House of Commons Hansard #5 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was chair.
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
Mr. Chair, could the minister confirm to the House today that the cost estimate for five years for Immigration alone will be $700 million, and likely far in excess of $1 billion when all of the other supplementary—supplementary (C) and other—expenditures come to the House?
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
Mr. Chair, if he is talking about the $280.2 million, that number is for my department only, and for 2015-16 only. Clearly, that does not cover the costs of every year. That is not what it says that it covers.
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
Mr. Chair, to steal a line from the new Minister of Environment and Climate Change, it looks like we are dealing with almost a $700 million floor that the government will then build upon by department.
Since the UNHCR is a body of the United Nations, funded by members through an assessment, has the minister and the government already spoken to UNHCR for the new assessment Canada will have because we have asked it to screen 25,000 refugees? What will our new assessment to UNHCR be?
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
The new assessment, the new payment to UNHCR, Mr. Chair? The minister previously has said what our expenditure is over all of these years, and it is if this is a floor. The total planned expenditure for all of the years is $550.8 million.
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Mr. Chair, there are three elements to this refugee crisis.
The first is to bring the refugees in, and my colleagues have very quickly pointed out that there is no real plan and that there are huge shortfalls that the minister cannot answer.
The second is to help the refugees in that part of the world. My colleague just talked about UNHCR and the assessment that will come from it.
The third will be the military element, which we will be talking about tomorrow.
My question for the minister is this. Has he looked at using Canadian NGOs to assist at the refugee camps in helping them? That is far cheaper than going to the UNHCR. Has he had a look at that as a proposal?
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
Mr. Chair, to refer back to the earlier question about the contribution to UNHCR, there was an additional $10 million, which is included in our estimates, to assist with the costs of identifying the people, and that work is done by the UNHCR.
The answer to the member's other question is that we are relying principally on the United Nations, the UNHCR, to identify the individuals, and on the International Office of Migration to help us with the logistical work to transport and line up the refugees for our processes.
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Mr. Chair, the United Nations assesses countries. In this case, UNHCR has already assessed us for how to help refugees around the world. Now the government is asking it to do some more work in bringing 25,000 refugees.
Would that assessment be increased and, if it is to be increased, has the minister included that in the estimates he is presenting here?
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
Mr. Chair, I just answered that question. I said that we have contributed an additional $10 million to the UNHCR for the work that it is doing now. It is in these estimates. That is quite apart from the $100 million that we have contributed as a general gift to the UNHCR.
There is all this sort of gloomy talk about the UNHCR. I would remind the member that the UNHCR went out of its way to praise Canada for our commitment and to say that only Canada would have the ability to settle such a large number of people so quickly. To put it mildly, the UNHCR is very happy with what Canada is doing.
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Mr. Chair, boiling down that question, can the minister tell us how much humanitarian assistance aid money is going toward helping the Syrian refugees? How much? The total amount.
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
Mr. Chair, in aid money, the total commitment by the federal government is just under $700 million. If he means the UNHCR, we have made an additional $100 million contribution. The additional cost that we are contributing for the UNHCR is $10 million. However, I am afraid I do not know what the word “humanitarian” means in this context.
Deepak Obhrai Conservative Calgary Forest Lawn, AB
Mr. Chair, the question is whether the Canadian military will be used in any capacity to deliver humanitarian assistance to the Syrian refugees.
The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton
I am going to interject momentarily. Members may recall at the start of the debate that I asked that comments be directed through the Chair. I sense that there is a bit of back and forth across the aisle using “you”, and so on and so forth. Members can certainly direct their comments across the aisle, but they might want to continue to use the third person, the hon. minister, or the hon. member, that sort of thing. We will keep it polite and generous, as we always like to.
That did not take away the time, by the way, for the member for Calgary Forest Lawn.
The hon. member for Durham.
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
Mr. Chair, getting back to my line of questioning about the supplementary estimates, the minister today alluded to the fact that there will be subsequent supplementary estimates likely for CBSA, likely for Global Affairs, but he has quoted to the House an overall cost of $700 million for the Immigration portion. Do the other departments have their final five-year budgets for their costs that will be in the next estimates?
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
That statement is incorrect, Mr. Chair. The overall cost over all of the years for the immigration department is $550 million. With respect to the earlier comment about defence, I do not think defence is involved in humanitarian aid, if that was the point. Defence is certainly playing a very major role with logistics and administrative support to CIC officials, a very big role in terms of expediting the medical exams. Therefore, defence is playing a very large role in helping us transfer 25,000 people from that part of the world to Canada.
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
Mr. Chair, I thank the minister for clarifying that of that $700 million, $500 million will be CIC expenses. It appears that the additional $200 million is known, so why did the government not bring those figures and breakdowns to the House in these estimates, to give the House adequate time to properly debate this?
My second question within this is, have all of the departments involved, from CBSA through to National Defence, through to development assistance, all assessed their incremental costs as part of either these supplementary estimates or the supplementary estimates to come?
John McCallum Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
Mr. Chair, I am here to speak for my department. Some of the questions that the member raises will have to be addressed to ministers of other departments.
However, what I have said, I think, very clearly is that all of the Immigration estimates are complete and we have no plans for numbers in supplementary estimates (C).
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
Mr. Chair, I am still perplexed as to why, if there is certainty with respect to the overall cost of the Syrian refugee initiative, the government is not bringing the full additional costs to the House of Commons in this era of transparency. We owe it to our new permanent residents who will be arriving tomorrow to make sure that our Parliament has the time to make sure its plan, which is apparently budgeted and complete, is before the House. I wonder why that additional $200 million is not part of these supplemental estimates to bring forward to the House as per our practice.
Scott Brison LiberalPresident of the Treasury Board
Mr. Chair, the hon. member asked a question about estimates and the budget process. CIC's front-end costs were immediate, and for many of the other departments and agencies of government, they are able to cash-manage until the supplementary (C) and main estimates. The member is displaying a lack of understanding of the budgeting process.
One of the things we want to do as a government is not repeat the mistakes of the previous government in terms of failing to align the budget and estimates process.
The previous government, for this fiscal year, actually introduced estimates before it introduced a budget. Of course, it had to do that because it had to delay the budget until after it could do the one-time asset sale of GM shares to create an illusionary surplus on the eve of an election. However, it was still unacceptable and unaccountable to Parliament.
Erin O'Toole Conservative Durham, ON
Mr. Chair, is the new minister then saying to this House that, for instance, CBSA, the Department of National Defence, the RCMP, or a variety of different agencies had budgeted for Syrians on the ground in three countries: Turkey, Beirut, and Jordan? Was that already provided for in the budgetary allotments of those departments, or are there not new costs facing many departments that should be part of these supplemental estimates?
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Mr. Chair, I was jostling my hon. colleague. I actually have known him for quite a while and quite like the fellow. However, beyond that, the departments he cites actually are in a position where they can cash-manage for a period and are preparing, for instance, for supplementary (C) and main estimates. They are going to prepare Treasury Board submissions and we will deal with those.
The budget process is such that these amounts are budgeted. When departments need additional resources, they come to Treasury Board and we will review them. This is clearly the case with the immigration department. Its costs are largely front-end, which is why these estimates are being tabled today.
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Mr. Chair, I will be allocating my time so that I have 10 minutes for a speech and then a five-minute question and answer period. I am pleased to stand in this place today on behalf of the government to discuss the important subject of open government, a key priority for the Treasury Board and the entire government.
However, before doing so, as this is the first time I am standing in this House, I would first like to take a moment to thank the constituents of Richmond Hill for giving me the honour of representing them here. I would like to thank my wife, Homeira, my daughter, Nickta, and my son, Meilaud, for supporting me for the last four and a half years as I embarked on this journey. I would like to thank my team for working hard and supporting me, and I would like to thank the more than 740 volunteers who put in a lot of effort to make sure I have the privilege of standing and sitting in the House beside all the hon. members.
The world is changing at a rapid rate. Just look around. About 30 years ago, fax machines were leading edge and information was stored in filing rooms. Today, it is smart phones and social media, big data and high-speed Internet. Technological developments have altered the way people live and interact with one another, but that is only half of the picture. A fundamental change is taking place in the relationship between government and the citizens it represents. This change is happening around the world and right here at home.
Technology is empowering citizens to act on their expectation for a government that is honest, open, and sincere in its efforts to serve the public interest. Canadians are demanding greater openness in government. They are calling for greater participation in government decision-making, and they are seeking to make their government more transparent, responsive, and accountable.
In real terms, Canadians want access to the data and information for which they have paid. They want the assurance that comes when a government is transparent and acts with integrity, and they want to be engaged in the activities of the government and in the decisions that affect them. That is what open government is all about. It is about greater transparency and accountability. It is about opening the door to more public participation in the development of government policies and releasing the information that supports government decision-making.
We firmly believe that government information and data should be open by default. When data is published freely in open formats, it can be used for a wide variety of purposes. That means it increases its value.
Take Canada's geospatial data, for example. A recent study estimates that $695 million is added to Canada's GDP as a result of the use of open geospatial data. However, the study also notes that the full potential of open data will only be realized when we can combine geospatial data with other government open data, such as health, public safety, and climate information.
We know that there is still an untapped wealth of information and data in federal departments and agencies that can be shared with all Canadians. Indeed, there is huge potential in the area of open data. Wherever it is possible, people should no longer have to specifically request data from the government. That information should be made available by default, and it should be published in accessible and open formats on the Government of Canada's open government portal under an unrestrictive licence.
It is therefore important that the government works toward a collective vision for how best to share information that is of interest to all Canadians.
The government has demonstrated its commitment to open government with the unprecedented step of publicly releasing all ministerial mandate letters. Each mandate letter highlights open government as a key priority.
The government has also committed to making government science fully available to the public and allowing government scientists and experts to speak freely about their work to the media and the public. This is an equally important part of an open and transparent government.
Lastly, the government has committed to strengthening the access to information program and will be reviewing the Access to Information Act to ensure the openness and accountability that Canadians' rightly seek.
Clearly, the government is living up to its word.
It is an honour to be sitting in the House.
Sean Casey LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Mr. Chair, I welcome the member for Richmond Hill to the House. It could not be more appropriate than for someone with a background in management consulting and information technology to give his maiden speech in the House on open government.
I would invite my colleague to perhaps talk a bit about his background as a management consultant in the information technology field and how it gives him an appreciation of the availability of data, and particularly the availability of data in useable, machine readable format, and how that is important to business.
Majid Jowhari Liberal Richmond Hill, ON
Mr. Chair, I also congratulate the member for Charlottetown on his re-election. It is definitely a pleasure to be sitting in the House with the member.
The hon. member asked a great question.
One of the most important things about data is how it can be mined and shared and transferred into information to enhance whatever decision an organization or individual needs to make.
Storing data in databases will not serve the country and will not serve any organization as it sits. What needs to happen and what often happens in large organizations is that data is structured and access to it is allowed given certain guidelines, and is turned into information for proper decision-making. As a result, a lot of key performance indicators are developed for people to be able to help manage the business, or manage whatever the body intends to do.