Madam Speaker, I too am aware of the excellent work by my colleague, the member for Etobicoke North, who shed light on external charging, not only by introducing his bill, but also through the excellent work he has been doing for a very long time as a member of the Standing Committee on Finance.
That having been said, the external charging policy that the government has just published is based on the conclusions of a triennial review of the policy, during which external stakeholders were invited to give their impressions.
Comments were collected through a vast survey based on interviews of government users and an advisory group of experts in external charging.
These two mechanisms sought input from the members of the Business Coalition on Cost Recovery, a broad-based industrial group that represents the interests of companies that pay external charging.
The revised external charging policy, announced on September 3, 2003, contributes a great deal to many of the major themes addressed in Bill C-212, namely improving performance and increasing ministerial accountability to Parliament.
This policy, which replaces the cost recovery and charging policy of 1997, is not merely revised, it repeats and reinforces the fundamental principles of fairness, accountability and communication.
In its revised form, the external charging policy ensures stronger accountability, transparency and consultation with stakeholders regarding the implementation of external charges, and requires that monitoring and reporting be as detailed as possible.
Furthermore, the revised policy ensures that the application of external charging better respects the economic environment and overall government policies.
This policy confirms the government's intention and ability to implement external charging in the best interests of all Canadians. It includes the following main improvements:
The first improvement aims to provide more complete and in-depth reported information to parliamentarians, so that members are better informed and more actively involved. This is in line with commitments made in the 2003 budget to improve reporting of external charging.
The government has made great strides in getting ministers to provide information on external charging, particularly with regard to costs, services, performance results, consultations and conflict resolution.
The guidelines for preparing reports on plans and priorities, which will be published shortly, will contain similar reporting requirements.
The second improvement is to make it mandatory to establish realistic and appropriate service standards and to report on these standards, and to this end, to carry out consultations with stakeholders and discuss possible options, such as cutting the fees applicable in case of non-fulfillment of commitments.
The third improvement is aimed at increasing active monitoring to ensure compliance with the policy and consistency in its application throughout the government.
Finally, the fourth improvement gives stakeholders an advisory role in the departmental decision-making process regarding dispute management.
The policy is more balanced. Bill C-212 seems to deal only with issues that are known to touch a limited number of regulatory programs.
The provisions of Bill C-212 reduce flexibility and increase the costs and the workload associated with all programs involving external charging. For example, all departments could eventually be required to have an independent dispute management process, when the policy review shows that most departments settle disputes to the satisfaction of stakeholders.
The policy is more effective. It provides clear directions with regard to all aspects of its implementation.
In conclusion, with all due respect to the member for Etobicoke North, I am asking the House to vote with the government against Bill C-212.