Public Accounts Committee on Sept. 25th, 2025

[Paul Halucha]

It's not atypical of portfolio management. It's very often the case that a federal department has policy responsibility. It's done for coherence. Think about the CLC, which is now in the portfolio. The issue around definitions gets easier if you have a central policy function that has responsibility for helping to design the programs across the different administrative organizations. In this case, the CMHC will continue to be responsible for the administration of the FLI. Should the government want to make changes, we would be responsible for.... Obviously, they have a huge amount of expertise, so that wouldn't be a completely hands-off approach, but we would be the policy leads in terms of those types of changes.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you very much. That is the time.

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

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

Thank you.

This is for the Auditor General.

Building on some of the questions my colleagues have asked, it's very concerning to me that there's a resistance, I guess, within the public service to modernizing the workspace and to identifying the usage of space. What role can the public accounts committee play in making sure that we overcome that resistance?

I'll add a second layer here, about information. We've had only 83% response rate based on the workers going in or the utilization of space by workers. Thirty-seven of 105 tenants provided monitoring data. Without the data, how can the public service really zone in on the buildings that are surplus, where we can make changes within that real estate? Without the co-operation of departments in providing the information—accurate information—Build Canada Homes is not able to access these buildings or the lands. That is very concerning to me.

[Karen Hogan]

I think you've raised a few matters on how the public accounts committee can help, and obviously this hearing is a first step in the right direction. I think the one next week, when you will have Public Services and Procurement Canada here, will be important. Public Services and Procurement Canada are the ones who are consolidating this information, driving that and trying to negotiate reductions of space. I think they will be able to play a bigger role, and a lot of these questions can be asked of them.

On the need for data, I couldn't agree with you more. We need it, which is why I think those two fundamental things are essential: what buildings you have available and how they are being used or not used, so that you can decide and reallocate and move. Missing that basic piece of information is key. I don't think leaving it up to every department and agency to track and monitor is working right now. That's why we've issued recommendations to Public Services and Procurement Canada to find a way to standardize and consolidate this, because you need to make well-informed decisions. Without that data, I don't think the decisions will be well informed.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

Thank you.

To follow up on that, the standardization of data collection is another concern. We have different tenants of these buildings responding differently, with different measurements of the data and different ways of collecting the data.

I know you've made a recommendation, but for the people who are tuned in with nothing else to do across Canada but to watch the public accounts committee, could you expand on that and also educate me and maybe other members of the public accounts committee? Tell us what role we can play in ensuring the information that is collected is standardized across departments and tenants of public buildings so that we are able to provide better decisions and zone in on what buildings are surplus.

[Karen Hogan]

I can see two issues: how the public accounts committee can help—and I will get to that—and collection methods and standardizing.

I think it's important that every federal department have a way of tracking this, and I think it's important for all public servants to know why monitoring is happening on who is in the building and when. It is about space optimization, and there are many elements on a day-to-day basis from a security standpoint. I want to know how many of our employees are in our buildings should something happen. That's a basic first step, but I also want to be able to contribute to rightsizing our space.

I think there should be two motivations, and that's why having it standardized would be helpful. Right now, many buildings are very different—there are different security mechanisms when you walk in—but there has to be a way we can do it. We listed in exhibit 3.2 the different ways it's being done. Some organizations are using many of them. I think it's really up to the government to pick one or two and then sort that out.

How can the committee help in this? The hearing next week is a great place to start, but then it's about continued follow-up on updates and on progress on action plans and commitments made and, when you don't see good progress, another hearing. The committee has the ability to make sure the public service is being accountable for the commitments they've made in response to the recommendations from our work.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

Thank you.

The next question—

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you, Mr. Osborne. Your time has elapsed, but I'll let you ask a question if you could keep it short, please.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

It will be a very short question.

Ms. Volk, you indicated earlier that you're only responsible for so much. You need your partners involved as well. In rural areas of the country, especially in the smaller provinces, we don't have the library of public lands or public buildings to allow Build Canada Homes to utilize them. We need a greater role, I guess, from CMHC and your partners.

What recommendations would you make to ensure that we are reaching rural Canada as well?

[Coleen Volk]

First, the policy lead on that is really with HICC now. They're the primary centre for policy advice to the government on housing.

As it speaks to rural, I would say that the FLI is not a program that will work well in rural Canada, because of the absence of a lot of federal buildings there, but we do have other programs that will work better in remote and rural areas.

[Tom Osborne, Liberal, Cape Spear, NL]

Such as...?

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

I will have to come back to you, Mr. Osborne. Thank you.

That leads me to my next question. I'm getting some correspondence here about extending it just a little bit.

Mr. Lemire, do you have many questions? You have one more turn. Would you be interested in another one?

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Absolutely.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Okay.

Just to give everyone preparation, here's what I'll do. I'll start our third round, which will be a full five members at various times. Then I'll do three more spots. We'll start with the official opposition, then Monsieur Lemire for two minutes and 30 seconds, and then the government, which always has the last word. I'll have the clerk fill this in. There won't be a full fourth round, but a partial one.

We'll begin the third round with Mr. McKenzie.

You have the floor for five minutes, please.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also wish to add my thanks to everybody in attendance here.

I'm a new MP, so I'm still filled with shock and disbelief at some of the time frames I learn about with respect to the operation of our federal government.

Ms. Hogan, I have great difficulty understanding the inability to identify space used by the federal government—whether there are people in it, how much of it is being used and so on. I'm wondering if you have information with respect to how long the effort's been under way to identify space utilization.

[Karen Hogan]

The identification by the federal public service that a significant portion of their office buildings was being underutilized was prepandemic. That would have been in 2017. In 2019, they designed plans to try to get to the reduction of 50%. There was very little movement between 2019 and 2024, mostly because there was no funding allocated toward this. The budget in 2024 gave money, so now there's funding. If you want to do something, I think you need resources and funding in order to make sure it's accomplished. Now there's the ability to move forward.

Here's where you need the co-operation of all the federal tenants. We saw that some of the larger tenants were very hesitant to agree to space reductions, motivated by a few reasons. One, they needed perhaps specialized space to deliver their mandates, so they couldn't really reduce their space to a certain square foot per employee. Two, there was concern about whether or not increased presence in the workplace would be a requirement. The increase that happened during the audit period actually removed a lot of the flexibility that was in the existing plan to get to 50%. We also highlighted the fact that we think there isn't an incentive for many departments to free up that space. For most departments, rent is not paid. It's sort of a global bucket that rents and/or owns the buildings. Individually, it doesn't hit your budget, so you might not be as incentivized to move forward.

We hope we've highlighted some of the weaknesses and made some recommendations to see bigger progress going forward. It's not one thing that's slowing this down; it's a lot of things. Missing data is another critical element.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

It seems to me to be the most critical piece. We really can't make intelligent changes if there isn't information available about what's taking place on the ground.

[Karen Hogan]

I think my office will always be a huge proponent for making well-informed decisions supported by data. Yes, I think you need data. Here, Public Services and Procurement Canada is relying on all the tenants to provide that. They haven't had much success with that. People are slow to provide that information. Then, when it is provided, it's like comparing apples and oranges. It's hard to put together.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Failing to respond to that request for information seems to me to be a performance issue. We had some questions previously about performance pay, and when 99% of employees are receiving their performance pay but we can't get basic information like that, it seems to me to be quite a gap.

[Karen Hogan]

This is an area that I hope the committee could explore with Public Services and Procurement Canada next week. In my view, they should be enforcing that this is happening and that departments are signing on for space reduction. Throughout this, since we tabled the report, I always try to encourage my deputy minister colleagues to take a really good look at the space they need. I know that I've put up my hand and that I am reducing my space. I don't have rent, so it's not having an impact on me, but it's impacting the bigger, broader public service, hopefully.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

I understand.

I would like to ask some questions about the housing accelerator fund. Is there somebody here today who can address that? Ms. Volk?

As I understand it, in November 2023 there was a press release announcing the fast-tracking of 6,800 housing units over three years in my city of Calgary. Would you be able to provide any information on the status now? We're almost a full two years later, and I'd like to know how many housing units are either constructed or under construction.

[Coleen Volk]

I don't have the data on hand, but I can answer your question maybe conceptually, at least, for a start.

The housing accelerator fund has a goal to increase housing starts, definitely, in those municipalities that have signed agreements. However, those results won't be immediate. This is because the commitments that are made as part of the housing accelerator fund are to speed up the processes of zoning and approvals, sort of clearing some red tape at the municipal level. That will accelerate processes, but it doesn't magically accelerate construction. Construction is still something that's going to take a while to get shovels in the ground to build. The results aren't instant. We are seeing some starts, but the expectation was that this increase in starts would come a little bit later. What we would be seeing first, in terms of the results, are the changes that the municipalities are making. Then the new starts would follow.

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you. I'm afraid that is your time.

Next we have Mr. Housefather, who is joining us online.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Mount Royal, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

My first question is for Ms. Volk.

Ms. Volk, I'll go back to Mr. Deltell's questions originally. He kept calling the pay that members of your department are receiving at the CMHC “bonuses”. I understand that bonuses are exceptional payments where work exceeds expectations. You were trying to explain, I believe, that this was at-risk pay, which is a regular component of pay, not an exceptional component of pay. It is given not when work exceeds expectations but when work meets expectations.

Can you explain that, so that people don't believe that 99% of your department received bonuses for exceptional performance?