CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 137 Ï NUMBER 149 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Tuesday, February 26, 2002 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire´´ at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 9227 HOUSE OF COMMONS Tuesday, February 26, 2002 The House met at 10 a.m. Mr. Jim Pankiw: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I would like to move concurrence in the 15th report of the Standing Committee on Public Prayers Accounts. Mr. Geoff Regan: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The members on this side expected that you might seek concurrence or unanimous consent to return to motions. Is it your feeling that there ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS was an error with the situation? Ï (1000) The Speaker: Yes, the Chair heard the hon. member call a point [English] of order when the hon. member for Scarborough Southwest was on his feet presenting a petition. I did not see him rise but I did not look GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS up because I had not been told any motion would be moved. I Mr. Geoff Regan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of assumed we would be sailing right through so I moved quite quickly. the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, Under the circumstances my inclination is to allow the hon. pursuant to Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both member to move his motion. Because we did not have notice I am official languages, the government's response to three petitions. proposing to put the motion to the House. *** *** Ï (1005) COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE PETITIONS PUBLIC ACCOUNTS JUSTICE Mr. Jim Pankiw (Saskatoon—Humboldt, PC/DR): Mr. Speak- Mr. Tom Wappel (Scarborough Southwest, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, er, I move that the 15th report of the Standing Committee on Public I have a petition from constituents of mine concerning convicted Accounts, presented to the House on Tuesday, February 19, 2002, be child killer, Robert Latimer. concurred in. The petitioners make the point that a lenient sentence or executive The public accounts committee made the report based on clemency for Mr. Latimer would imply to all Canadians that killing a consideration of chapter 18 of the December 2000 report of the vulnerable person is a lesser crime than killing an able-bodied Auditor General of Canada pertaining to governance of crown person. They therefore call upon parliament to uphold the Latimer corporations. Before I get into the findings of the committee report I decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. will cover some factual pieces of information. *** Crown corporations are administered under the Financial Admin- [Translation] istration Act. A board of directors oversees the management of each crown corporation. The federal government's responsibilities are as QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER follows. First, it is responsible for appointing directors and chief Mr. Geoff Regan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of executive officers to the boards of crown corporations including the the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I level and degree of their remuneration. ask that all questions be allowed to stand. Second, it is responsible for directives and regulations pertaining The Speaker: Is that agreed? to crown corporations. Some hon. members: Agreed. Third, it is responsible for approval of corporate plans and [English] budgets. The Speaker: Apparently the hon. member for Saskatoon— Fourth, it is responsible for conducting special examinations every Humboldt had risen and I am sorry I missed seeing him. Is he rising five years to provide the board of directors with an independent on a motion? opinion of how well the corporation is being managed. 9228 COMMONS DEBATES February 26, 2002 Routine Proceedings The report of the public accounts committee is based on the government in a process that the report has found to be lacking in findings of the auditor general. First, specific examinations revealed transparency and accountability, and they are not qualified to be that 66% or two-thirds of crown corporations have serious there. deficiencies in corporate and strategic planning. The deficiencies are broken into two categories. Some 38% are described as What I am getting to is the scandal in the public works department extremely serious and 28% as serious to a lesser degree. None- and the fact that the former minister, Alfonso Gagliano, used theless, two-thirds of all crown corporations have serious deficien- political interference to land jobs and contracts with crown cies in corporate and strategic planning. corporations for friends and supporters of the Liberal Party. That is a violation of the code of ethics, the very code of ethics that the Second, the government's process for approving corporate plans is government brought in itself in 1995. It is the same code of ethics deficient. that the Prime Minister himself broke when he lobbied the head of Third, performance and accountability are inadequate. the Business Development Bank of Canada to get a loan for his friend. Fourth, the Treasury Board Secretariat and the Department of Finance exhibit a weak understanding of crown corporations and What we see is pork barrel, patronage politics, using political demonstrate limited skill in analyzing and interpreting financial influence and breaching the code of ethics to get jobs and contracts statements. for Liberal friends and supporters. The government has structured a That is a scathing indictment of the bureaucrats in the finance system of appointing CEOs and members of boards of directors to department. They are the people responsible for drafting the annual crown corporations in a manner that lacks transparency and budgets of the federal government. It is no wonder that when we accountability and allows them to appoint Liberal supporters. In look at the most recent federal budget we see no provisions for the end Canadians pay the price because our crown corporations are making payments on our massive $547 billion national debt over the not being managed properly. next three years. It is consistent with the findings of the report. The report says the bureaucrats in the finance department demonstrate As the report itself found, the members of the boards of directors limited skill in analyzing and interpreting financial statements. Why lack key skills and capabilities in finance, administration and would we have bureaucrats in the Department of Finance who are management. In other words, they are completely unqualified to sit not skilled at interpreting financial statements? It does not make in those positions, yet they have been appointed through a process sense. It is a scathing indictment of the competence of the Liberal that lacks transparency and accountability so that the Liberal government. government can play games of patronage and land contracts and jobs for its friends and supporters. This is not only an obvious breach of There are three more findings of special note. the code of ethics but we know that at least two ministers, and this is First, audit committees lack financial literacy and accounting a matter of public record, the Prime Minister and the former minister experience. This results in incomplete financial oversight. They lack of public works, Alfonso Gagliano, openly breached that code of the required capacity, knowledge and experience to effectively carry ethics by using improper political interference. This is a matter of out their mandates. It begs the question of why. Why do we have ethics and integrity in government. The stench of corrupt activity is incompetent people on the audit committees? How do they get there? overwhelming. Why do we not have competent people in these positions? The report by the members of the public accounts committee Second, members of boards of directors have serious weaknesses concluded that the appointment process for members to the board of and lack key skills and capabilities in finance, administration and directors of crown corporations lacked accountability. That was management. In my opening remarks I gave general information pretty clear in the findings. It stated that CEOs and members of the about crown corporations being managed by boards of directors board of directors of crown corporations should have the required appointed by the governor in council. The report finds members of skills and experience to effectively carry out the objectives and the boards have serious weaknesses and lack key skills and mandate of the corporation. Once again it is an obvious statement capabilities in finance, administration and management. It again and makes us wonder why this was never the case in the first place. begs the question of why. Why do we have incompetent people on the boards of directors? Why were competent people not put there in The Liberal government has been in power since 1993. Why have the first place? corporations not been managed properly from the beginning? Why Ï (1010) has there not been an open, transparent manner of appointing CEOs and boards of directors who are competent and capable of fulfilling I might add that Canadians expect crown corporations to be their mandate? managed effectively and efficiently. To find that the members of the boards of directors, who have been appointed by the government, are not qualified, raises some very serious questions. I will get to that in I think we know the answer to that question. It is the same reason a minute but I want to cover the last and final finding. that the Prime Minister lobbied the head of the Business Development Bank of Canada: to get a loan for a friend. It is the The process of appointing crown corporation CEOs lacks same reason that the former public works minister and his staff transparency and accountability.