Public Accounts Committee on Nov. 1st, 2022

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

What does that mean?

[Karen Hogan]

It means that our office spends much more time on something for very little value added, in my opinion. We could group the museums together, for example, because they present aspects that are quite similar. That would allow us to invest more time on a special examination of a big Crown corporation.

There's also the fact that the scope of the special examinations is set out in the act. The scope of the examinations could be more flexible. That would allow us to look at operations rather than only processes. The value added by examining operations would help us to give a better account to the committees and to Parliament.

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

Thank you very much, Ms. Hogan.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much, Ms. Hogan and Ms. Sinclair-Desgagné.

Monsieur Desjarlais, you have the floor for two and a half minutes, please.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thanks again to the witnesses.

I will try to be as quick and succinct as I possibly can, considering time.

Mr. Leswick, public servants, at least from my conversations with many, are concerned, of course, about a big issue related to the budget that's going to be coming soon. We're having a fall economic statement. We know that there are signals from the Department of Finance in relation to possible cuts within the ministry. We heard 25%. Workers are nervous.

Does that mean that workers could see an impact, given the mandate from the Minister of Finance?

[Nicholas Leswick]

I don't really want to speculate on the potential for a worker/employee impact, but what was clearly written in the last budget was that the government intended to pursue a strategic policy review of government spending, and it outlined its expenditure reduction target in that context.

It also committed to delaying or deferring planned spending that it had set out in previous budgets and updates, so it intends to execute on that, but I certainly don't want to speculate in terms of how that may impact the public service employee count.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Simply put, you're not certain, or you believe there may be?

[Nicholas Leswick]

Simply put, I don't want to speculate on any of that, to be honest.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Then you have no comment about the entire public service and our finances.

[Nicholas Leswick]

No, I'm making a comment. Just to be clear—and thank you for the question; I appreciate it—I'm not here to say that I'm uncertain, but I do not want to be speculating on the government's intention in terms of how it wants to handle program growth or government operations growth in future budgets.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Okay, sir. Maybe I will ask this in a different way. Will the federal strategic policy that you just mentioned impact ministries' budgets?

[Nicholas Leswick]

The government has outlined its expenditure reduction commitment in the context of that review. It has committed to a profile of savings associated with that review that equals $1 billion in fiscal year 2024-25, rising to $3 billion in fiscal year 2027-28 and ongoing. It intends to achieve those reduction targets.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Would that include the surplus from selling of real estate?

[Nicholas Leswick]

The government will have to outline how it achieved those reduction targets in a future budget in order to satisfy the commitment. Again, I don't want to speculate on what they may or may not include.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

I see. Okay. Well, thank you very much for that.

My final question is for the Auditor General.

We've heard a lot of testimony today. In your role, particularly bargaining with the public servants in your office, what if that fence hadn't been there? Would there have been a strike?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Ms. Hogan, please hold that thought for one second. I'm going to come right back to you.

I'm told that your time is pretty much up, but I think you're going to get more time. Are there any other questions from the government members or other questions from the official opposition?

Ms. Sinclair-Desgagné, do you have any more questions?

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

No.

I will give my time to my colleague.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Okay, very good. Mr. Desjarlais, you have another two and a half minutes, please.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

That's perfect.

To the Auditor General, I have a bit more time to clarify that statement and that question in relation to the strike that took place in your office and the impact to service work and our job at public accounts to have predictable audits at the time we needed them. You, I believe, being an independent office, would know how critical that is for Parliament, and the importance of your role in the perseverance of democracy, as my colleague from the Bloc put it.

Given that the strike was there, it's my perspective that we should try to end all strike avenues to prevent further strikes in the future that affect the work of the government, in particular independent offices.

In your comments, you mentioned in comment 5 that “the President of the Treasury Board gives our office its mandate for collective bargaining. This mandate establishes the maximum amount of pay and specifies the other terms and conditions of employment that may be offered by our office during collective bargaining.”

You also mentioned that your role in that was in some sense limited by this “fence”. Can you describe what that fence limited you to do in relation to those things? If that fence had not been there, would the situation have been resolved differently?

[Karen Hogan]

I know that we would have liked to have been able to provide all of our employees who were in the bargaining unit with a wage grid. We had done that across the rest of the office. We believe that it is the right step to make in order to simplify pay and minimize errors in the future.

Had we had more latitude, we would have liked to have given every employee in that group a wage grid, which we could not do with the original mandate.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you very much, Ms. Hogan.

That concludes my questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

You have a minute left.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

I got what I needed. I think it's really important to note that in the public service, these wage grids aren't particular to the Office of the Auditor General. It's critical for people's understanding of fairness. I know I can't say the whole context in the meeting, but I think that knowing that fact and having more context are critically important for the Treasury Board to consider and look at. I think it is incumbent on the government to do that, considering the rate of inflation and the loss of employees that we're seeing across the public service due to poor wages.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Thanks to everyone for your speedy questions today.

I want to thank our witnesses in particular. Mr. Diotte, thank you for joining us virtually. Mr. Leswick, thank you for appearing today. To our friends in the auditor's office, thank you very much for coming in today and sharing all your thoughts with us.

I'm going to excuse the witnesses now.

I'd like members to stay behind for a couple of minutes. I have a few announcements. We do have time if there are further things to discuss, but for now I'll excuse the witnesses.

We'll suspend for 30 seconds. We'll still need translation services, so everyone else has to stay in their seats except the witnesses. Thank you.

All right, colleagues, there are a few things. It's 4:55 and we do have this room for another 30 minutes; however, I'm going to suggest that on Friday we have a subcommittee meeting to discuss the calendar. Let me just bring you up to speed on where we're at.

This Friday is the last day before the break. In the subcommittee, at least on the government side, you can delegate responsibilities to one member, and it's the same on the official opposition side.

On November 15, coming back after the recess, we're going to hear from the Auditor General on the report she will have tabled that day. That will be in camera, I believe. Mr. Clerk, is that right? Yes, it is.

As well, we'll have a briefing with the Canadian Audit and Accountability Foundation for the second hour.

On November 18 we have the public accounts 2022 review. I'm told that in the past there were two presentations: First there was one in camera and then there was one in public. We can discuss today or on Friday whether we want to continue that practice.

Then there are a couple of days to fill. Actually, there are only three.

We do have Mr. Dong and hydrogen on the docket, and that's not going to go anywhere, so I just want to reassure you. We had to move it out just because of the availability. We want to make sure we have the right deputy ministers there so that we have the people you and all of us want to hear from.

Then it looks as though we'll be able to turn to some draft reports in the last three weeks. I'm going to leave the 16th open for now, either for business or to review any other matters before the Christmas holiday.

We really just have three holes to fill. I propose we do it Friday in a subcommittee, but I'm at your mercy.

That's my first announcement. Are there any comments on that?

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

I simply wanted to mention that the Auditor General's reports will be tabled on November 15 and that it will be difficult for us to establish a coherent work schedule before that date.