PACP Committee Report

On December 7, 2006, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts submitted its Tenth Report to Parliament.  The focus of the Committee’s report was Chapter 4 of the May 2006 Report of the Auditor General of Canada (Canadian Firearms Program).  The Government of Canada was asked to respond to the eight recommendations made by the Standing Committee in its report.  The following is the comprehensive Government Response.

Recommendation 1

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee with an action plan and timetable no later than 31 January 2007 for the implementation of the Auditor General’s recommendations contained in her May 2006 Status Report, Chapter 4.

Response

The responsibility for the Canada Firearms Centre (CAFC) was transferred to the RCMP after the tabling of the Auditor General’s (AG) chapter on the Canadian Firearms Program.  The Government agrees with the recommendations of the Auditor General and the RCMP continues the corrective action undertaken by the CAFC prior to the transfer.

The RCMP/CAFC has designated an official responsible for implementing each action item outlined in the Department’s response to the AG’s report, and progress is monitored on a monthly basis to ensure implementation.

The RCMP/CAFC met with the Office of the Auditor General and discussed how best to implement the recommendations in the AG’s chapter on the Canadian Firearms Program, as well as in the 10th Report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.

The AG requires an annual progress report.  The RCMP/CAFC will fully disclose all progress and challenges it may face in fulfilling its commitments.  In addition, the Departmental Performance Report includes a requirement to report progress on audit commitments to Parliament. 

The RCMP/CAFC will report, in detail, on its action plan, timetable and progress according to the plan set out in the 2006 Commissioner of Firearms annual report to Parliament.  The RCMP/CAFC will submit this action plan to the Minister of Public Safety.

RECOMMENDATION 2

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide Parliament detailed information about the amount allocated to the Canadian Firearms Program’s proposed expenses in the RCMP’s votes included in the Main and Supplementary Estimates.  That the RCMP provide detailed performance and financial information about the Program in its Report on Plans and Priorities and Departmental Performance Report.

RESPONSE

The Government agrees with this recommendation.  The RCMP will continue to provide detailed performance and financial information about the RCMP/CAFC in its Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) and in the Departmental Performance Report (DPR).  The RCMP has included a special chapter in its RPP dealing only with the CAFC and will do the same in future DPRs.  The RCMP will continue to prepare annual financial statements solely for the CAFC operations and it will propose to the Office of the Auditor General that its financial statements be audited.  The RCMP will engage the Office of the Auditor General in discussions on this proposal to determine the earliest opportunity for the proposed audit.

The RCMP will ensure the CAFC is maintained in its Program Activity Architecture as a distinct entity for financial and performance reporting purposes.  Votes for CAFC funding will be blended into the regular operating and capital votes of the RCMP.

Recommendation 3

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide, in consultation with officials from the Treasury Board Secretariat and the Office of the Auditor General, a meaningful results chain for the Canadian Firearms Program in its 2007-08 Report on Plans and Priorities.

RESPONSE

The Government accepts this recommendation.  The RCMP has developed a results chain (logic model) for the Canadian Firearms Program, in consultation with the Treasury Board Secretariat Centre for Excellence in Evaluation.  In addition, the Office of the Auditor General provided general guidance on the logic model.  The final version of the logic model will be included in the 2008-09 RPP.

RECOMMENDATION 4

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police conduct a program evaluation of the effectiveness of the entire Canadian Firearms Program and submit the results to the Public Accounts Committee by 31 December 2007.

Consequently, and also because of the amounts that have already been invested in the Program, the Committee considers that a moratorium should be declared on the dismantling of the Firearms Registry, to allow the Committee to evaluate accurately the findings of the Program audit.

RESPONSE

The Government accepts the first part of this Recommendation. The RCMP is drafting an evaluation framework in consultation with the TBS Centre for Excellence in Evaluation.  The evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the TB Policy on Evaluation.

The Government is unable to support the second part of this Recommendation.  The Government is committed to implementing measures that effectively target the criminal misuse of firearms.  As a result, it has tabled Bill C-21, and is committed to eliminating the requirement to register non-restricted firearms.  The requirement to register restricted and prohibited firearms will be maintained.  Firearms Program efforts will focus on meaningful firearms control initiatives.

RECOMMENDATION 5

That the Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide the Public Accounts Committee a report by 31 January 2007 on the specific steps the RCMP is taking to address each of the data quality problems described in the audit report, including a timeline and milestones for the “continuous improvement plan.”

RESPONSE

The Government supports this recommendation.  Following the audit conducted by the Office of the Auditor General, CAFC established a Data Quality Continuous Improvement Plan to identify and resolve data quality issues. This is a critical component of the CAFC data quality assurance regime. 

The RCMP/CAFC is taking steps to remedy the misclassification of up to 2,500 registered firearms during the Registration Readiness Initiative, which ended in July 2003.  Although these firearms represent only .03% of all registered firearms, it is crucial that any misclassification be corrected.  Technicians from the Canadian Firearms Registry are contacting the owners and verifying these firearms. This process will be completed by summer 2007.

In response to Recommendation 4.64 of the AG’s 2006 Report, RCMP/CAFC is investing in a performance management solution to provide operational and performance information of the Canadian Firearms Information System (CFIS).  This solution is already in use and is supporting the data quality review as well as the analysis recommended in 4.52 of the AG’s 2006 Report.  The full implementation of the solution is expected by March 2008.

The RCMP/CAFC remains committed to ensuring that its information is accurate, complete, current and accessible.

RECOMMENDATION 6

Public Works and Government Services provides the Public Accounts Committee with a report by 31 December 2006 ensuring that its contracting tools are not being used to circumvent contracting policies and regulations.

RESPONSE

The Government agrees with this recommendation.  Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) has taken a number of steps to ensure that its tools are not being used to circumvent contracting policies and regulations.  These steps were outlined in a letter from PWGSC to the PAC, constituting PWGSC’s report as requested in the Recommendation, and are summarized below.

First, PWGSC has strengthened its oversight of the use of Professional Services Online.  Specifically, the Department has completed approximately 180 audits affecting a variety of users.  PWGSC has followed up by taking appropriate corrective actions in areas covered by its mandate and by sharing the information with client departments for them to take corrective action in their areas of accountability.  Further, PWGSC will introduce an expanded automated reporting capability to Professional Services Online in the first quarter of fiscal year 2007-08.   These additional reports will help PWGSC monitor the usage of Professional Services Online and identify possible areas of concern.

In addition, since Professional Services Online was implemented in 1995, it has been mandatory for federal department users to receive training prior to being granted access to the database.  Since 1995, PWGSC has trained over 1,100 individuals from 95 departments and agencies.  As part of the training, PWGSC provides information concerning the Professional Services Online application and a clear explanation of departments’ obligations related to usage of the tool.  An information web site has also been established which contains the protocol for departments using the application and clearly defines users’ responsibilities.  Training has also been provided to procurement staff in PWGSC's regional offices, with the intent that they will train regional clients in the use of Professional Services Online.

Over the past year, in response to the Auditor General’s recommendations, PWGSC has taken steps to strengthen the management of its information technology service to government departments.  For instance, the new Enterprise Product Catalogue has been released for distribution, outlining a list of information technology products currently offered by PWGSC to its clients.  There are no service offerings that provide professional services without a formal service agreement being in place between PWGSC and its client that identifies service levels. 

PWGSC has also consolidated its contract management function supporting its information technology service to government departments in one unit to ensure that all policies are adhered to and re-established a Contract Review Board to approve all of these contracts.  Clear and concise guidelines for PWGSC staff have been implemented to ensure compliance to internal and Treasury Board contracting practices and policies.  In addition, PWGSC has made all staff aware of the consequences of inappropriate contracting practices and reinforced this message through specialized training, which focuses on ethics and procurement. 

RECOMMENDATION 7

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide the Public Accounts Committee with a report on the past and expected future costs of the Canadian Firearms Information Systems (CFIS) I and II by 31 December 2006, and that the RCMP report on the costs of CFIS in its annual Departmental Performance Reports.

RESPONSE

The Government supports this recommendation. The Canadian Firearms Information System (CFIS) is a notional system designed to support the administration of the Firearms Act.  CFIS records, tracks and makes available specific firearms and licensed owner information to police agencies and other stakeholders.

In July 2002, PWGSC, on behalf of the CAFC, awarded a contract to CGI for the replacement of CFIS I, to be known as CFIS II.  The original contract was for the development, implementation, operation and maintenance of an alternate service delivery solution including a new application (ie. CFIS II).

Numerous delays were encountered and CGI did not achieve the timely completion of the CFIS II application. As a result, CAFC was required to maintain CFIS I to meet existing legislative and business requirements, which by late 2005, met the user requirements of the CAFC.

CGI failed to deliver a functional application by April 2006, and PWGSC issued a stop work order in relation to CFIS II.

On May 17th 2006, responsibility for the CAFC was transferred to the RCMP.  In June 2006, as requested by PWGSC, the RCMP conducted a review of the CFIS II project, which was supported by an independent third party.  The results of the RCMP review, which was consistent with previous independent reviews provided to the CAFC, revealed that the development of the CFIS II software application was unlikely to succeed, that the partially implemented network component failed to meet performance requirements and that the current CFIS I met the current needs of the RCMP/CAFC.

As disclosed in Government of Canada’s Public Accounts, costs associated with CFIS I, and any future costs incurred in relation to the CFIS II, will be recorded and reported in compliance with Treasury Board Policy and all project development costs will be recorded against appropriations as they are incurred. 

Past Costs CFIS I

The past costs of CFIS I represent development as well as maintenance costs.  In this regard, a contract with EDS Canada is ongoing.  The total payments by fiscal year made to this contractor to March 31, 2006 are as follows:

Fiscal Year	Amount
1997-1998	$13.7M
1998-1999	$45.4M
1999-2000	$38.0M
2000-2001	$33.6M
2001-2002	$18.2M
2002-2003	$7.7M
2003-2004	$7.2M
2004-2005	$7.7M
2005-2006	$8.4M
Total (amounts excl. GST)	$179.9M

Past Costs of CFIS II

Past costs of CFIS II represent development as well as maintenance costs.  A contract was awarded to Team CENTRA, a joint venture made up of CGI Information Systems and Management Consultants and BDP Business Data Services Limited (now known as Resolve Corporation).  The total payments made to this contractor to March 31, 2006 are as follows:

Phase / Tasks	Amount
Phase I – Original solution contract (including Amendment #1) for work to March 31, 2004	$8.2M
Amendment #2 (four task authorizations)	$0.6M
Amendment #3 (scope increase to Phase 1)	$9.2M
Balance of Phase 1 - Solution Realization	$21.6M
System Redesign - Contract Amendment  (includes delay costs)	$34.2M
Task Authorizations (servers and CPUs)	$0.4M
Task Authorizations & start up of Business operations (Dec, 2005)	$6.9M
Total (amounts excl. GST):	$81.1M

The RCMP will record and report, as required, the CFIS costs in the RCMP Departmental Financial Statements which form part of the Departmental Performance Report.  The RCMP will continue to report the status of CFIS within the “Status Report on Major Crown Projects” section of the special chapter dedicated to the RCMP/CAFC. 

RECOMMENDATION 8

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide a legal opinion to the Public Accounts Committee on whether or not it violated the Privacy Act by engaging the Volunteer Verifiers Network.

RESPONSE

The Government cannot agree with this recommendation.  The Government does not generally provide information about when it receives legal advice, or the nature of that advice, and it is not prepared to do so in this case.

The RCMP/CAFC ensures that the handling of personal information for the purposes of firearms verification is consistent with the Privacy Act.  The RCMP/CAFC fully supports the Committee’s intention, stated in its Tenth Report, to forward a copy of its Report to the Privacy Commissioner for her consideration.

Volunteer verifiers act as agents of the Registrar.  During the firearms verification process, they are engaged by individuals for verification services, and personal information is recorded on firearms verification forms.  This information is necessary to complete the administration of the verification process, as required under the Firearms Act and Regulations.  Volunteer verifiers are not permitted to keep copies of the completed verification forms. Once completed, the original form is sent directly to the Central Processing Site (CPS).  RCMP/CAFC databases housing personal information about firearms owners are not made available to volunteer verifiers. Volunteer verifiers are granted access to information only in the Firearms Reference Table (FRT), which is a reference tool and compendium of data on the make, model and physical features of registered firearms.