Evidence of meeting #81 for Public Accounts in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was ncc.
A video is available from Parliament.
Noon
Conservative
Noon
Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy, Planning and Communications, Department of Public Works and Government Services
I'd have to come back to you on that one. I don't remember if we're a three or a four.
This is an area that's way outside my expertise, but we do have an OPMCA that's been approved by the Treasury Board Secretariat.
Noon
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
Absolutely. PSPC, at a level three or four, is able to deal with very high levels of complexity for projects, I would be led to assume. Four is obviously the highest and three is the second highest, so PSPC could obviously undertake very complex projects.
Noon
Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy, Planning and Communications, Department of Public Works and Government Services
Yes. Members of this committee, as well as members of “the mighty OGGO”, as I believe the chair refers to it, often get to hear about the various activities that Public Services and Procurement Canada does in a number of areas, including real property, digital services and Receiver General functions.
We have numerous business lines. Because of that, as a department we obviously need to have fairly strong approaches in terms of project management as well as risk management and all the other things. We abide by the Treasury Board policies and directives.
Noon
Conservative
John Nater Conservative Perth—Wellington, ON
Let's go back to Mr. Gear for a moment, as the executive director of the centre of excellence for Crown corporations.
We know that the base class for the OPMCA is that...where there's no OPMCA class level, it's a $2.5-million project base without a PCRA. Obviously, if we're talking about the NCC, which does not have an OPMCA—it does not have that specific expertise—anything over a $2.5-million base project would have to go for Treasury Board approval.
From a centre of excellence standpoint, do you find it concerning that an organization like the National Capital Commission, which doesn't have this assessment done for its project management capacity, is able to go ahead with an $8-million project without that oversight and without that expertise in project management? That's for an $8-million project that seems to be, for all intents and purposes, far overpaid for what was received.
Is that a concern at the Treasury Board centre of excellence?
Noon
Executive Director, Policy, Planning and Performance, Priorities and Planning Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
What I can say, Mr. Chair, is that, as I explained, Crown corporations are not subject to Treasury Board policies and directives—
Noon
Executive Director, Policy, Planning and Performance, Priorities and Planning Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
However, as a best practice, we do encourage Crown corporations to adopt their own policies and procedures that are similar to the ones that we have in place as part of the Treasury Board policies.
Noon
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
I'm afraid you're out of time, Mr. Nater, but I think you have your next line of questioning lined up.
Mr. Blois, you have the floor for five minutes, please.
Noon
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Listening and watching this committee today, I think it's a bit of a microcosm of why we are one of the few G7 countries in the world that, as I understand it, have not been able to actually replace the residence of whoever occupies the Prime Minister's Office.
I want to qualify my comments. Of course, there has to be a role for scrutiny in the role of Crown corporations or government agencies in terms of reinvesting in infrastructure. That is important not only for democracy and for our national heritage, but also for the function of government here in the national capital region.
However, just listening to the line of questions.... Again, scrutiny is fine, but it's no wonder that we can't actually upgrade some of the really important institutional buildings in our corporate memory and in our history in this country, just seeing the motion and the line of questioning as a result of that.
Just for Canadians at home who are watching.... Mr. Gear, the National Capital Commission was an organization set up independent of government, to be responsible for how many different buildings and what types of buildings in Ottawa? Can you explain that for Canadians?
Noon
Executive Director, Policy, Planning and Performance, Priorities and Planning Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
I don't have the exact number of buildings. I know that it's the largest landowner in the region, by far, in terms of the volume of area. There are probably dozens of buildings.
I don't know whether Mr. Ieraci might have more specific numbers.
Noon
Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy, Planning and Communications, Department of Public Works and Government Services
I don't have specific—
Noon
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
That's okay.
Essentially, there are buildings that the National Capital Commission has purview over and that relate to Canada's history as it relates to some functional buildings that are still used, whether that be by the Governor General, by the leader of the official opposition, by the Prime Minister, etc. Is that fair to say?
Noon
Executive Director, Policy, Planning and Performance, Priorities and Planning Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
I would agree with that, Mr. Chair.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Okay.
Do you have an estimated number for what the budget is on an annual basis for the National Capital Commission?
12:05 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy, Planning and Communications, Department of Public Works and Government Services
I have the numbers for 2021-22. Its budget was $239 million in total.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
With regard to the questions that I've heard my colleagues ask, I think it's fair.... To be fair to you as officials who are not directly responsible for the National Capital Commission, we'll look forward to the opportunity to ask for specifics about this particular storage shed at Rideau Hall, but we're talking about an $8-million expenditure on a roughly $250-million budget.
Again, I think there could be qualifications made about why it is that the specific project needed to be funded in this fashion and about different elements—that's all fair game—but at the end of the day, the government itself is not directly involved in making these allocations. I presume that when the budget is allocated to the National Capital Commission, it is expected to follow its own policy guidelines, which, hopefully, would be somewhat similar to those of the Treasury Board. However, it is independent and trying to be at arm's length from partisan considerations about how we actually go about reinvesting in these buildings.
Is that fair?
12:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Policy, Planning and Performance, Priorities and Planning Sector, Treasury Board Secretariat
Mr. Chair, I would generally agree with the observation that this is the reason why the NCC was originally established and that, again, it is responsible for making the day-to-day decisions on how it spends within its budget, as long as it is in line with its mandate and the corporate plan and priorities that have been approved by Treasury Board.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
I really appreciate that because, again, at the end of the day, I want Canadians to understand. I see, sometimes, videos from politicians gaslighting this issue. It's a challenging time for Canadians right now; I know that as well. In my own constituency, people are facing difficult decisions. There is a requirement for either Crown corporations or governments themselves to reinvest in properties. Perhaps there are instances—and this may be one—where there's an ability to re-examine. However, I think that we, as parliamentarians, have to be careful not to take a look at a particular expenditure and just simply suggest that it was coming from the wrong intent or that it was not necessarily a capital reinvestment that is crucial to the functioning of government.
I take Ms. Sinclair-Desgagné's point. Ideologically, she doesn't believe in the role of the Governor General. However, at the end of the day, that is Canada's constitutional requirement, and we want to have facilities that actually support the role, that support our constitution in this country. I think we have to be careful not to just make ad hoc statements that somehow there's an abuse of power or that these expenditures were not justified.
Mr. Chair, I see that I'm coming close to the end of my time. I appreciate that the officials were able to provide, hopefully, some clarity to Canadians about this process.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Thank you, Mr. Blois.
Gentlemen, I appreciate your coming in today. I'm now going to suspend this meeting. You're both excused. We have some in camera business work that we'll set up, but we appreciate you both coming here today. Regarding the information that was requested, could you have that submitted to the committee as soon as possible? Thank you very much, both of you.
[Proceedings continue in camera]