On April 12, the PBO sent a letter to the deputy ministers of all 64 government departments requesting that “information pertaining to the savings measures undertaken within your department that has been presented in Annex 1 of Budget 2012.” What the PBO was essentially looking for was the full details of the government’s planned cuts. Only 18 departments complied before the Privy Council Office issued a letter to the PBO saying the government would not release more information until affected employees were notified of pending job cuts.
Now, though, the Privy Council Office has told the PBO to go back to each department and ask them again.
On Tuesday, the PBO issued a letter to deputy ministers.
“On September 25, 2012, officials from the Privy Council Office informed us that the decision whether or not to disclose the information requested rested with each deputy head,” the letter reads. “Accordingly, we are asking you to provide the information by October 10, 2012 or an explanation as to why it is not going to be provided.”
In May, Tony Clement, president of the Treasury Board, tabled the 2012-13 Reports on Plans and Priorities. PBO Kevin Page and his office were hopeful that, given the reports were delayed until May (they usually appear earlier), they would take into account initiatives announced in the April 2012 budget. They did not.
Thus began the process of the PBO seeking the more up-to-date information from the departments. The PBO received a response to its departmental requests from the Privy Council Office on May 15, stating that while “we appreciate the importance of providing Parliamentarians with information on the savings measures” from the budget, “the government is equally committed to treating its employees fairly and respecting its contractual obligations.”
While the PCO was arguing that information on employees cannot be disclosed until the affected unions are notified, the unions themselves issued an press release in late June calling on the government to respond to the PBO’s request.
Over the summer, the PBO tried to set up meetings with the PCO, and also sent along a legal opinion outlining how withholding the costing information could be in violation of the PBO’s power of direct request laid out in the Parliament of Canada Act. To no avail.
“We have provided financial and economic data in accordance with our understanding of our legal obligations,” Raymond Rivet, a spokesman for the Privy Council Office, said in an e-mail statement to the Canadian Press in June.
Now, months after the PBO’s first request to the department heads for information, the PCO has directed it to try again.
Should the PBO again come up against non-compliance it has said it will consider legal action against each deputy minister and the Clerk of the Privy Council.
Shortly after the PBO issued the legal opinion, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird told the House of Commons the arms-length office, which the Conservatives created in 2006, was pushing its boundaries.
“I have to say, with great respect, I believe from time to time the parliamentary budget office has overstepped its mandate,” Baird said.
The opposition saw it differently.
NDP Leader Tom Mulcair called Baird’s comment about mandate creep “a warning that Kevin Page has made the ultimate mistake: he doesn’t tell the Conservatives what they want to hear and he actually wants to be able to say the truth to the Canadian public.”
Despite such criticism, when faced with questions in the House Tuesday, Clement stuck to the government’s position that Page has strayed from the office’s mission.
“He should spend his time worrying more about his mandate, which is about how we spend money not the money that we do not spend,” Clement said after NDP’s Peggy Nash demanded to know why the Conservatives are “afraid to tell Canadians the truth?”
Outside in the Commons foyer after question period, iPolitics asked Nash why she thought the PCO had waited so long before telling the PBO to direct its requests for information back to the deputy ministers.
“Either they have the information and they don’t want to share it, or they really don’t know where the cuts are coming from. It could be either, we really don’t know,” Nash said. “it’s very difficult if you don’t have a plan, you can end up cutting services and programs that can really hurt Canadians. And we can see some of the areas where those cuts are taking place, so is that part of a plan or is it an ad hoc decision? We don’t know.”
Original Article
Source: ipolitics
Author: Colin Horgan
No comments:
Post a Comment