“The office has strayed from its intended mandate which was to provide non-partisan, independent advice. The perception, rightly or wrongly, is that the office has become part of the opposition’s research branch. I don’t think that was the intent, but it just evolved,” said Conservative MP Brent Rathgeber (Edmonton-St. Alberta, Alta.).
Mr. Rathgeber said that the office’s high media profile, and the practice of releasing all of its reports publicly has meant that controversy-shy government MPs “almost never” ask the office for research.
“The fact that the data and the information will be released, or could be released publicly, will serve as a deterrent for government members to employ the services of the PBO,” he said.
Mr. Rathgeber sits on the joint House-Senate Library of Parliament Committee, which oversees the Library and the PBO.
Mr. Page has been accused of overstepping his mandate since 2008 when he publicly released a financial report prepared at the request of a Parliamentarian.
“This position, for whatever reason, has become very, very, public, and I think to its detriment,” said Mr. Rathgeber.
Mr. Rathgeber said he believes that if the PBO were to release its reports directly to the Parliamentarians who request them, the move would reduce friction between the Parliamentary Budget Office and the government. He added that full officers of Parliament do not have as high a profile as Mr. Page, who serves Parliament through the Library, but that they work effectively.
“There has to be some balance between the office’s ability to make reports public and its ability to still maintain non-partisanship. I realize that that’s a struggle and I don’t have a magic bullet,” he said.
For his part, Mr. Page has said it is part of his job to be available to media to explain and be accountable for his office’s reports.
“In a legislative budget office we have to be seen to be very transparent and accountable for our own work,” Mr. Page told The Hill Times in a recent interview.
At the same time, Mr. Rathgeber said that the office is an invaluable tool for scrutinizing government spending.
“An office like the Parliamentary Budget Office is absolutely essential to help Parliamentarians like myself who are not members of the executive to scrutinize how the Cabinet, how the executive, spends taxpayers’ dollars and attempt to assure that there is good value for taxpayer’s dollars,” Mr. Rathgeber said.
Finance Minister Jim Flaherty (Whitby-Oshawa, Ont.) touched off a wave of controversy last week when he stated that the PBO had “not yet” provided value for money for Canadian taxpayers on Global TV’s The West Block with Tom Clark Jan. 27.
“The idea was that the Parliamentary budget officer would kind of work like the Congressional budget officer in the United States—to report to the elected people in the House of Commons about how the government was doing in its budgeting. So, sort of being a sounding board, a testing board. He’s kind of gone off that course,” he said.
Last week Mr. Flaherty’s office declined to comment on exactly how the PBO had reportedly strayed from its mandate.
The opposition parties disputed the idea that the budget office has not been useful to Canadians, and accused Mr. Flaherty of wanting a lapdog as the next PBO.
“That’s not what the role was. … It makes no sense to create an independent, non-partisan position for economic analysis that will be a cheerleader for the federal government,” said NDP Finance critic Peggy Nash (Parkdale-High Park, Ont.).
“The Parliamentary budget officer has been invaluable at helping Canadians see what the real costs are when you think of things like the F-35, the war in Afghanistan,” she said.
Ms. Nash added that, “Every time he has raised concerns that are in the best interests of Canadians he has been attacked by the Conservative government.”
The PBO’s reports on costing Afghanistan, the price of the F-35 jets, the sustainability of Old Age Security, and others that have gone against government estimates have been criticized by senior Conservatives.
Mr. Page has been called “unbelievable, unreliable and incredible” in the past by Mr. Flaherty. Last summer Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird (Ottawa-Nepean, Ont.) and other Cabinet ministers said that Mr. Page had overstepped his mandate in asking for details on how the government planned to meet its spending reduction commitments in the 2012 budget.
Most recently, the PBO has drawn criticism for its report on government spending during the first six months of the 2012-2013 fiscal year, released Jan. 24.
The PBO reported that while the government promised to only make cuts to administration to find the savings listed in the part of the 2012 budget, most of the savings have come from frontline services so far.
In Question Period Jan. 28, Treasury Board President Tony Clement (Parry Sound-Muskoka, Ont.) said that the PBO “has his definitions wrong and is ill-informed on these issues.”
“What is very unfortunate is that the current Parliamentary Budget Officer, Kevin Page, clearly overstated his role and overstepped his mandate,” wrote Conservative strategist Fred DeLorey in The Hill Times’ Spin Doctors column this week.
Liberal Finance critic Scott Brison (Kings-Hants, N.S.) said he doesn’t think the PBO has overstepped its mandate.
“No. Kevin Page has done his job with professionalism and honour and great competence. He has done an exceptional job, and any rational government that had any respect for Parliament would encourage, not attack, Kevin Page,” he said.
Conservative MP Rick Dykstra (St. Catharines, Ont.), Parliamentary secretary to Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney (Calgary Southeast, Alta.) said that it’s too soon to tell whether Mr. Page has overstepped his mandate.
“To say that he overstepped his bounds, it’s probably a little premature to acknowledge that,” he said.
But the change of guard in the office is a good opportunity to examine how it’s been working out, Mr. Dykstra said.
“Once you get into the re-evaluation you can have a look” at the mandate, he said.
Mr. Rathgeber said that the makings for an effective office are already in the PBO’s mandate to provide economic analysis to Parliamentarians.
“I think tweaking would need to be done in terms of releasing the information to the requestor, but I don’t know if whether that needs to be done by statute, that could be done in terms of a contractual term in the next employment contract,” Mr. Rathgeber said.
Mr. Brison said that he thinks the Conservatives would move to dilute the PBO.
“They will either weaken the mandate or weaken the holder,” he said.
The Conservatives have insisted that this would not be the case.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary-Southwest, Alta.) stated last week the that government was committed to a budget office that is “non-partisan and credible.”
The government also responded to opposition speculation that it would scrap the office altogether.
“We are committed to the office continuing to exist,” said Mr. Clement.
On CBC’s At Issue panel Jan. 31, pollster and communications consultant Bruce Anderson said that the relationship between the PBO and the government “was going to come to tears to some degree” due to the nature of the position.
“There were going to be controversies, there was going to be a situation where the government was looking at any kind of an activist in that role and saying: Well, wait, we wanted somebody who was going to be an independent advisor to Parliament, not effectively trying to be the department of Finance for the official opposition,” Mr. Anderson said.
He said that both Mr. Page and the government had contributed to the friction.
“They both used language that drifted away from the original idea of a non-partisan source of advice. And, as a consequence, I think to some degree I would look at Mr. Page and say he made some important interventions, but probably his communications also cost him some effectiveness over the long term,” he added.
Ms. Nash has sponsored private member’s legislation to make the PBO independent of the government, an idea that has the support of the other opposition parties. The bill was introduced in December 2011 currently sits at first reading. Right now, Ms. Nash has 156 MPs ahead of her in line to present legislation.
Mr. Page’s five-year appointment ends March 24, and he has said that he will not be seeking a second term. The opposition parties want his term to be extended if a replacement is not found in time, so that the PBO can provide advice on the budget and other spring financial documents.
Last week the Library of Parliament, which is responsible for filling the position, chose executive search firm Renaud Foster to lead the search for a replacement. The Library met with the firm last week to discuss a recruitment strategy and to develop a work plan and timeline for filling the position, explained Library of Parliament spokesperson Cynthia Cusinato.
The process to find the first budget officer took about eight months from the point the Library hired firm Ray and Berndtson to find candidates in August 2007. Mr. Page was appointed in March 2008, after a panel of former senior public servants reviewed candidates and submitted a shortlist of three names to the government for final selection. Under a similar timeline, Mr. Page’s successor would be appointed next September.
A senior search committee will be assembled after the work plan is finalized, explained Ms. Cusinato.
“The Parliamentary Librarian will begin work to form a selection committee in alignment with the search firm’s work plan and timeline. It is important that members of the selection committee understand the time commitment and scope of the work they will be required to do,” she said.
The Conservatives created the position under the Federal Accountability Act. It pays between $139,900 and $164,500. The office has a budget of $2.8-million and has a staff of about 14.
The PBO’s request to the Federal Court for it to clarify its mandate continues in the court.
Ms. Cusinato said that the case has no impact on the Library of Parliament’s search for a replacement.
Ms. Nash said it’s to be expected that the PBO and the government won’t always get along.
“Sometimes there’s going to be situations where any government is going to be unhappy with the report … but it’s an important step in accountability and it’s an opportunity for governments to correct themselves before they go too far down a path that may not be in the best interests of Canadians,” said Ms. Nash.
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author: -
No comments:
Post a Comment