In a June report, the Commons government operations committee tabled an all-party report on ways to improve reporting to Parliament about of billions of dollars in annual spending. Chief among its recommendations was Page’s long-standing proposal to have departments report by program activities and strategic outcomes.
Page has argued that it makes no sense for MPs to vote by spending plans for inputs, operating and capital expenditures rather than by programs such as meat inspection, aboriginal housing or even the cost of the Afghan mission. He says reporting on programs would encourage more scrutiny.
Last week, Treasury Board President Tony Clement sent a letter to the committee rejecting many of its proposals, but approved a move to reporting by program activity.
Clement also said the government was willing to consider changing the way Parliament votes so MPs would vote on program activities, but that could take years and would require an overhaul of internal systems, controls and legislation. He said the government is putting together a plan that it will present to Parliament by March, along with a timetable and the costs of implementing the changes.
“The Government agrees that Parliament requires improved information and linkages between appropriations and planned spending at a program activity level,” Clement said Monday in a statement. “Taxpayers and parliamentarians deserve a clear, discernible and traceable line between spending and results.”
The move to reporting and voting by program activity is a big victory for the Parliamentary Budget Office. Page has argued that even if Parliament did nothing else, such a move would put so much more information in MPs’ hands that it would significantly improve Parliament’s ability to hold the government to account.
Despite Clement’s apparent agreement, the government is still digging in its heels and refusing Page’s requests for similar information on the Conservatives’ $5.2 billion in spending cuts over the next three years.
The PBO’s request for details on the nature of the cuts, including the impact on programs, jobs and service levels, is information that flows from the 669 program activities that more than 80 departments manage. Each department typically has between three and 10 program activities, or lines of business.
Departments provide information to MPs on program activity spending in their annual reports on plans and priorities, but were ordered by Treasury Board not to include details on the cuts in those reports earlier this year.
Page upped the ante this week when he announced he is preparing to take more than 60 departments to court after they failed to turn over details on their cuts by the Oct. 19 deadline he imposed. Page wouldn’t comment further other than to say his office will be filing and serving legal notices to all deputy ministers and heads of agencies that failed to comply.
Page won a significant concession when departments, after months of silence, recently promised to turn over information if they were given more time. A majority of departments indicated they would reply by Page’s extended Oct. 19. deadline, but only one more department did so.
Under the Federal Court Act, the PBO has to file a claim for judicial review within 30 days of its deadline for departments to turn over information.
Deputy ministers are the ones who would be on the hook if the dispute ever goes to court. Under the Parliament of Canada Act, they are personally obligated to give the PBO “free and timely access” to data they collect to help him do his job.
Page claims the information should have been part of budget planning when departments presented their five-per-cent and 10 per cent reduction plans. These plans would have been signed off by the deputy and chief financial officer.
If this tug of war does escalate into a legal battle, the parties could still settle before they go to court.
Original Article
Source: ottawa citizen
Author: KATHRYN MAY
No comments:
Post a Comment