What I've always appreciated with chairs of committee is the balanced way they presume a question, and I can't help but think the way you've positioned the question to the committee, by virtue of their potential inaccessibility, presupposes a response that they would not be available.
We had a particularly strong fuss, it seems to me, by members opposite not so long ago when we had Transport officials present, including two ministers, and there was some question of timing. We got into some really ridiculous wrangling, quite frankly, but members opposite made it really clear at that time, Madam Chair, that they intended to hear specifically the people who they had anticipated they would hear. Now there just seems to be an inconsistency in the logic that I'm trying to understand.
Separately, it seems, Chair, through you, that you biased the question to the committee, the way you positioned it, by suggesting their unavailability. I would respectfully ask you, when you pose questions of this nature, to remove the bias out of that, if you would, please--respectfully.
:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
As you've indicated, and I believe my office has indicated to the clerk of the committee, my colleague and I will have to leave at 4:30. But as I also indicated to you, I will no doubt be back before the committee on December 3, when we appear before this committee with my minister on the supplementary estimates for the Treasury Board Secretariat. So if there are other issues or questions that cannot be addressed within this timeframe, I'd be happy to address them at that opportunity as well.
I understand that I'm here today as a follow-up to my November 3 appearance before this committee, when I appeared with the Clerk of the Privy Council.
Accompanying me today is Mr. Alister Smith, assistant secretary in the expenditure management sector of the Treasury Board Secretariat.
In addition, I would say further to my November 3 appearance, I believe the department forwarded to the clerk of the committee the information the committee had requested on the Government of Canada's communications and federal identity program policies, as well as related information to the expenditure action plan.
It is my understanding that members had additional questions about communications planning--particularly coordination of communications on initiatives that cut across more than one department--and that some of these questions arose as a result of Mr. Kennedy's appearance before the committee last week.
I thought it would be of interest to the committee if I did a brief recap of the roles and responsibilities under the Government of Canada's communications policy.
I'll start with the cabinet, which is supported by designated cabinet committees. It sets and monitors the government's strategic communications direction and provides day-to-day coordination for the implementation of the government's agenda. It ensures that emerging issues are managed effectively throughout the government and acts as the gatekeeper for policy and legislative proposals. The cabinet sets policy direction and funding allocations required for Treasury Board to release funds for advertising contracts based on the government advertising plan.
I'll turn now to ministers. Ministers, both individually and collectively as members of cabinet, are the principal spokespersons for the Government of Canada and its institutions. It is their role to provide leadership in establishing the priorities and overall themes of government communications.
Specifically, ministers determine--together with their respective deputy heads--their communication priorities, objectives, and requirements. They approve the corporate communications plans of the institutions they head; they define the responsibilities of ministerial staff with respect to communications; and they establish, together with their respective deputy heads, effective liaison between ministerial staff and institutional heads of communications to ensure that the communication of policy and operational initiatives is coordinated. Particular attention is paid to media relations and participation in public events and announcements.
The Privy Council Office--my colleagues who appeared with me before you on November 3 and subsequently--coordinates and manages government communications, as determined by the Prime Minister and the cabinet. It is responsible for advising the cabinet and its committees, as well as the Privy Council Office senior management and institutions across the government, on communication issues, themes, and strategies.
The Privy Council Office supports and monitors the implementation of cabinet decisions across government, particularly with respect to communications. It collects and analyzes information on the public environment in order to advise the Prime Minister, ministers, and institutions on the management of public issues. It coordinates and supports the planning of horizontal or government-wide communications by designating lead institutions and assigning special responsibilities. It develops and monitors the government advertising plan and recommends funding allocations under that plan to the cabinet or its designated committee.
For its part, the Treasury Board of Canada is responsible for approving and promulgating general administrative policy for the Government of Canada in accordance with the Financial Administration Act. The Government of Canada’s communications policy is a good example of such administrative policy.
The secretariat advises and supports the board and its president in the development, management, and evaluation of those policies.
In that capacity, the secretariat has key responsibilities for the communications policy, which include developing and evaluating the policy itself; advising institutions on policy interpretation and application; monitoring policy implementation and compliance; advising on the allocation and management of funds for government advertising, which the Privy Council Office coordinates, and assessing, advising on, and processing Treasury Board submissions from institutions to release funding for approved advertising initiatives; assessing performance results and ensuring effective resource and expenditure management related to the communications function; and directing, coordinating, and monitoring implementation of the federal identity program.
Deputy heads lead and are responsible for the overall management of communications and its integration with other key functions, particularly policy and program management, and they champion an institution's internal communications.
Deputy heads are accountable to their ministries for ensuring the government's communications priorities and requirements are met; to the Clerk of the Privy Council for ensuring that their institutions' communications fully reflect government-wide policies, themes, and priorities, and that the communications function is fully integrated into the planning, management, and evaluation of policies, programs, services, and initiatives; and to the Secretary of the Treasury Board for implementing this policy within their institutions and for carrying out related directives, instructions, or administrative procedures that the secretary may issue from time to time.
Deputy heads must ensure that any instructions issued by the Clerk of the Privy Council and all relevant cabinet decisions concerning communications priorities of the government are fully implemented.
Deputy heads must ensure that the requirements of the communications policy of the Government of Canada are fulfilled in all operations of the institutions they lead, both within Canada and abroad. This includes ensuring that institutions manage both internal and external communications according to the values and principles expressed in the policy.
[Translation]
In my November 3rd testimony, in response to a question from Ms. Bourgeois about whether there is a government-wide planning process for communications, I said that, and I quote:
It is up to each department to establish a communications plan or a communications strategy. The Treasury Board does not have a communications plan, except for its own department. Most of the communications initiatives form an integral part of the initiatives of the programs of every department and agency.
This applies to the vast majority of communications initiatives in government. A certain level of coordination is usually put in place where an initiative cuts across more than one department and requires a coordinated approach from a communications perspective.
When I stated at that same meeting “that there is no pangovernmental planning”, I was referring to advertising in general. Communications planning for the economic action plan is an example of an initiative that cuts across multiple departments and as a result is coordinated, which my colleague from the Privy Council spoke to and showed you by way of the communication materials he referred to.
In his opening remarks at the November 3rd meeting of your committee, the Clerk of the Privy Council spoke on this issue. He stated that the Privy Council Office, and in particular, Mr. Simon Kennedy, Deputy Secretary to the Cabinet, Plans and Consultations, is “responsible for managing the overall communications of the economic action plan.” He went on to talk about two key elements of communications planning for the Economic Action Plan: the economic action plan website and advertising.
Madam Chair, I trust I have clarified the roles and responsibilities for communications planning in the Government of Canada for initiatives that are within a single organization, as well as for initiatives that cut across several departments.
I will be happy to respond to any questions you may have on this topic. Thank you.
:
Good afternoon, Madam Chair and committee members. I have with me John Forster, who is our associate deputy minister of infrastructure.
[Translation]
We are pleased to be here today to update you on Infrastructure Canada's work in implementing the Government of Canada's Economic Action Plan.
[English]
Last January, the government tabled its economic action plan. At that time, Infrastructure Canada was charged with two important responsibilities: first, to accelerate the government's Building Canada infrastructure plan; and second, to design and deliver five of the more than 20 new infrastructure initiatives in the budget, as approved by Parliament.
[Translation]
In the past 10 months, my department has been focused on delivering this challenging agenda for Canadians.
[English]
Today, I would like to spend a few moments to talk about our progress and the measures the department has put in place to ensure the accountable stewardship of taxpayers' funds. While appreciating that much of the focus has been on new funds, we cannot overlook the steps taken to accelerate our existing programs, specifically the Building Canada plan. This plan was originally designed to provide $33 billion over seven years to 2014. In the past 10 months, Infrastructure Canada has announced funding for 88 major projects worth $9.6 billion, transferred half a billion dollars to provinces and territories for their core infrastructure projects, and approved the entire program for small communities, about $1 billion for almost 800 projects in all 10 provinces.
[Translation]
Second, Infrastructure Canada has designed and launched new infrastructure funds announced in the budget.
[English]
For example, since January, Minister Baird has signed agreements with every province and territory that has committed matching funds of their own to infrastructure stimulus funds. He has committed more than $3.3 billion of this $4 billion fund, approved over 3,000 projects across the country, allowing work to begin, and approved a $500 million top-up for small communities in 9 of 10 provinces. Through all this activity, the department's focus has been on effective and efficient program delivery. In other words, Infrastructure Canada's goal was to balance speed with accountability and stewardship.
Madam Chairman, while much work remains to be done, the department has made good progress in achieving this goal. The department has streamlined the administrative and approval processes to allow work to begin sooner.
[Translation]
The department developed an innovative online application form and review process.
[English]
The Government of Canada passed legislation and changed regulations to streamline environmental assessments to avoid duplication while protecting the environment. The department contributed to the government's overall efforts.
Infrastructure Canada has not done this alone. Infrastructure Canada has built a truly impressive national partnership with two other levels of government. Provinces, territories, and municipalities play a key role in this partnership. They provide matching funding to increase the number of projects that can be built. They review and approve the projects with us. They contract, manage, and oversee the construction of projects on the ground, and they provide additional accountability to their citizens and taxpayers.
The Government of Canada is responsible for reviewing and approving the projects with our partners as well, and our department monitors progress.
Infrastructure Canada pays its share of the costs as construction proceeds based on claims submitted by the provinces and territories. This is a very important point. Under our stimulus funds, the department reimburses the claims as construction proceeds.
Through signed contribution agreements, the department has provided advances to each province and territory. As construction on projects proceeds and milestones are reached, provinces and territories can submit claims and the federal government pays its share.
This is exactly what Canadians do when they are renovating their homes. They do not pay 100% up front before any work is done; they pay a deposit or an advance. Then, as the construction proceeds, they pay the money for the work that is done.
In some cases, this means the department may not see a claim for work that began this year until later this year or even next year. This is not a reflection of inactivity. Instead, it is simply how these programs work in our agreements signed with the provinces and municipalities.
It is also an important part of protecting taxpayers by ensuring that the Government of Canada is paying for results achieved and delivered. Once the department receives complete and accurate claims, we have financial controls in place to review it. Upon approval, Infrastructure pays the claims within 30 days.
[Translation]
There is one last thing I would like to touch on.
Infrastructure Canada was tasked with a very important mandate. The department takes this mandate very seriously. And it has put in place important measures to deliver on it.
[English]
Infrastructure Canada's management capacity has been strengthened by the appointment of my colleague, John Forster, as the dedicated associate deputy minister for Infrastructure Canada.
The department has created and staffed a separate team that is responsible for infrastructure stimulus fund administration.
The department has strengthened its audit team. Infrastructure Canada has created an external audit committee. It has started its operations and the committee has been briefed on all our programs, most importantly regarding the economic action plan.
Infrastructure Canada has bolstered its capacity on environmental assessments. The department has strengthened its human resources management team, and we have improved the monitoring of our staffing processes.
[Translation]
And, Infrastructure Canada has built effective partnerships with other departments, such as the regional development agencies, who manage and deliver some of the department's infrastructure programs on the ground.
[English]
In the four months since I have become responsible for Infrastructure Canada, I have been very pleased with the dedication and level of effort in the department to deliver on the government's agenda. Much work remains to be done, and I will continue to seek ways to improve our implementation.
In closing, over the last 10 months, Infrastructure Canada has developed a national partnership that is leveraging billions of dollars in infrastructure funding, contributed to the start of thousands of important projects across the country, and, most importantly, put measures in place to ensure that the department could deliver quickly on the agenda while being accountable to Canadian taxpayers.
Thank you again, Madam Chair, for inviting us. We are very pleased to be here, and hopefully we'll answer all of your questions.
:
It would be my pleasure to do so.
There are two ways to submit projects in Quebec. First, as I mentioned, you can do so under the PRECO program, which involves putting in new waterlines in municipalities. This is a $700 million program, for which we assume half the costs and Quebec the other half.
The applications are sent to the Government of Quebec, which reviews them and approves the projects. Then, it sends the paperwork to the federal government, which accepts or rejects them. Quebec then manages the program, in Quebec. It signs agreements with the municipalities, provides the necessary funding for the projects and conducts follow-up with the municipalities.
Further, there is the Stimulus Fund. Quebec itself can propose projects. There are basically three categories: transportation projects, which basically involve infrastructure in Quebec, such as highways, cultural projects, and municipal projects which do not involve water treatment.
Quebec provides the application forms. As I indicated, they are available online and are only one page long. The federal government then quickly reviews the applications. If the federal and Quebec governments support a project, it becomes part of the agreement between the federal government and Quebec. The province of Quebec is responsible for the implementation of these projects.
I doubt we'll ask you to do that. It sounds crazy.
I notice that a lot of the infrastructure.... Well, I think I know why there's a lot more road infrastructure. There's a kind of Huey Long mentality: the more projects you have, the more signs you can put up, and filling potholes is a very popular thing to do.
I see that the province of Ontario has a lot of projects. I know the dollar figure is on a per capita basis. But there are a lot of small projects--1,721 projects in total. And I understand that, because you get to put a sign up on each one. I think that's the reasoning.
My question, though, is in terms of the federal contribution and the provincial contribution. In most provinces they're almost equal, almost exactly the same. In Ontario, the federal contribution is $200 million higher than the provincial contribution. I'm going to leave that as a question that I hope you can answer at the end of my comments.
My last question is this. From a communications point of view, is there any consideration of contracting out a new wordmark for the Government of Canada in terms of the federal identification? I ask this because the wordmark that we're all used to has been compromised to the extent that people don't see a great nation when they see that wordmark now. They see the sponsorship scandal. They see Chuck Guité. They see Buryl Wiseman. They see all these sleazy characters ruining the good name of our country. Is it part of the plan to design a new wordmark for Canada as the main label, the main logo, for the country?
Those two questions probably use up my time.
:
The information you have, that we gave the committee, is the same information we gave the Parliament Budget Officer at the end of October. Because he asked for claims dated in September and we didn't have claims yet, we couldn't respond to his request, so at the end of October we gave him, as a first tranche, all the application data as of September 22. So this information here is information from the application of the approved projects under the stimulus fund as of September 22.
What we since have provided to the Parliamentary Budget Officer are two things. Last week we met with his office and gave him a very detailed technical briefing on the program, walked him through the whole program, how it works, and showed him how it operates. We've now provided him with the claims information he requested in September, which was the first round of claims information, and that covers about 1,750 projects.
That was information that was provided to us in late August and the middle of September. Some of it would have been collected early in July, the middle of July, so it represents the state of projects from, I'd say, July to about mid-August. That's the information we just gave him and that he will now go through, and that covers about 1,750 projects.
We now are getting to the second round of claims. Remember they have to do it quarterly. Before they would do it once a year; this program, it's every quarter. The next quarter was November, so we're now just going through the next round of reporting and claims from all the provinces.
:
Madam Foote moves that the report that was submitted to us from Infrastructure Canada be distributed in the format it was given to the committee, in whatever language it was given. It's in both languages, actually, in terms of the Quebec portion.
Those in favour of the motion, please signify. Those against?
I will break the tie, voting in favour.
(Motion agreed to)
The Chair: The next thing I'd like the committee to note is that Madame Bourgeois wanted the study of the large infrastructure projects and the procurement process. Mr. Minto has stated that....
Attention Monsieur Plamondon, s'il vous plaît!
Mr. Minto suggested that he has produced his report. He would like to be here with the committee for two hours. That means that Public Works and Government Services, who are coming on November 26, is going to attend to the large IT projects as well as estimates on that day. It's just a little switch around. This is for information purposes. On December 1, Mr. Minto is going to be here for two hours.
With that amendment, we concur with the report. Is anybody opposed to the report?
Are you opposed to the report?