We are very pleased to be here today to present our report of May 2007, which was tabled in the House of Commons yesterday.
As you mentioned, I am accompanied by Assistant Auditors General Hugh McRoberts, Richard Flageole, and Andrew Lennox.
[Translation]
Let me begin with the management of the Forensic Laboratory Services by the RCMP. We undertook this audit at the request of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice, after it heard conflicting testimony in 2004 and 2005 about the performance of the labs.
We found that in a high percentage of cases, including many involving violent crimes, the labs were not meeting their turnaround targets for providing forensic results. And the backlog for DNA analysis is increasing.
We examined the RCMP's system for ensuring the quality of lab results. On paper, their quality management system looks good, but we found it was not always being applied and could not assure senior management about the quality of DNA analysis. We did not examine the scientific methods they used.
Most of the problems our audit found were also raised in our 1990 and 2000 audits. It is disappointing to find them still unresolved. The RCMP needs to develop a realistic action plan to fix these long-standing problems.
[English]
We also audited, in chapter 4, the Canadian agricultural income stabilization program, also known as CAIS, after a request by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food.
Over the years, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada has developed a number of programs to provide income support to agricultural producers when their farm income drops due to circumstances beyond their control. The CAIS program is the most recent of these. In 2005-06, the department spent more than $1 billion on the program Canada-wide.
This is a program with a highly complex method of calculating benefits to producers, based on the information they submit to the department. Producers have complained they did not understand how the department calculated their benefits. There were also long delays before they were told whether or not they would receive a benefit and in what amount.
We also found that some of the department staff who processed applications were also acting as paid consultants and helping producers prepare the applications. This practice contravenes the conflict of interest provisions in the values and ethics code for the Public Service, and it could have provided an unfair financial advantage to some applicants. The department has since told employees to stop this activity.
Since the completion of the audit, the government has announced its intention to change the CAIS program. In reviewing the program, the department should look for ways to simplify its delivery of farm income support and make the process more user friendly.
[Translation]
We also looked at financial assistance programs for post-secondary students. We found that Human Resources and Social Development Canada and the Canada Millenium Scholarship Foundation have good controls to ensure that loans, grants and bursaries are delivered in the right amounts to eligible students.
I am pleased by the good management practices we found in these programs, aimed at giving young Canadians better access to higher education.
The department and the foundation have taken appropriate steps to make students and their families more aware of the financial assistance available to them. The department has also improved its communication to students about measures available to help them manage their debt.
However, although the department committed to completing an evaluation of the Canada Student Loans Program in 2006, it has not yet done so. We think the department should evaluate this program to see if it has indeed improved access to higher education, as Parliament intended.
[English]
Turning now to the management of human resources at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, the department operates 170 missions in 111 countries around the world. Its people conduct diplomatic relations, provide assistance to Canadian individuals and businesses, and advise the government on international issues.
Carrying out Canada's international objectives depends on having the right people in the right place at the right time. We found, however, that the department is struggling to do this. Unless it acts now, the situation will only get worse.
In the next few years, more than half of the department's employees in the management category will be eligible to retire. The department has not been planning adequately to meet these challenges. It does not have a complete picture of the people, competencies, and experience it will need in the future, and it lacks basic information needed to manage its human resources.
In addition, it does not pay enough attention to the management of locally engaged staff in missions abroad, who make up half of its workforce.
Finally, the department lacks the flexibility it needs to provide Canadian staff with cost-of-living compensation and incentives for hardship conditions at missions abroad. This makes it difficult to find people willing to accept some postings in certain foreign countries. Barriers to spousal employment are another deterrent.
This lack of flexibility is an important, long-standing problem. It is time for the department and the Treasury Board Secretariat to work together to resolve it.
[Translation]
We also looked at the modernization of the NORAD system used for air surveillance and control in Canada, a project that began 12 years ago. The Canadian government originally approved about $93 million for the Canadian part of the project to define requirements, develop a new system, and build an above-ground complex to house it.
The project has been marked by delays and cost overruns. Neither National Defence nor the government made appropriate use of mechanisms available for managing large, high-risk projects like this one—for example, designating it as a major Crown project.
It was expected that with the construction of a new complex, National Defence would be able to close its underground complex at North Bay, Ontario, and save an estimated $16 million a year in personnel and operating costs. It turned out that at the time of our audit, the department was still operating both facilities because there were questions about the security of the new building before it could be used as planned. The anticipated savings have yet to be realized.
There were several signs that this project was in trouble. The cost escalation and the delays should have prompted more rigorous reporting and oversight.
National Defence intends to continue with upgrades to the new system. But first, it needs to resolve the problems we found in this audit. The government also needs to ensure that these large, high-risk projects are subject to better oversight.
[English]
We move now to the delivery of legal services to the government. The Department of Justice Canada can be characterized as Canada's largest law firm, with about 2,500 lawyers and a budget of close to $1 billion in the last fiscal year. The services it provides to the federal government and its departments and agencies include legal advice, drafting of legislation and regulations, and representation in court.
Since our last audit in 1993, the complexity and volume of litigation have increased significantly. The cost of legal services provided by the department has more than tripled.
We found that the department has made progress in its management of litigation risk and its management of legal agents. However, most areas have not fared as well.
We found that the department does not have a system to ensure consistent quality in the legal services it provides to the federal government. While it has elements of quality management, it does not know whether they are functioning as intended.
We also found that its current financial arrangements with client departments provide few incentives to control costs and manage the increasing demand for legal services.
The department has been aware of this problem for several years, but its efforts to resolve the matter have resulted in little improvement.
It is surprising how little progress has been made since our 1993 audit. As do many of Canada's large law firms, the Department of Justice Canada needs someone like a chief operating officer to oversee the administration of the department.
[Translation]
Finally, acquisition and travel credit cards can be a convenient and efficient way for the federal government to obtain and pay for goods and services. Many federal departments are encouraging their use—total spending with these cards was about $825 million in 2005.
We examined the acquisition and travel card programs in the three departments that, together, account for about half the total acquisition card use and a large portion of the travel card use in the government.
I am pleased that we found no abuse of government credit cards, and the departments have good controls in place.
However, the controls are not always applied consistently and rigorously. In some cases, transactions were verified and certified by individuals who lacked the authority or by the individual cardholder who charged the transactions in the first place.
The more the cards are used, the greater the risk of misuse. Departments can reduce those risks by applying their controls rigorously. This is another case where the government does not need more rules, it just needs to make sure existing rules are followed.
[English]
Mr. Chair, that completes my overview of the report. We would be pleased to answer any questions that committee members may have.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to all.
Here we go again.
I want to follow up on the same chapter that Mr. Williams introduced, which is chapter 3, for many of the same reasons.
I've had an opportunity to travel on a couple of occasions to other countries on behalf of Canada, and some of them were high security areas. Not only do I have a lot of sympathy, but I have a lot of positive things to say about virtually every person I've dealt with in every embassy and every consulate. Every staff person has been phenomenal.
Given that so much of our future is predicated on our ability to identify and bring immigrants to Canada to play a role in our society, this is a key piece. This has to work. If this doesn't work, nothing else can. Not only that, but a lot of our foreign policy is developed by virtue of the information that's received.
Mr. Williams has addressed it, and I won't go back to that issue, but there's the whole issue of compensation.
When you're travelling from meeting to meeting with officials, and you've all been through it, you're stuffed into vans and you move from place to place. You chat with these folks on a personal basis and not only about business; you ask them what's it like living there.
I won't mention the places, because I'm going to say they're not very desirable places to live.
It's fine for the professionals, and it's much like us in terms of the fact that we pick this role. However, our families get dragged along into it, and it's the same for these folks.
When we talk about security and the ability to make sure their children receive an adequate education, I notice there is a difference between the schooling they would get in the U.S. versus the schooling they would get elsewhere. In terms of the compensation they get, it's also different in the U.S.
I find it very strange. Normally, I would have thought, if you'd asked me, it was the other way around. If you were in Canada or the U.S., you'd be doing the best, and from there on it would be catch-as-catch-can. But it actually is not. When you go to further-flung places, more is provided. There's a real issue with that.
It's something that is really important. We need professional staff in these embassies and consulates who feel comfortable with their own personal lives. When they leave in the morning, they should know that everybody at home is safe and family life is going to continue. Without that, they can't do their jobs. None of us can.
To me, this is big. I realize that in the constellation of problems it's not as huge as a stand-alone, but think of the work being done, what it means to Canada, and how important it is.
Believe me, if you've ever been in any of these places when you have an emergency, you pick up the local phone to contact someone and you want to get hold of the embassy. It's no different from when you bring your baby to the hospital. You don't want to be told anything other than care is on its way right away.
When you're in a foreign place and one of your children goes missing or is hurt, or if something happens, you phone the Canadian embassy. It's the Canadian cavalry, and it's going to help. If they aren't operating in the way they need to, we're not taking care of Canadians who are across the world doing different things.
I feel very strongly about this. I have a lot of questions, but they're not really for you, Madam Auditor. You've done your job.
But I will say this to colleagues. This is one that I would like to bring in, and I will be voting for it.
Again, in the constellation of things, it's not a big scandal and it's not a big headline. But this is the kind of infrastructure we need to provide. It doesn't matter which party is in power. The future depends on our ability to communicate with the world effectively.
In my mind, this report is our warning that it's in jeopardy.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Fitzpatrick.
Thank you, Mrs. Fraser.
I take it from Mr. Fitzpatrick's questions and interventions that he thinks Canada's new government is doing a great job. I get the impression that's his view.
I'm going to go to the second round, colleagues.
Before I do that, however, I just have one area, Mrs. Fraser, I want to pursue and get your comments on, and that is the issue of human resources within the Department of Foreign Affairs.
It seems to me that over the last six and half years that I've been on this committee, this has been a recurring theme, not only for Foreign Affairs but I believe for most other departments here in the Government of Canada. As Mr. Christopherson said, it's not a scandalous issue, but it's very important to the proper functioning of government. When you look at the statistics and the number of people who can retire in all departments, not only Foreign Affairs but all departments, over the next short period of time, and when you look at the statistics as to how people get into the federal civil service—I think 87% of them are through temporary or contract positions—
About five years ago we had a number of different studies going on. Mr. Quail actually was leading a charge on civil service renewal, and the clerk at the time. We had the Treasury Board. I asked them all who accepted responsibility for that, but no one would actually say they would accept responsibility. It was kind of a joint mishmash.
We're entering a time when we're dealing with labour shortages. This is a problem that I think will get more acute and more severe and more serious as time goes on.
I have three points for you. In your observations, do you see the same issue recurring in every department? Is the problem getting better or getting worse? And do you have any comments or observations as to how, from a strategic basis, the government may want to look at dealing with the issue?