Public Accounts Committee on June 2nd, 2022

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much. That's all the time.

We'll turn now to our next round.

Mr. Patzer, you have the floor for five minutes, please.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Thank you once again, Mr. Chair.

I think I want to keep down this one path here, and that's talking about things like efficiencies. A theme that could be part of this report is that there are a lot of inefficiencies in government as well. My colleague Eric in his first round was talking about how there's more being spent but less service actually being delivered. By definition, that's inefficient.

When you're doing your audits, are you making recommendations that are specific to how the government can be more efficient without having to spend millions and billions more dollars, focusing instead on how they can be more efficient with taxpayers' dollars? Perhaps you would like to elaborate on that.

[Karen Hogan]

In many of these reports, as you characterize accurately, it's not necessarily about spending more. In some instances there likely is a need to provide permanent funding to Veterans Affairs Canada so that they have a long-term stable workforce. In the case of access to safe drinking water, again, it's likely that there's some more funding needed there. In some instances it is more funding, and in other instances—you're right—it is about more efficiently or effectively spending that money.

To return to a statement I made earlier, it isn't just about the process. It's about the outcome, and that, to me, is a way to spend more effectively. We do try to look at that in some of our audits. Sometimes it's really hard to zone in on why things aren't happening. That's why in some instances we will talk about the ineffective or inefficient processes that are resulting in a lack of outcome. I believe one of the good ways to sort of target more effective processes would be to actually have a lot more disaggregated data to understand, really and truly, the barriers faced by the groups you're trying to target.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Yes. That's exactly right. I think we need to talk about hard-to-reach populations as well, which you look at from many different perspectives. You touched on many of them here, such as serving a very large rural community, for example. That can sometimes be and quite often is forgotten as one of the harder-to-reach areas, just because of the fact that the distance between places is so vast and becomes problematic. Again, I think there are ways we can be more efficient in how government operates without it being more expensive, for sure.

Building on that point, then, and looking at how the government works with hard-to-reach populations, I think it's fair to say.... I guess we touched already on the different groups, but it's also the case that anyone in a rural area generally has a harder time with accessing or navigating the services. Can you elaborate on the process for rural communities and how that could be more efficient or be better dealt with?

[Karen Hogan]

I'll start, and then, if I may, Madam Chair, I'll see if Mr. Swales would like to add to that.

I agree with you that a lot of the programs were accessed online before the pandemic, and the pandemic actually accelerated how so many more programs are accessed online. That does present a barrier for certain rural communities.

Mr. Swales, would you like to add something to that?

[Nicholas Swales]

Thank you.

I think part of the issue is that the government plays a role in reaching out. We talk a little bit about that in our report. Some of the activities they have undertaken in aboriginal communities more recently involve doing that kind of thing and taking a more proactive stance. That could be part of a way of helping rural communities and more remote communities as well.

[Jeremy Patzer, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Yes. Service Canada and all these different outfits quite often tend to be in the larger urban centres. Logistically it makes more sense, but sometimes the participation is a bit of a problem or a factor in terms of reaching out. Not everybody is going to go looking through a Government of Canada website to try to find where the feedback link is on a program or how to make something better.

What more should be done? Do the audits reflect on what should be done in terms of improving that outreach to make sure that these disadvantaged communities are more adequately serviced?

[Karen Hogan]

That's a bit of a difficult question. I think that's something that the government needs to ponder on its own. There are so many different factors to consider, and we really just targeted four programs that were meant to help lift low-income families out of poverty and support them in their day-to-day lives. You can tackle any program, and there's likely a different need or a different response that might be needed. I think it's about acknowledging that you now need to actually touch the edges. The most vulnerable are those who really need the programs the most. Recognizing that the traditional way is likely not going to reach them, how do you change that to reach those who the program was also meant to support and might need it most?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much. That concludes the round.

Mr. Dong, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses as well for coming today. As a new member to the committee in this session, I think these reports are eye-openers, to say the least.

To the Auditor General, I'm going to start off with a question on the hard-to-reach populations when it comes to government programs. You mentioned there's one category of the population who are newcomers, including refugees. In your findings, did you see any collaboration among various ministries, whether it's CRA or employment services, with IRCC through the settlement programs, so that the community organizations can go out proactively and inform and assist these populations with government benefits?

[Karen Hogan]

Mr. Chair, if you will permit me, I will ask Mr. Swales to add onto this issue, but I do think newcomers to Canada face many barriers. Oftentimes it's the language of the form or their hesitancy to interact with a government, depending on where they may be coming from. They face those unique barriers as well.

I will turn to Nick to comment on the collaboration and the program that you mentioned. Thank you.

[Nicholas Swales]

Thank you.

We did speak with IRCC, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, as part of our work. Certainly there is some collaboration. We're talking about measuring and identifying the communities and getting a better understanding of the take-up rates among them. That was one of the groupings where we thought there was an opportunity for improvement. Certainly there is more work that could be done there.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Thank you.

In my constituency work I came across a very niche population. They are waiting for a decision on their status, whether they are asylum seekers or previously undocumented workers, but they have Canadian-born children. These are Canadian kids. Because of the way the program is set up, they won't be able to access, say, the Canada child benefit in that case. Do you think there should be some modifications or perhaps increased eligibility from...? I'm not talking about the policy side. I just want to get your thoughts on this. Should there be a way to include these Canadian kids when it comes to the Canada child benefit?

[Karen Hogan]

Mr. Chair, honestly that is a very large policy question as to who should be scoped into the programs. I'm not sure that I actually have a view or perspective on it.

I do know that we issued a report on the Canada child benefit program, and we found that, when someone had submitted an application, the government was really effective at providing those payments to individuals. Now it's about identifying those people who aren't aware or are incapable, or who have different barriers to accessing them, but your question is much more specific about a policy angle, which I'll defer to the policy-makers to comment on.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Thank you.

I looked at the chart that you mentioned previously. I'm talking about the Veterans Affairs issue. In exhibit 2.1, you talked about the backlog numbers. In 2019, it was 40,305. In 2020, it was 49,216. In 2021, it was 43,227. I see that these numbers have a lot to do with incomplete applications and the need for more information. We saw the same number increase by almost 10,000 from 2019 to 2020.

Would you comment quickly on that? What is the largest contributor to the backlog? Is it because somehow the ministry is not communicating well with the applicants to get the information needed to process these applications?

[Karen Hogan]

The exhibit that you refer to, I think, really just identifies that there is an issue with the management of files at Veterans Affairs. With some of these files, we're waiting for applications. With others, we're waiting for them to be assigned to an adjudicator to start processing them.

There is, I think, a variety of reasons why items are sitting in the waiting or backlog file, and I'm not sure that I would attribute it more to one classification than another. I would chalk it up to needing better file management.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

[Han Dong, Liberal, Don Valley North, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Ms. Sinclair-Desgagné, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to return to one of the topics already raised. I am referring to your report on gender-based analysis. It appears that the government is really trying, in good faith, to improve the treatment of various people, various Canadians, regardless of gender. Yet there does not seem to be much improvement. Can you explain why?

[Karen Hogan]

Using gender-based analysis plus, or GBA+, we have identified persistent shortcomings. I will outline the three main shortcomings. The first is the inability to conduct analysis owing to a lack of time, availability, or even the required expertise.

The second is the lack of availability or use of the data. As I said before, in some cases, the data is not gathered. So it is difficult to conduct an analysis if basic information is missing.

The third main shortcoming is really the lack of focus on intersectionality. There is a lot of information about genders and about how men and women access programs and are served, but there is definitely room for improvement in the “plus” part of GBA+. We must be able to determine, for instance, how a woman with a disability can access a program or not. That is what we are missing.

There are about 43 elements of intersectionality, and a lot of information is missing to determine whether there is real progress in eliminating the existing shortcomings and barriers.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Is it a problem with the data or the process?

[Karen Hogan]

A bit of both. I would add that we have to know what to do with the data and the process.

So we recently recommended that Women and Gender Equality Canada increase its visibility. The department has a very important role to play in providing education and training within government in order to increase the focus on aspects of GBA+ in program design. GBA+ is in addition to the existing program.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Desjarlais, it's back to you again, for two and a half minutes.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to follow up on a similar topic that I addressed previously. To remind everyone, it's about access to services, particularly the hard-to-reach-populations portion. There are many kinds of ways people can face barriers. There are racial barriers, but there are also persons with disabilities. Sometimes there are both or multiple barriers. There can also be gender inequities present in that.

Considering that, I'm thinking of community members in my city. We have 3,200 houseless folks. It's a massive population that is completely unserviced. When I go and talk to these folks, they often don't have ID. They don't have some of the basic things that these programs often demand in order to provide support.

Thinking about how we can do better to service these populations, I think of some of the models that have been employed by Indigenous Services Canada, such as going to hard-to-reach, remote communities in person, for example, and saying, “Here are some programs”. However, that's not very successful, considering the mistrust that's often there between the government and community members. However, that's an aside to my question.

For those who may be experiencing very real barriers to access to these services, such as persons with disabilities, is there a specific process that the departments take, if any, in order to better consult or to better inform those people—who may be living with a disability—about these programs?