Evidence of meeting #96 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 assets.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, National Capital Commission
Yes. We prioritize environmental and ecological factors.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you, Mr. Deltell.
Now we'll move to Ms. Yip, please. You have five minutes.
May 3rd, 2018 / 4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Jean Yip Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
Thank you for coming here, first of all.
Following Mr. Deltell's question regarding the priorities and the fixing up of assets, so to speak, do you have definite timelines so that this doesn't become like the 24 Sussex project, where it just keeps going?
4:30 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, National Capital Commission
The 24 Sussex project is somewhat unique, to be honest. The 10-year plan that we've set out is pretty clear. There can be adjustments.
Many of the projects involve partners, either municipalities or other land holders, namely, other federal land holders. There are many steps to take in many of these projects. We have to have some flexibility to advance some over others depending on where they're at. In general, yes, there is a very clear plan that we can effect over the next 10 years to bring the whole portfolio up to a good level.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Jean Yip Liberal Scarborough—Agincourt, ON
On page 7, it mentions that “The Board and management did not clearly describe one of the Corporation’s strategic risks in its annual corporate plan”. What was that strategic risk? It says, “As a result, the steps to mitigate that risk were also not described in this document.”
4:35 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, National Capital Commission
Mr. Chair, would you like me to answer that?
4:35 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, National Capital Commission
The risk that I believe the Auditor General is raising is the fact that the commission did not proactively raise with the government the growing deferred maintenance problem that it faces today. We accept that finding.
Of course, we have moved to bring it to the government's attention, and the government has reacted.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, everyone.
I'm actually more curious about who does the evaluation of the risk factors. I imagine you have inspectors at the National Capital Commission. Do you also get outside experts to corroborate your findings? How does this work?
4:35 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, National Capital Commission
Yes, that's a very good question.
The commission has an engineering department. It has a design and construction department. It also has environmental specialists.
We're a bit of an unusual organization in the sense that we are not only a doer but also a regulator. There are quite severe internal test functions for all of these matters. That does not preclude our bringing in third-party consultants for special engineering or environmental studies. It would be quite normal to have a series of such studies on any given project.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Alexandra Mendes Liberal Brossard—Saint-Lambert, QC
I'm glad to hear you have that. I think it's also part of risk management.
I'm directing this question through you, Mr. Chair, to Mr. Ferguson. Would it be part of the normal risk assessment to have third-party experts also measure the risk and consult on the risk management strategies?
4:35 p.m.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
I think it's important for the organization to have people internally who can do inspections and make assessments, and then use third parties when they need them. From the board's perspective, it needs to have some comfort that what it is hearing from management about risk assessment is an appropriate approach or review.
In terms of what you're talking about, from time to time it would be important for the board to make sure they have advice from some of those third parties directly, and are not just getting advice from management about the state of the risk management practices. That would help them have confidence that management is providing them with the right information and the information they need.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Kevin Sorenson
Thank you, Ms. Mendès.
We'll go back to Mr. Deltell, please, if you want back in.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would like to address another issue with you, friends. It's about who is calling the shots, because as a crown corporation you have some responsibility, but also a responsibility to a city, a province, the federal level, and to the NCC. Who is calling the shots?
4:35 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, National Capital Commission
We are a servant of many masters and mistresses, and of course we report to Parliament through Minister Joly. We have a very good relationship with our minister's office and with the portfolio affairs in our department.
They are all sympathetic to the fact that we operate differently from most crown corporations. All of our board meetings are held in public. I don't think there is another federal crown corporation or provincial crown corporation that I am aware of that has pretty much totally open public meetings. We only hold back commercially confidential information and cabinet confidences.
We also have the mayors of Ottawa and Gatineau sitting on our board now as ex-officio members, which has been a great advantage, in my opinion, to the governance of the commission. The chair should probably really respond to this, but we've been able to resolve many issues and get greater alignment for a region that hasn't always had as much alignment as it should.
The only thing I would say is that we're a very small commission compared now to these amalgamated cities that dwarf us in size, budget, and scope of responsibility. But aside from that I think our governance model has been working quite well.
4:35 p.m.
Chairperson, Board of Directors, National Capital Commission
Mr. Chair, I would concur with Mr. Kristmanson that the governance model is a unique one, but it's one that's been working. I think the addition of the two mayors has been an opportunity for the members and residents of Gatineau and Ottawa to have their voices heard and have a perspective.
The board is very diverse. There are five members from the national capital region and other members from across the country to bring that national perspective, and it's been a very functional one. I am very impressed with the questions that the board asks.
The board's role is to provide the right level of governance, and I think through this risk assessment and some of the modifications that have been made, they have been making informed decisions and been a sounding board. Having the input of all the different stakeholders is important because, as I mentioned earlier, we are a very collaborative organization that works with the federal government, the provincial governments, municipalities, and private stakeholders to come up with the best decisions that are in the best interests of not only the citizens of the national capital region, but also all Canadians.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
At the end of the day, do you need all three levels of government—municipal, provincial, and federal—to sign off on any decision you make?
4:40 p.m.
Conservative
Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC
You have total independence in that regard. Is that correct?
4:40 p.m.
Chairperson, Board of Directors, National Capital Commission
As Mr. Kristmanson said, the mayors of the two cities sit on the board as non-voting observers. They nevertheless play a big role in decision-making.
4:40 p.m.
Conservative