On Tuesday, a Conservative bulldog offered his party's most recent characterization of Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page.
"I have to say with great respect, I believe from time to time and on occasion the parliamentary budget officer has overstepped his mandate," Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird said when he rose in the House of Commons.
The allegation left Page perplexed.
"What does that even mean?" Page asked in an interview. "Someone has to explain that to me...Does he mean we're having too much impact? Well I ain't apologizing for that. I'm not apologizing for the work we did on the F-35s, on crime bills, or the fiscal sustainability reports. Those are all papers the government has not produced, that I produced with help from a group of people you could fit around two dinner tables."
For months, Page has been asking for detailed information on the Conservatives' plans for implementing $5.2 billion in government-wide cuts. Although the overall figure was revealed in the March budget, Canadians remain in the dark in terms of how the cuts will affect programs and services they use.
Page published a legal opinion this week, solicited from a leading constitutional lawyer, that concluded the 64 agencies withholding information are breaking the law by denying the information.
Page's small office of 15 accountants and analysts was launched after the Conservatives came to office in 2006 and passed the Federal Accountability Act into law. The office was given a mandate to independently analyze trends in the economy, provide costs estimates on procurement and policy, analyze program spending and help MPs scrutinize government's spending plans, among other orders.
Over time, Page, the man who was hand-picked to lead the newborn office, has been frequently criticized.
Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, for example, has described some of Page's estimates as "unbelievable," "unreliable," and "incredible."
A certain amount of pushback and criticism from the government, Page said, is expected when a new accountability office comes to town.
"But what concerns me, is when we get these high-level comments with nothing behind them to explain what they mean by it," he said. "Say what you want to say, but explain it."
Baird's office didn't elaborate on his accusation when contacted Tuesday, instead referring questions to Treasury Board Minister Tony Clement, who has been the lead on the file.
Clement's office didn't immediately answer emailed questions.
The opposition, however, was quick to retaliate earlier in the day.
"I think it's outrageous," interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae told reporters. "It's a smear without substance or foundation... It's completely preposterous to suggest that when a parliamentary budgetary authority asks for information from government departments he's somehow overstepping his bounds."
The leader of the New Democrats seemed similarly disturbed.
"Right now the Conservatives are sending another strong message," Thomas Mulcair said. "You're not allowed to disagree with them. And, by the way, even if you have a mandate under the law to (receive) information... you can be starved of that information even if it's a clear infraction of the law."
Following Page's initial requests for information, only 18 of 82 federal organizations came through.
Clement has publicly disagreed with the assertion that their actions are an infringement of the Parliament of Canada Act, which governs the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
The minister has also repeatedly said the government is waiting to publish information on the cuts -- currently sitting in the hands of department heads -- until all affected employees and their unions have been notified.
But unions and public servants alike have come out saying they have no qualms about this information becoming public, so long as no personal information is released.
"There's no legal reason for saying they have concerns about their relationship with the employees or the unions," Page said, noting the information could be provided to Parliament in confidence.
In the meantime, Page's office is waiting for a legal opinion in response to what he sent the government's top bureaucrat.
The budget officer said he isn't certain to when he will receive a response, but is confident it will reflect the one he submitted.
"I think it would be very difficult for them to write a legal opinion saying they're against the sharing of information and scrutiny," Page said. "Let's just see the plan. With no plan, there's no accountability. I honestly can't be the parliamentary budget officer and say this is OK. I might make more friends, but I wouldn't be doing my job."
Original Article
Source: global news
Author: Amy Minsky
No comments:
Post a Comment