The Sub-Committee on the Business of Supply has the honour to present its
FIRST REPORT
Pursuant to a request from the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, the Sub-Committee on the Business of Supply met with officials from Treasury Board Secretariat and the Office of the Auditor General on 27 November 1995 to consider a proposed change to the votes contained in the Estimates.
At the meeting, Treasury Board officials presented a document entitled Operating Budgets and the Vote Structure. This document explains the reasons for altering an aspect of the votes in the Estimates and proposes that a new Operating Expenditures Vote be introduced for the 1996-97 Main Estimates. This new vote would contain items of minor capital expenditure currently included in separate capital votes. Treasury Board officials stated that by making this change, Parliament would be presented with a more accurate view of the way departments and agencies expend the funds that are allocated to them. Furthermore, they indicated that if this change is made, public service managers would be given enhanced flexibility to match available funds with existing priorities. They also indicated that this proposed change is an interim measure that would be in place until the government adopts a new accounting system.
Mr. Ron Thompson, of the Office of the Auditor General, told the Sub-Committee that the change being proposed by Treasury Board Secretariat is largely administrative in nature and that it would make it easier to manage government departments and agencies. He also assured the Sub-Committee that Parliament's ability to scrutinize and approve the expenditure plans of government would not be diminished by a change of this kind.
After listening to the evidence presented by the witnesses and after having considered the issue carefully, the Sub-Committee concluded that it has no objections to the proposal being made by Treasury Board Secretariat at this time. However, the Sub-Committee does have some concerns over the potential effect this change may have on parliamentary scrutiny of the Estimates and on accountability. The Sub-Committee also has some concerns about the nature of the expenses to be included as minor capital. Accordingly, the Sub-Committee, which is currently engaged in a comprehensive review of the business of supply, may make recommendations with regard to this proposal on completion of its work.
The Sub-Committee recommends that the Chair of the Procedure and House Affairs Committee write to the President of the Treasury Board indicating that the Committee has no objections to the proposed changes to the Operating Expenditures Vote, and requesting that the President take note of the concerns expressed by the Sub-Committee.
Respectfully submitted,
MARLENE CATTERALL, M.P.
Chair
The Sub-Committee on the Business of Supply has the honour to present its
SECOND REPORT
In accordance with the Order of Reference from the House of Commons dated 7 June 1995, and with the Committee's decision of 22 June 1995, the Sub-Committee on the Business of Supply met twice on 7 December 1995 with officials from Treasury Board Secretariat, the Office of the Auditor General, and Ronald Duhamel, M.P., who was present in his capacity as the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board and as Chair of the parliamentary working group on the revision of the Estimates.
At these meetings, Treasury Board Secretariat officials informed the Sub-Committee of a proposal to table, on a trial basis, revised Part III documents for the 1996-97 fiscal year for six departments: Transport Canada, Agriculture and Agri-foods Canada, Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Fisheries and Oceans, Revenue Canada, and Natural Resources Canada.
The witnesses from Treasury Board Secretariat explained that the Secretariat has been working closely with the six departments in a trial effort to produce Part III documents designed to answer the information needs of Parliament in a more efficient and effective manner. On the basis of the progress that has been made to date, it was deemed appropriate to present the results to the House for the upcoming fiscal year.
Ronald Duhamel told the Sub-Committee that the parliamentary working group examining the revision of the Estimates has met with officials from Treasury Board Secretariat on several occasions. He indicated that the working group encourages and supports the initiatives undertaken by the Secretariat. Ron Thompson, of the Office of the Auditor General, also indicated that the initiative has the support of his Office. The Office also supports plans to evaluate the trial Part III documents, will monitor the initiative, and will examine the results as part of its future audit work.
As a consequence of its discussions with the witnesses, the Sub-Committee developed a number of concerns regarding this proposal, concerns that it expects to see adressed. The Sub-Committee believes that the revised documents should be constructed within a framework that will allow departments the necessary degree of flexibility while at the same time requiring them to report certain kinds of information consistently, succinctly, and according to clear standards. Thus it is expected that Treasury Board Secretariat will develop general guidelines for the departments governing the production of the revised Part IIIs.
It is the Sub-Committee's firm conviction that the primary focus of any revisions to the Estimates and other related material must be on the needs of Parliament. The Sub-Committee notes that Treasury Board Secretariat intends to conduct an evaluation of the revised documents after their presentation to the House and the appropriate standing committees. The Sub-Committee believes that an evaluation plan must be established in advance and must be based on criteria that are clear and commonly understood. The Sub-Committee also expects that as part of this evaluation process, Treasury Board Secretariat will assess which of the revised Part IIIs best meets the needs of parliamentarians and make any appropriate revisions to future documents on that basis. To this end, the evaluation process must include careful, ongoing consultation with the standing committees that will be receiving the revised Part IIIs. The Sub-Committee intends to monitor developments in this area and expects Treasury Board Secretariat to report back to it on the steps being taken in response to these concerns.
Finally, in the process of conducting its study, the Sub-Committee has been examining ways in which parliamentarians might be encouraged to become more closely involved in the business of supply. Two recent changes offer this possibility. A new Standing Order (81.8) gives standing committees the opportunity to examine and report on the long-term expenditure plans of departments. The tabling of Outlook documents with standing committees at the same time that the Estimates are presented is intended to facilitate this process. Treasury Board Secretariat, as part of its initiative to revise the Estimates documents, intends to allow departments the option of combining their Outlooks with the Part IIIs. While the Sub-Committee is generally favourable to this measure on a trial basis, it is concerned that it be accomplished in a manner that will note interfere with the ability of parliamentarians to understand and comment on the future expenditure plans and priorities of departments. In particular, information from the Outlooks must be integrated into the Part IIIs in a way that allows Committees to review and report on it separately, and have an input into the following year's budget.
Following close consideration of this proposal, and subject to the above reservations and expectations, the Sub-Committee reports it agreement with the direction being taken by Treasury Board Secretariat in its reform of the estimates project and that Transport Canada, Agriculture and Agri-food Canada, Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Fisheries and Oceans, Revenue Canada, and Natural Resources Canada table, on a trial basis, revised Part III documents for the 1996-97 fiscal year, for consideration by the appropriate standing committees.
Respectfully submitted,
MARLENE CATTERALL, M.P.
Chair