Government Operations Committee on May 29th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, Mr. Bains.

Mrs. Vignola, please go ahead for six minutes.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, for giving me my speaking time.

Minister, the Treasury Board Secretariat is responsible for applying the Official Languages Act. You set an example in terms of learning French, and I thank you for it. Some officials also set an example when it comes to using their mother tongue. Even if they are bilingual, some respond to anglophones by using their mother tongue, since interpretation is available and it’s offered not only from French to English, but from English to French as well.

Nonetheless, we see a certain lag in implementing regulations. The Commissioner of Official Languages called on you at the beginning of the month to publish regulations for Part VII of the Official Languages Act.

When can we expect the regulations to be published?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

I thank the member for her question.

I want to start by saying that it’s important, even crucial, to have an environment where we can work in both official languages. It’s crucial for me, as Minister, to make sure everyone can work in both official languages, and to do so throughout the country and in all departments.

You asked a question about the date when regulations will be published. When will we have a framework for public services? This spring, we will make an announcement on that. I will be able to share the announcement with you over the coming weeks.

Then, next month, we will also publish a training guide for federal institutions.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you very much.

Since spring ends on June 20, we can expect—

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

It will be next month.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

It will be around June 18 or 19, right before the end of spring.

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Yes.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

In the Main Estimates, I saw that the amount the Treasury Board Secretariat requested to monitor expenditures went from $44 million in 2022‑2023 to over $5 billion in 2024‑2025. That is more than one giant step. We just crossed the Atlantic and the Pacific in a single bound.

What can explain this extraordinary increase for a budget request to monitor expenditures?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

Mr. Chair, first of all, it’s to support the most vulnerable in our economy and have essential programs for our country, such as a dental care program and a pharmacare program. It’s also about investing in affordable housing. As for your question, I invite my colleague to share her comments with you.

[Annie Boudreau, Comptroller General of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat]

Thank you very much.

Is your question about the $5.1 billion for central votes? I think yes. If so, it’s about the same amount as last year. We always make changes from year to year. I don’t know if you’re comparing the same numbers with last year’s, Mrs. Vignola.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

If I remember correctly, last year, it was just over $3 billion. That's a massive increase compared to $44 million for 2022-23. It sure made my jaw drop.

Under the Treasury Board Secretariat's core responsibilities and internal services, for 2022-23, $44,076,954 was earmarked for spending oversight. For 2023-24, I said it was $3 billion, but it was actually $2,680,659,291. I'm sorry. It went from $44 million to over $2.5 billion, and this year it's over $5 billion.

What is spending oversight, and what justifies spending $5 billion on it, when it was $44 million two years ago?

[Annie Boudreau]

There must be a mistake. I'm sorry, but we'll have to send you a written answer, because a jump from $44 million to several billion dollars is impossible. Maybe the central votes are part of that amount, but it would be best for us to send you a written response.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

You have 10 seconds.

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

I will come back to this later, so thank you for giving me some speaking time despite my nameplate mishaps.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm sure Mr. Bachrach appreciates that.

Go ahead, sir.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Minister, for being here today.

Not long after you were given this new role, you sent a letter to your ministerial colleagues asking them to identify areas to cut within their respective departmental budgets in an effort—I'm reading from a Global News article—to reduce spending by $14.1 billion between now and 2028.

Why is it $14.1 billion? It's a very specific number.

What's it based on?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

This was the first-ever refocused government spending initiative that our government has done since 2015. We wanted to be prudent, as other G7 economies are, with an exercise of this nature.

We wanted to differentiate ourselves from the Harper DRAP program, which was much more severe and involved serious cuts to services and programs in the public service, so we chose a prudent amount to begin the first phase of the refocused government spending initiative.

It's not just $15.8 billion. It is also that amount over a five-year period and then $4.8 billion every year thereafter. It's actually a continuous process of ensuring that we are reducing our spending in some areas and refocusing it on others.

Finally, there's a phase two of the refocusing government spending initiative that was enunciated in budget 2024.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I appreciate all that, Minister, and I think you've laid out your rationale for it, but you didn't answer the question. The number in this article is $14.1 billion. The number you gave is $15.8 billion. They're both very specific numbers, and I'm wondering what they're based on. Arguably, you could provide the direction to find cost savings, and this assumes that there's some sort of slop in departmental budgets. I don't think anyone would argue that there isn't, but why are there specific numbers: $14.1 billion and $15.8 billion? What are they based on? Are they based on some kind of preliminary evaluation?

This is out of honest curiosity.

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

I will say that we needed to begin with a baseline for an initiative that our government had not undertaken at that time.

I'll let Ms. Boudreau give a supplementary answer.

[Annie Boudreau]

In the budget announcement, it was based on discretionary spending, so it was 3% for operating discretionary spending and 15% for professional services and travel.

If you take those two percentages, and you apply them to the main estimates, you're going to get those specific numbers that you just referred to.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you. That's a very clear answer. I appreciate it, and I would encourage you to pass on your answering ability to the minister that we had here prior to this, because he seemed to really struggle with answering simple questions that obviously have answers.

The CBSA border officers voted 96% in favour of a strike. They've been without a contract for two years. They provide really important services, as everyone around the table knows. After the strike vote, the Canadian government said in a statement that a strike was “unnecessary”, but they also said that the government was ready to return to the table, “at any time”.

I guess the question is: Has negotiating resumed, and why did it take a strike vote for the government to offer to return to the table?

[Anita Anand, Liberal, Oakville, ON]

We have already reached collective agreements with 80% of public servants comprising 17 bargaining units, and we look forward to being at the table with the CBSA at the beginning of next week. There's an independent mediator who will be overseeing the negotiations.

There is the public interest commission report, which is available publicly now and contains independent recommendations from that mediator. Those will form the basis of the negotiations that we will undertake at the table with these very important public servants.

You'll recall the essential work the border folks do, the CBSA folks do, and we're very grateful for that work, I will say, and 90% of CBSA employees are performing essential services for Canadians. We want to reach a deal that is fair for employees and fair for Canadian taxpayers, and we will look forward to doing that at the bargaining table.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Minister.

This is my last question. I know there's a lot of concern and interest in the return-to-work directive that your government provided to public sector workers. I think one of the curious things about this is the core rationale for that directive. We see that most of the departmental reports have indicated that productivity has either gone up or at least remained level for public sector workers working at home. What was the core rationale for providing that directive?

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Give a quick answer, please.