highlighting any errors in the public accounts that we are aware of before this meeting. There are three. They are all in volume II of Public Accounts, and they all relate to the same topic. I would like to explain why that is.

In volume II, we are providing additional information this year, for the first time. Clearly, while it's good information, we have a few wrinkles to iron out in terms of the quality of that information. All three relate to this new information on lapses. It is additional information we have not provided before. Three departments have come forward to let us know about this. It's the second year we've done this, but there are some wrinkles we still have to iron out, so I do apologize for that.

8:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, Mr. Matthews.

You made reference to the deck. I think now would probably be the appropriate time to take as long as you want on the deck. I think it's a good macro picture of the whole process of public accounts. We were privy to seeing some of it yesterday, but we encourage you to do that at this time.

8:55 a.m.

Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

Bill Matthews

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will start on slide 2. The deck is available on screen, and I believe members have copies, as well.

The purpose of this deck it to provide background information on the Public Accounts of Canada, some quick highlights of the financial results—the Auditor General has already mentioned his observations, so I will not touch on those very much—a little bit of information on appropriation and lapses, which is always an important topic. We'll stop it there, and then turn it over to the committee for questions.

Slide 3, just to situate us in terms of where we are in the financial reporting cycle, we are at the end of the fiscal cycle. Public Accounts of Canada and the soon to be coming departmental reports are the last phase in terms of providing accountability documents to Parliament on the performance of the government.

This follows a series of financial reports that starts with the budget, the estimates, and mid-year updates that take us all through the cycle. There is a list of those reports on the far right side of this slide. That will give you a sense of what is out there. The one thing that is not on there is the Treasury Board Secretariat InfoBase that I already mentioned. It's an additional source that people can use.

Public accounts are a whole-of-government reports. There is a mix of accrual information and modified cash information. If it's of interest to members, we can talk about what's what. The budgets and the financial statements of Canada are done on a full accrual basis. The estimates and related departmental spending are done on a modified cash basis. That's why we have that mix.

I will take you to the next slide. In terms of the three volumes of the Public Accounts of Canada, this is a significant amount of information that is made public.

Volume I is the financial statements of the Government of Canada, and that includes the audit opinion of the Auditor General. It also includes additional information on the major elements of the financial statements of the Government of Canada.

Volume II is the companion piece to the estimates. If you are interested in how departments discharge their parliamentary appropriations that were granted to them, volume II provides information on spending department by department, including the lapsed or unspent authorities that were available during the year.

Volume III is a mix of information that is provided for accountability purposes. You will see audited financial statements for some other organizations, as well as things like losses of public money, claims against the crown, and ex gratia payments. Finally, I should also indicate that for volume III there is additional information online that we don't print simply because of volume concerns. There is additional information that is available online that is not printed.

The next slide is on roles and responsibilities.

I point this out because it is not generally well understood: the Government of Canada prepares the financial statements, and it is our job to do so.

It is the Auditor General's job to audit those financial statements. The financial statements are prepared by the government. That involves my office, the receiver general, as well as the departmental financial management community.

It is the government's choice as to which accounting policies it will use, and I will talk more about that in a moment. The Auditor General audits those financial statements. It is a source of confusion, as in some countries the Auditor General actually prepares the financial statements, but in Canada, North America, and most G7 countries, the government prepares and the auditor audits. You do have this independent verification of the financial statements themselves.

I do have to say a few words on accounting standards themselves. We have independent accounting standards in Canada. They are set by the Public Sector Accounting Board. The government follows those standards. This is important in terms of assuring yourself that you have a high quality set of financial statements. They are prepared based on the Canadian public accounting standards that are independently set. If the government chose not to follow those standards, my friend to the left of me would have something to say about that in his audit opinion. It is a choice, but the government does choose to follow those standards.

Where my office gets involved in preparing additional policies, we want to make sure that departments and agencies implement those accounting standards on a consistent basis. My office will prepare accounting direction to departments on just how to implement the independent accounting standards, or the government accounting policies to ensure consistency across the board.

If there is a gap in Canadian public sector accounting standards, there are other standards out there that we would refer to, and they are on the far right of this slide.

The international public sector accounting standards provide a good set of standards we can refer to when there are holes in our guidance, or gaps. On the private sector side, there is an international set of standards as well. This is important for two reasons: one, it is an additional set of guidances we can refer to if we're seeing a gap; and two, some of our crown corporations actually follow those standards. So they do have an impact on the government reporting entity.

Turning to the actual financial results for the 2016-17 year, on this slide you will see a summary of what you will see in the financial statements themselves. This is on the revenue and expense side. You will see presented here the initial budget for 2016-17 as well as the actual budget for 2016-17 and then for the previous year. It's accounting standards that require us to produce it in this format. The reason I'm highlighting the budget for you is that it is the initial budget that must be disclosed in the financial statements. The Department of Finance updates that budget throughout the year as economic circumstances change, and as new spending decisions are made, but it is the initial budget that must be disclosed in the financial statements. You will see here that the initial budget on the revenue side was $287 billion. The actuals came in slightly higher than that, although slightly down from the previous year. We can talk about why that might be later on. If you look at the expense side, you will see program expenses, which are the expenses of our departments and agencies. The budget was $291 billion. The actual came in slightly below that at $287 billion, but it was higher than the previous year's figure of $271 billion. For those reasons, the annual deficit came in at $17.8 billion, which is lower than the initial forecast of $29.4 billion. You will see the previous year comparative figure for 2015-16.

That just gives you a sense of what you can compare the results against, the initial budget as well as the previous year's results, to see what actually happened.

On the next slide we move to the balance sheet, or the statement of financial position. What you will see here is just a comparator against the previous year. There is no requirement to budget for things like accounts payable. You don't have to disclose that sort of thing. The budget applies to the revenues and expenses. The disclosure you will see here is versus the previous year. You will see the liabilities are up over the previous year. That is typically what happens when you run a deficit—liabilities go up. On the asset side, you can see on the financial asset side, that is, assets that are either cash or that can be turned into cash, we are running with more assets than we were in the previous year. I believe the Auditor General already mentioned the net debt figure. You will see that towards the bottom of the slide, as well as the accumulated deficit.

On the next slide is the actual government reporting entity itself. It's probably not well understood that it includes departments and agencies but also crown corporations. It gives you a breakdown of what is in here to give you relative size, by expense. You will see the enterprise crown corporations in the upper right-hand corner. They are crown corporations that basically are supposed to be self-sufficient, such as Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. From an accounting standards perspective, this group would follow private sector accounting standards. From an operations perspective, they are at arm's length from the government, but they are still part of the financial statement entity, so we consolidate those and the Auditor General audits them. In the bottom half of this group you will see our departments and agencies. Then, in the upper left-hand quadrant, you will see what is called our consolidated crown corporations. Those are crown corporations that rely on government financial support. In here you will see VIA Rail, our museums, and the Canada Foundation for Innovation, just to name a few.

That is the federal family from an expense perspective in terms of what's in these financial statements.

On the next slide, on the Auditor General's observations, he has already mentioned that he has three: pay administration, management estimates specifically on discount rates, and National Defence, which is inventory. Some of these observations have been with us for a number of years. If you have questions on his observations, I would suggest you direct them to the Auditor General. If you have questions on just what the government is going to do about these, those would be for this side of the table and we'd be happy to take questions on the plan or the progress...because National Defence has been with us for a while, we could tell you what the progress has been and what the plan is going forward.

On the next slide we have total voted budgetary authorities. This gets back to what Parliament actually voted in terms of departments' abilities to spend. This gives you a breakdown of the larger departments to give you a sense of where the money is. As I've said, these are the main players: National Defence, Indigenous and Northern Affairs, Health Canada, and Global Affairs Canada. It just gives you a quick overview of some of the bigger departments, in terms of their spending authority, and what was actually used during the current year, so actual spending.

The next slide we should spend a couple of minutes on, which is on lapses. We've only highlighted the significant lapses here. Lapses are often a topic of interest to this committee. I would highlight two things for the committee.

Number one is the lapsed number itself. You'll see for the big ones, and I'll just pick Public Services and Procurement at the upper right-hand corner, where you'll see a lapsed number of $510 million. Below that, you'll see frozen allotments of $233 million. It's a little bit of technical jargon. The point here is that there is the lapse, which means how much money Parliament voted versus what the department actually spent. There's always questions about why they didn't spend the full amount.

I would remind you that it's actually illegal to overspend what Parliament votes. We had no departments that overspent this year. There is always going to be some amount of lapse. There are some departments that are chronically higher lapsers than others because of the nature of their business. We're happy to talk about that.

The reason I'm highlighting frozen allotments is to give you a sense of the planned lapse. Sometimes partway through the year something happens where a department knows it can't spend the money. A decision is made and the department is told not to spend the money. It might be a budget cut, like one placed on travel, which was one we put in place a couple of years ago, and also one on professional services. We freeze money.

When you see a frozen allotment, if you're trying to understand what happened with the department, it's important to ask how much of it was planned versus how much of it was frozen or not frozen. It is to give you a sense of whether it is really just program money that wasn't spent or whether there was something else going on there, so in fact, it was actually a planned lapsed. That's why we have now disclosed these frozen allotments for you here. That is new information that has been available in volume II for two years now in the frozen allotments, which gives members a better sense of what's really at play, in terms of departmental spending and the results that they achieve.

I'm happy to talk about these during the actual meeting, if members have questions on the lapses.

Since I mentioned Public Services and Procurement, I'll tell you the big part of this lapse was around slower spending than initially planned on the parliamentary precinct. That's just an example of a lapse.

I think I'll stop there. There is an annex here of definitions, if you are interested in some of the technical terms. I'm happy to refer to those.

I'll leave it to you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you very much, Mr. Matthews.

I think we'll move on to the first round of questions.

Again, we'll also remind you that the Department of Finance is here. You can direct your questions, if you so choose.

Ms. Mendès, you have seven minutes.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank everyone for being with us again this morning.

Mr. Chair, I'm sharing my time with Mr. Arya.

My question would be more on the form.

Yesterday, after we met with the Office of the Auditor General, Mr. Matthews and Ms. Peressini, we had a training session, if you will, with the Canadian Audit and Accountability Foundation. We were given some direction on how to read the public accounts. One thing that struck me, and I think it struck us all, is that we kept going from section one to section two, then referred to this table and referred to that table, and then went back to that text.

Is there a way to change the way these are presented so that it would be a little easier for us to understand how parts of section two, which is the financial accounting itself, go back to the discussion and analysis document? That's a form question.

I'll let Mr. Arya go with the content ones.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thanks for that important comment for Mr. Matthews.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC

It's for both actually.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Then Mr. Arya.

9:10 a.m.

Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

Bill Matthews

I could respond very quickly, and our friends in the Department of Finance are actually responsible for the management's discussion and analysis piece that you referenced. You've raised an important point, in that the link between that and the financial statements is very clear. If there is something we can to do make those links stronger, we're happy to consider that.

I'm wondering if an interactive tool would be easier than the paper-based tools to draw those links.

9:10 a.m.

Liberal

Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC

Maybe we could sometimes just refer to a figure or a chart or something. Thank God, we actually had somebody who was telling us what to look for.

9:10 a.m.

Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

Bill Matthews

To properly understand those financial statements, the MD and A, management's discussion and analysis, is absolutely critical. I'm not sure if Finance wants to add anything on that front.

9:10 a.m.

Paul Rochon Deputy Minister, Department of Finance

I would only say that the management's discussion and analysis tends to be a document that highlights the main trends in the public accounts, so be it with respect to debt, deficits, revenues, and spending. It tends not to be a guide to the public accounts. If that's something that would be useful to the committee, we're certainly open to working on that. I think that would be something we would want to do with the comptroller general, absolutely.

We're completely open to making the document more user-friendly, which is what you're asking, I think.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC

Exactly, please.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson

Thank you, sir.

We'll go to Mr. Arya.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Ferguson, 19 years of statements without any qualifications, but were there any differences of opinion which may not have been material enough for you to qualify the statement?

9:15 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Obviously, in the course of an audit of an organization that has a revenue of close to $300 billion in expenses, there are always issues that come up that need to be discussed and need to be settled, but at the end of the day, no, there were no differences of opinion on how to resolve the issues that came up in the course of the audit.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON

Were there any extraordinary items in these accounts, anything that was not there the previous year?

9:15 a.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General

Michael Ferguson

Well, I think that in our audit observations that's the tool we tend to use to highlight the issues that come up during the course of the audit that are most problematic. Obviously, this year it was being able to audit pay expenses that took up a lot of our time. Other than that, there have been some, I would call them, minor improvements to disclosure and other things. For example, amongst the liabilities on the balance sheet now there is a specific line for the contingent liabilities that have actually been recorded. There have been some improvements like that, but I think in terms of the main issue that came up in the course of the audit, it was around all the work we had to do to audit the pay expenses.

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON

Talking of contingent liabilities, the Department of Finance has issued insurance programs managed by the government—$258 billion. It's on page 11.41 of volume I. What is it that you need to ensure that none of these contingent liabilities will actually become a liability?

9:15 a.m.

Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

Bill Matthews

Perhaps we could pause while we find that page in French. Page 11.41 and....

9:15 a.m.

Liberal

Chandra Arya Liberal Nepean, ON

It's table 11.5 on page 11.41.

9:15 a.m.

Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat

Bill Matthews

It is the same in French.