This piece of legislation is really appreciated. The spirit of it is exactly what is appropriate. I just think it's a little vague.
I understand that perhaps that's been done so that the board will have the ability and flexibility to act differently when addressing different issues. However, I think some of the core things, which you mentioned in your opening remarks....
I'll just read out my proposals and then I'll explain them:
The Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security recommends that the Standing Committee on Finance consider amending Division 10 on the Budget Implementation Act to:
1. Require full reports prepared by the Management Advisory Board, per 45.18 (3), to be automatically provided to the Minister;
In the legislation, it says that they “may” provide them, so this is more of a “shall”. I know that the minister receives a lot of reports, but I think it's important, especially if it's an official report, for him or her to be seized of the issue moving forward. That's been recommended. I further propose:
2. encourage diverse representation on future iterations of the Management Advisory Board, including but not limited to women, Indigenous persons, persons with disabilities, members of the LGBTQ+ community and members of visible minorities; and
3. require that Gender-Based Analysis+, or any future program that may reasonably be viewed as its successor, be incorporated into the Management Advisory Board's work.
Number four is on the fly. After our discussion today, I'm thinking that the mandate of the advisory board lacks any specific mention of harassment and cultural change. I think that should be encompassed in proposed paragraph 45.18(2)(a) of the mandate, but it's very vague. I would recommend that the finance committee figure out what language they want to use, but specifically mention that is the transformation or a part of the modernization plans.
Although you've mentioned in your introductory remarks that they are trying to achieve regional diversity—all of those different things—it's not actually stated in the legislation. This government may intend to make appointments based on that—or the council—but that might not be the case in the future. I think putting that language in would make the person who needs to make appointments aware that he or she must make sure that the board comprises all of those factors.
I haven't listed if there needs to any kind of mandated specific.... What's the word I'm looking for?