Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 9th, 2026

[Nick Leswick]

We certainly recognize the challenges faced by Canadian households and businesses.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

That's very heartfelt.

Going back to Madame Hogan, you found there were continued errors in public service employees' plans. Can you please elaborate on that?

[Karen Hogan]

We found that there were continued errors in pay for public servants. Is that what you're asking about?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

That's right—continued errors in public service employees' pay. Pardon me if I misspoke.

[Karen Hogan]

Obviously, every year we look at salary. Salary is a large expenditure for the Government of Canada. We continued to see that there were errors in pay. What we noticed as different over the last two years is that, while 29% of the individuals we looked at still had errors in pay, we're seeing a shift in where those errors are coming from.

As I mentioned previously, about two-thirds of them are due to data entry errors, and one-third is due to delays in when items are entered into the pay system. This isn't about the Phoenix system making errors, but about everyone who's feeding information needing to improve timeliness and the controls they have in order to make sure that information is accurate.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Are you concerned that as the government moves away from the Phoenix system, these outstanding actions will still be an issue?

[Karen Hogan]

Absolutely, which is why we highlight the legacy pay action requests and how long some of them have been outstanding. You don't want to transfer information that is wrong into a new system. You'll still have individuals being paid incorrectly. It's important to clear up all of these pay issues before data is transferred to a new pay system.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you all.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

That is your time, Ms. Kusie.

Up next is Mr. Osborne.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

Thank you.

I just want to clarify something from the last questioner about the action of the Prime Minister and the deficit. The current administration is not even 10 months in power today.

I want to tie a couple of things together so that the millions of viewers watching CPAC can see what is happening, in my opinion. We're segregating the operational budget and the capital budget so we can show taxpayers, the people of the country, bond-rating agencies and investors that we are lowering operational costs but investing. We're making generational investments that will strengthen our economy and bring more investment to the country. You can tie that to removing interprovincial trade barriers, which should make the economy stronger and spur additional investment, and to the timing of the budget, which will give greater certainty to parliamentarians, contractors and others in terms of timing.

Looking at making generational investments and what the road ahead looks like, if budget 2025 is successful not only in terms of international trade negotiations and talks and the agreements we're making, but also in getting interprovincial trade barriers to come down, can you talk a bit, Mr. Leswick and perhaps Ms. Dancey, about unlocking these investments and what the impacts on Canada's economy and on future balance sheets will look like? These generational investments tie the three things I just mentioned together: the timing of the budget, capital investment versus operational investment, and, more importantly, the generational investments that will be made in Canada and the trade movement.

Can we talk about what that will look like for future balance sheets?

[Nick Leswick]

As we exchanged with the committee this morning, the government, as it implements the new capital budgeting framework, is trying to demonstrate that components of its new spending initiatives are focused on productivity- and growth-enhancing initiatives so that they will deliver a dividend for growth in the economy. That's across a broad range of measures, including tax measures that support for example, research and development. It supports new infrastructure measures. It supports new residential investment and housing measures.

In addition, it's about taking initiative to rethink regulation and to work with provinces to lower interprovincial trade barriers, obviously with the intent of reducing trade frictions, enhancing productivity and delivering on growth.

Let's be frank. We've had a 10- to 20-year history of low business investment and poor productivity, and we need to improve on that.

To your question about how that ultimately translates into pinpointing a growth forecast and how that translates into improved fiscal balances, that is to be determined, but that's definitely the effort and intent of the budget and the government's mission right now.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

Ms. Dancey, do you have anything you want to add?

[Evelyn Dancey]

Yes. Thank you.

One thing I want to point out, and it speaks to prudence in the budget's fiscal plan, is that although there is a very strong focus on growing the economy in this budget through the various means the deputy has noted, our budget forecast, our fiscal forecast, is based on economic outputs from independent private sector forecasters. We have not introduced any kind of dynamic growth into the forecast. What you see here is from the private sector survey, and I think it reflects a prudent, cautious approach. The projections in the document do not seek to build into our main financial displays the potential benefits to the economy of the measures herein.

What the government must do is wait to see how private sector forecasters internalize and react to what they see in the data and what they see from the government, and that will be in future publications.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

I'm afraid, Mr. Osborne, that is your time.

We will begin our fourth round, which will take us to just before the top of the hour.

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

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to touch on a theme, and I honestly do not know if it is positive or negative. It depends on how you look at it.

I want to talk about debts, writeoffs and forgiveness. So these are amounts that are paid to the government and that the government pays to businesses or citizens as a result of agreements that have been made with third parties to have their debts written off or repaid.

What we are seeing is a bit spectacular. For this year, we are talking about $7.2 billion, whereas for the previous year, it was $18.6 billion.

How do you explain such a dramatic jump?

[Annie Boudreau]

Can you repeat the numbers?

You said $7.2 billion for this year. For last year, what was the amount?

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

It is $18.6 billion.

[Annie Boudreau]

The answer lies in the Canada emergency business account. During the COVID‑19 pandemic, money was given to businesses. It was roughly $60,000. If that amount was repaid by the end of a predetermined period, companies would receive a $20,000 credit out on the $60,000, so a third.

So that one–third credit is part of the amount you just mentioned. That was done in 2024. That's why you see a large amount for 2024 and a smaller amount for 2025. These are essentially amounts that were given under the Canada emergency business account.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

Now, let's dig a little deeper.

In the public accounts, we have the big tables with the names of each department and all that, but we don't have the company names. You'll understand that I don't want to know why Ms. Tremblay received a $2,000 refund or whatever it was.

That's not really what we're interested in. I'm talking about big businesses that, for example, owe taxes after analysis, but agree to have a writeoff.

Is that information public?

[Annie Boudreau]

If I'm not mistaken, with regard to all writeoffs of accounts, one of the writeoffs is made public because you have to get an order in council.

I will keep you abreast of what is made public. You can see all the names and all the companies that are included. I'll get back to you in writing on that.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

Of course, I was giving the example of a constituent, Ms. Tremblay, who owes $2,000 and with whom an agreement was eventually reached.

However, it's also possible that people are a bit better known, have deeper pockets and higher incomes. In such cases, we might be talking about $1 million.

Are cases involving individuals also made public?

[Annie Boudreau]

Again, I'll have to get back to you in writing. It all depends on how the debt was removed from the books.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

Have you ever spent a significant amount of money when there is a dispute?

I assume there are people who disagree, who don't want to pay it back, or things like that. At the end of the day, you're spending a lot of money for a return that may not be that high.

Do you do a risk assessment when you contest returns or when someone challenges your decision?

[Annie Boudreau]

If I take the example of the Canada Revenue Agency, where there are very well-established and sophisticated processes for debt collection, what you just said is indeed one of the factors to be considered.

If recovering a $10 debt requires more time and money than writing it off and removing it, that's obviously what the agency will do. Costs and benefits are taken into account when the Canada Revenue Agency reviews debts, both for individuals and businesses.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

At first glance, as a member of Parliament, I can understand that the more modest cases, let's call them that out of respect, are not in the public domain. However, when it's over a million dollars, or half a million dollars, it should be public. That's a personal observation.

In closing, Mr. Chair, I'd like to make two quick observations.

Earlier, it was mentioned that the Prime Minister has been in office for less than a year. I would like to remind you that, despite the fact that he has been there for just under a year, there are 33% more public servants, 37% more consultants, and 33% more deficits. As well, $60 billion worth of investments have left Canada. We're off to a bad start, Mr. Chair.