Public Accounts committee  I think if we put ourselves in the context of the 2022 year.... These are the 2021-22 public accounts. Over the course of 2021, nobody was really travelling a whole lot. Then there was the whole omicron episode at the very front edge of 2022. I assume there wasn't a whole lot of business going on in the Passport Canada office.

Public Accounts committee  This cut off on March 31, 2022, though, so you kind of were—

Public Accounts committee  I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. I don't know if I totally understand the question. Is it whether the EI program is fit for purpose for the next recession?

Public Accounts committee  Yes, I see that.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you for your question. Quite honestly, there are two things. One is there's no excuse for the poor client service experience that you're associated with, or that your client or your interlocutors are talking about. That sounds terrible. EDC were a key partner with us at the very front edge of the crisis.

Public Accounts committee  I'm going to go out on a limb here, because I've been to this committee three or four times now and this is a very common theme from the member. I completely agree. These Crown financial organizations are massive federal enterprises that have a lot of capital and a lot of spending power, but they are distinct beasts.

Public Accounts committee  To be honest, as we were generating programs—and, as you know, many of these programs were sector specific and regionally specific—often we engaged bilaterally with the five financial Crown corporation community—so BDC, EDC and to some extent CMHC as well—to ensure that the programs we were standing up were within the wheelhouse of their mandates, and that we could leverage the financial authorities they had to deploy the programs or supplement those authorities with new legislation and new authorities in order to deploy the programs.

Public Accounts committee  No, I'm making a comment. Just to be clear—and thank you for the question; I appreciate it—I'm not here to say that I'm uncertain, but I do not want to be speculating on the government's intention in terms of how it wants to handle program growth or government operations growth in future budgets.

Public Accounts committee  I don't really want to speculate on the potential for a worker/employee impact, but what was clearly written in the last budget was that the government intended to pursue a strategic policy review of government spending, and it outlined its expenditure reduction target in that context.

Public Accounts committee  Simply put, I don't want to speculate on any of that, to be honest.

Public Accounts committee  The government has outlined its expenditure reduction commitment in the context of that review. It has committed to a profile of savings associated with that review that equals $1 billion in fiscal year 2024-25, rising to $3 billion in fiscal year 2027-28 and ongoing. It intends to achieve those reduction targets.

Public Accounts committee  The government will have to outline how it achieved those reduction targets in a future budget in order to satisfy the commitment. Again, I don't want to speculate on what they may or may not include.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you. I thought I'd said something wrong.

Public Accounts committee  Thank you for the question—

Public Accounts committee  To cut to it, yes, the mandate is approved by the government. The President of the Treasury Board submits a recommendation to the Minister of Finance in terms of the path of the wage. When I say “wage”, I mean salary and non-salary adjustments. The Minister of Finance and Prime Minister set the overall macro pattern for the wage envelope, which is then transmitted back to the President of the Treasury Board to transact the collective bargaining process.