Hold the government accountable? Tracking every dollar: The PBO’s mission for transparency

Added: 2026-05-16

[00:00:01]Thank you.

[00:00:04]We're back with our second panel and it's a pleasure to welcome for the very first time our new parliamentary budget officer, Ms. Annet Ryan.

[00:00:19]And uh Mr. uh Jason Jacques, director general of uh economic analysis and finance, Mark Mahabir.

[00:00:30]Director General of Budget Analysis Analysis and General Counsel.

[00:00:36]And uh Govinda Deva.

[00:00:40]Bernier, I'll get to practice.

[00:00:43]Director of Budget Analysis, Mr. Bernier.

[00:00:47]Welcome to you all. Welcome, Ms. Ryan.

[00:00:52]After a brief opening statement, we'll move to questions.

[00:00:56]Uh thank you uh Chair Senator Carignan.

[00:01:00]Vice Chairman, Vice Chair For and honorable committee members.

[00:01:06]Thank you for inviting me to appear today as part of your review of the 2026-27 main estimates.

[00:01:13]I'm pleased to be here in my new capacity as a parliamentary budget officer and as an independent officer of Parliament.

[00:01:23]I'll begin by saying how impressed I've been by the warm welcome I have received from the dedicated and highly professional team at the Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

[00:01:39]As you have said, Chair, with me today are Jason Jacques, Director General of Economic and Financial Analysis, Mark Mahabir, Director General of Budget and Cost Analysis and General Counsel.

[00:01:59]And uh Govinda Deva Bernier, director of budget analysis.

[00:02:03]Mark and uh Govinda Deva led the work on our report on the 2026-2027 main estimates, which are to be published this week.

[00:02:14]As you know, the office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer generally publishes a report shortly after uh main estimates are tabled, but this was not the case this year because of the delay caused by the vacancy in the PBO position.

[00:02:35]Our report will be published on Thursday.

[00:02:40]before you today as part of this study and your study.

[00:02:43]As part of my appointment process, I committed to paying close attention to how the government's budget measures are implemented from their announcement through to the inclusion in estimates and ultimately their reporting in public accounts. This is a central element of parliamentary oversight.

[00:03:01]And I understand that this issue has been of particular interest to your committee for several years.

[00:03:07]In your report on main estimates for the year ending March 31, 2024, you state the committee believes that it can be very difficult to track the amounts spent on various budget measures from the time they are announced in the federal budget to the time the amounts are requested in the estimates, then authorized in supply bills, and reported in the public accounts.

[00:03:30]This is precisely what I would like to help you address.

[00:03:33]And I note that in the fourth paragraph of the 2026-2027 main estimates, uh the document reads "These amounts reflect previous funding decisions, such as initiatives announced in prior federal budgets, and reductions approved as part of the comprehensive expenditure review.

[00:03:53]Departmental plans to be tabled shortly after these estimates will provide additional details on the CER and how financial resources will be used to achieve planned results.

[00:04:10]The 2026-27 main estimates provide for budgetary authorizations for 502.8 billion. Parliamentary approval is required for 230.4 billion.

[00:04:27]Existing legislative authority, meanwhile, amount to 272.4 billion.

[00:04:37]I also note that these main estimates are the first since the government adopted a fall budget cycle.

[00:04:47]It contains 14.1 billion for measures coming from budget 2025 amounting to approximately 70% of the expenditure relating to budget 225 2025 measures expected to feature in the 2026-27 estimates.

[00:05:08]In conclusion, for example, the Department of National Defense accounts for the largest share of budget 225 related spending at 9 billion.

[00:05:21]We would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

[00:05:25]Yep. Thank you.

[00:05:27]We'll try to stick to 4 and 1/2 minutes per senator.

[00:05:34]Senator Forest.

[00:05:35]Thank you, and thank you for being here today.

[00:05:39]And first of all, I'd like to congratulate you on your appointment.

[00:05:43]We're very much looking forward to working with you.

[00:05:47]The five briefing notes you published on Monday on the spring economic update. I'd like to take advantage of your presence here to get your first impressions on last week's update.

[00:06:02]I believe that I'm not uh taking you by surprise.

[00:06:08]What are your impressions on debt spend expenditure control and the viability of the government's uh financial framework?

[00:06:20]Thank you for your uh rather vast question, Senator.

[00:06:28]I think the framework is important to your discussions.

[00:06:36]In the spring economic update, we saw an increase in projections that has led to an increase in the fiscal margin for maneuver. That margin is about 60 billion, most of which is being spent on new planning plans, rather.

[00:07:13]I believe the spring economic update lacks some important links to the budget, and that is why we published a series of briefing notes yesterday.

[00:07:36]As I said regarding your report on the estimates for 2024-25.

[00:07:44]What's important in the budgetary cycle and the estimates cycle is the goal of seeking the results of government spending. It's important for us to be able to track a government proposal after the announcements that are always very positive.

[00:08:06]And these announcements present what's essentially a government aspiration.

[00:08:15]It is important, however, uh to look at the risks these programs involve, any delays, whether the aspirations are manifested in the estimates, or do we see uh changes in budget plans.

[00:08:42]So, we need to be able to track announcements to programs to results through public accounts, through our notes. We have established a structured framework to be able to track all components uh throughout the budgetary cycle.

[00:09:15]Now, the sovereign wealth fund.

[00:09:19]I'm having difficulty in understanding the government's rationale in establishing it. How is it different from existing tools the government might use to support infrastructure projects or other significant things it wants to achieve.

[00:09:40]As I said last week before the government operations committee, uh the spring economic update uh presented more questions than it did answers to questions of that kind.

[00:09:58]The in the update it was noted that uh the fund's main goals were twofold.

[00:10:05]One was to uh support the Canadian economy through infrastructure investment and national interest projects.

[00:10:16]That is a broad goal, one that is shared by most existing Industry Canada and other economic department programs.

[00:10:28]The second goal of the fund was to give Canadians a stake in those investments or projects so that they could basically participate in the returns on sovereign wealth fund investments.

[00:10:57]It basically proposes the notion that taxpayers are already stakeholders since these are public funds.

[00:11:10]It's taxpayer money that's funding the sovereign wealth fund.

[00:11:15]However, so I don't quite see what would be gained by the participatory aspect of Canadian a Canadian stake in the wealth fund.

[00:11:29]Senator Cardozo.

[00:11:33]This the PBO, we look forward to working with you and I want to take this opportunity to thank Mr. Jakes for his uh diligent service as interim parliamentary budget officer and uh being a regular visitor to our committee.

[00:11:45]Um I I want to uh since I I suppose we're supposed to talk a bit about the budget of of of your office um as as part of our look at the estimates. Um if you could just confirm what your what your total budget is uh last year and this fiscal year.

[00:12:05]Um in terms of the organization of your office, do you plan to make any changes to it?

[00:12:10]And if you need more resources for your office to carry out its responsibilities effectively, how do you go about seeking more funds?

[00:12:21]Uh so, I will be uh as complete as I can be, Senator, uh with tomorrow being my my second week on the job. Yeah. Uh so, you know, on balance, uh the the funds are um uh sought through the uh the process for parliamentary officers.

[00:12:40]And uh during the last fiscal year as interim parliamentary budget officer, uh Jason did put forward a voluntary reduction of 5% uh from that amount.

[00:12:52]Uh so, you know, that's in a context where the office had traditionally been running surpluses of up to a million dollars.

[00:13:01]And so, um you know, I think [clears throat] that uh essentially conditions the extent to which, you know, changes to the office could be envisaged uh in the short term.

[00:13:13]In terms of uh what changes I would make to the office, I I definitely uh think that I've walked into uh an organization and a culture of excellence, and uh I I cannot say that enough that the the office is absolutely staffed by competent, rigorous, and dedicated civil servants.

[00:13:36]Uh through time, I would like to make sure that we keep in mind the recommendations of the OECD report to think about governance from wider communities of Canadian thought leaders and such like, but I see that as more again evolution rather than revolution.

[00:13:54]Okay. And and What is the total budget?

[00:13:56]I have in mind that it is 8 million.

[00:14:01]I'm saying 8.4, is that it?

[00:14:02]>> 8.4. Is that all? Yeah.

[00:14:04]It's 40 staff, so small but mighty.

[00:14:07]>> doing good work for that.

[00:14:08]Um if I've got a little more time, I just like to get your comments on the announcements in the in the economic update about the apprenticeship program and how you see that rolling out. Is that an effective way to to roll that out? Yeah, thanks, Senator. So, you know, the the spring update spoke about the Team Canada Strong as a suite of measures around apprenticeship.

[00:14:34]Uh at a highest level, the targets that they set forth are clear and measurable.

[00:14:39]So, they want to bring forward an additional 80 to 100,000 new skilled tradespeople through the Red Seal program. Very positive. That's that's that's a target. Uh I think that the announcement had a number of high-level spending targets that will that will benefit from overall funding.

[00:15:00]Uh I think that is is positive and it's critically important to avoid bottlenecks for the government's otherwise very ambitious plans in terms of capital investment. And that includes major infrastructure projects, housing, defense. So, and at a time when provincial governments are starting to spend uh, on infrastructure as well.

[00:15:23]So, um, you know, from that perspective of overall consistency, uh, that's well, uh, welcomed. I think we will be watching to see the detail of those programs to make sure that the spending aligns with, uh, essentially gaps in that Red Seal completion process. For example, late stage apprenticeships is a traditional, um, you know, kind of gap in terms of getting people from the initial starting of, uh, Red Seal, uh, training programs through to actually getting the full certification.

[00:15:57]Thank you.

[00:15:59]Monsieur le Coq, [clears throat] Senator Ross.

[00:16:01]Thank you, Chair.

[00:16:03]Welcome to your, uh, first meeting with National Finance.

[00:16:07]Um, I want to ask you a question about the Canada Strong Fund. Uh, just a bit of a follow-up.

[00:16:13]Isn't it a concern for you it will be funded by debt versus surplus?

[00:16:18]Um, do you believe that projects that are typically funded, or could be, or should be funded by the private sector, might now be funded by the Canada Strong Fund?

[00:16:27]Or do you believe it might attract, um, or leverage private investment?

[00:16:32]How do you think it relates or compares to BDC's, uh, Canada Growth Fund or the Infrastructure Bank?

[00:16:39]And finally, um, do you think it might be the solution to fixing what is sometimes referred to as Canada's private investment deficit?

[00:16:53]Thank you, Senator.

[00:16:56]Um, I think we have many of the same questions, and the answers to these questions, uh, will rely on the government setting forth, uh, more detailed plan of how they, uh, see this, uh, fund, this sovereign wealth fund, as solving a specific gap in the overall access to financing and capital in Canada.

[00:17:25]Uh as you noted very well, EDC, BDC, Canada Infrastructure Bank, they all have similar mandates of filling gaps in the financing fabric of Canada.

[00:17:40]There is also concern, a long standing concern, that private sector financing for these projects may either be crowded out by governments searching the same return on investments.

[00:17:56]And so, you know, I think the issues that you've you've queued up are really at the core of what we would like to see more of in terms of this plan.

[00:18:08]I also think that the aspect of financing this fund through debt is something that we are concerned about.

[00:18:19]And we will want to pay close attention to how that debt is recorded in forward fiscal tracks, forward debt and deficit tracks. To our understanding, the government has included debt costs associated with the fund in its forward track in the spring statement. But certainly the idea of in issuing debt in order to to finance a third yet another third party investment vehicle, which will need to have its own overhead and all of the um uh costs that that incurs with an unclear mandate of the gap that it's trying to fill, uh those are those are big questions and we will want to stay close to that one.

[00:19:11]Merci beaucoup, Senator Gignac. Merci, Monsieur le Président. Bien >> Thank you, chair. Welcome, uh Ms. Ryan, and congratulations on your appointment.

[00:19:26]You know that how important the committee considers the position of PBO.

[00:19:31]My first question is a little bit uh uh potentially touchy.

[00:19:39]As a francophone senator, I always read your documents in French.

[00:19:47]When you published uh your update on uh the viability of uh budget uh targets, I was a bit surprised because it said the ratio of the federal debt to GDP should go down by 2.1% in 2025-26 and uh 2.1% the following year. You're referring to the deficit rather than the federal debt to GDP ratio.

[00:20:21]You've got an eight uh million budget. You have 40 people. I've had the privilege of being a minister.

[00:20:29]I In the end, we're always responsible for our teams. So, I would ask you to be careful about the French versions of published documents. This might have been the only error in the documents uh from last year, but I did want to point out the importance of looking carefully at the French version before it's published.

[00:20:50]So, moving on.

[00:20:54]There are uh two budget anchors. One is to reduce the debt to GDP ratio, and the other one is to balance operating expenditures.

[00:21:05]Did you or do you plan to have any discussions with the Minister of Finance on what a capital investment is?

[00:21:12]Because you can achieve it more with more or less difficulty depending on the criteria you use to define what capital investment is since this is not quite the definition we recognize in the national accounts.

[00:21:27]So, what is your um a view? The IMF stated that uh having a clearer definition would improve transparency.

[00:21:39]Have you had discussions with the Minister of Finance on this?

[00:21:43]Thank you, Senator.

[00:21:47]Personally, uh I'm very sorry about the error in the translation and I thank you for pointing it out.

[00:21:56]We will correct that.

[00:22:02]I'll just say that we chose to fast-track those notes so that we could uh provide parliamentarians with information in real time.

[00:22:16]And we did our best to look at the translations uh we will review how we did that and how we could have prevented uh errors. Thank you.

[00:22:30]As to your question on the government's uh budgetary anchors the first is the deficit as a percentage of GDP and the second one is a two balance the operating budget.

[00:23:02]Within that context, the capital the definition of capital investment is basically the remainder, that which is not operational. In other words, expenditures other than operational.

[00:23:17]We have a list of what the government considers uh operating expenditure and revenue because the government does indicate that some of its tax measures are a form of capital investment.

[00:23:36]It is important that we have those details for a number of reasons. First of all, we need them in order to um understand the government's uh philosophy underpinning the budget.

[00:23:56]Secondly, it's a question of transparency.

[00:24:05]It keeps the government honest and uh it manages its budget on the basis of fixed rules.

[00:24:17]I'll stop with that.

[00:24:22]Thank you, Senator Rabeau.

[00:24:25]Thank you, Chair. I welcome Ms. Ryan and once again, congratulations on your appointment.

[00:24:33]The first question I had was on your note on uh capital investment priorities.

[00:24:48]Senator Cardoso was uh talking about training for 80,200,000 workers. Given the national demographic projections and the aging population. This will be a key factor for success. Do you believe that the restrictive immigration policy could have a negative impact on the country's ability to reach those goals?

[00:25:19]Thank you.

[00:25:21]Um well, yes.

[00:25:25]In so far as immigration of workers with skills in construction trades, uh can could contribute to major construction projects.

[00:25:43]That's been important for now. So, yes, it would have an impact on the supply of workers with the appropriate skills, their availability in other words. There hasn't been a specific analysis conducted to see how the drop in immigration numbers would affect the supply of sufficiently skilled workers in construction.

[00:26:19]So, that analysis might have to be carried out.

[00:26:24]On the aging population, well, we are going to see a significant number of those skilled trades workers in construction-related trades retire retiring in the years to come.

[00:26:46]And that will correspond to the investment trajectory.

[00:26:52]So, it's good to have a target like 80 to 100,000 uh uh people training in the trades that can be tracked.

[00:27:00]But, the government is being asked to be transparent on their projections indicating that 80 to 100,000 is the right target and that it will be sufficient in the years to come.

[00:27:18]Thank you. I think we have the same concerns on that.

[00:27:22]Because uh through immigration, we could get an influx of uh qualified workers in real time. Of course, with uh some training adjustments.

[00:27:31]But, in the longer term uh that'll be different.

[00:27:38]In your report on economic and financial changes, you talked about defense spending.

[00:27:45]And you said it's not uh certain that the figures take full account of Canada's commitment uh to commit 5% of GDP to defense spending uh And uh the additional impact on the deficit is estimated at 63 billion by 2035-36.

[00:28:09]And that uh is uh significantly higher risk for uh debt and uh deficit projections. So, what you're saying is that Canada's underestimating by 63 billion the uh debt over 5 years.

[00:28:27]Could you please elaborate?

[00:28:31]That's That's it, Senator.

[00:28:36]Those expenses, those expenditures are not included in the projections we saw in the spring update.

[00:28:57]If they were, there would be an increase of 63 billion.

[00:29:04]Thank you, Senator Galvez.

[00:29:06]And myself, I want to add my congratulations to both and thank you to all your team. It's wonderful to have you and you are like a um incredible right hand when we have to >> [clears throat] >> uh discuss budget bills. Um so, I want to take this opportunity of my first question to you to ask you a question that I asked the the previous PO before um Mr. Jack, which is that in these last 8 years that I sit in this committee, I have seen the budgets increase, the expenditures increase. You know, we have health costs, we have the service of the debt, we have the settlements with indigenous people, we have now the extreme weather events, we have right now the war with the um in the Middle East and the defense costs. And in this committee, we concentrate a lot on how the government allocates the budget and expenditures.

[00:30:04]But nothing to in my opinion about the revenues.

[00:30:10]And that is very different with respect to the other house, which have FINA and have public accounts.

[00:30:16]So, I feel like in this committee, it's a little bit like I'm just watching one part and I'm don't watching the other.

[00:30:24]I was chair of a department in at Laval University and I had the board and I knew how much had and how much what and it it was important. So, in this case, um I wonder if you can help us with that and how do you think you can help us with that?

[00:30:45]Thank you, Senator. I I think it's an excellent point. I I think that these are are questions that we can work into our work plan as as we move forward. I do look forward to meeting senators, committee chairs, committee members to understand the issues that you would like to see more of in parliamentary budget office analysis. I think that we have to you know, be prudent about how we set up that work plan to be able to respond to committee requests that come through, you know, the the the channels that have priority in any given sitting of Parliament. But I I also do see our work plan as as something of a portfolio. And you know, to the extent that we have PBO driven reports that we can bring forward as we did yesterday, then I think that that consultation with senators and others helps us be much more targeted and precise about what are the priorities of where we can do analysis. And so I look forward to understanding you know, what you would find most helpful and and let's see what we can do. Okay.

[00:31:58]So two specific issues for me is this um the service of the debt that is in dollars and the the changes that are occurring geopolitically with respect to the dollar. I just come from Colombia where I hear a lot about the BRICS and the and the changing trading petroleum not anymore in dollars, petrodollars, but in another currency and that will affect everything.

[00:32:25]And the other issue as my colleague Senator Fortin mentioned is the wealth sovereignty fund because we heard that there is the possibility of asking for credit to put in there. and you rightly pointed out that we already invest because the pension plans is for that. No, we have our money put it aside and and sovereignty funds, the one that I'm very familiar with is the Norway fund which gave $1 billion for the protection of the Amazon because they are so rich. And and and and it's made out of the revenues that coming from the oil and for us we don't have this. So, how how are we going to manage this?

[00:33:09]Thank you so much. Thank you, Senator.

[00:33:12]I I I think those are all strong points and I I'm I'm not quite sure how to you know necessarily improve on them or or inform them specifically. I think you know that that the PBO has traditionally had a close interest in terms of the evolution of debt and you know different issues about you know how international reserve currencies and so on are changing you know our our our pertinent and and also very large questions. So, I I I think there's probably a combination of working through what can fit on our work plan versus perhaps you know in lieu of doing detailed costing or analysis on some questions perhaps we could help you make more precise the questions that you might ask to say Bank of Canada in terms of or Finance Canada in terms of how they manage these questions. So, I I I do see you know kind of a flexibility of how we can use our you know 40 people which includes 30 analysts to best effect and and and contribute best. I think that in terms of the sovereign wealth fund and that interplay with pension funds you raise a good point that many of these large funds uh have a mandate to invest outside of their borders as, you know, something of an insurance policy against downturns domestically. And so, it it goes again to the question of what is the goal of this fund? Is it to maximize investments into the fund?

[00:34:55]Uh or is it to achieve Canadian public policy goals? And, you know, depending on what problem they're trying to fix, uh the design of the fund and the organization, uh you know, should follow that. And and and from there, I think we could provide better comment. Thank you.

[00:35:14]Merci beaucoup, Senator Petitclerc.

[00:35:16]Thanks. I have uh congratulations and welcome. And uh Mr. Jacques, thanks so much for all the work you did with our committee uh diligently. Um and I see you're still going to be doing that. One of the questions we had started with I had started with Mr. Jacques actually was the Buy Canadian uh influence on our books in the country. And how can you think about what kind of a work plan could you measure the benefit of the Buy Canadian policy uh in a granular enough detail? Some of the stories recently articles are suggesting that it's it's uh almost hit and miss depending on what region of the country you're in. If you're along a border community, it's different. I I would prefer to have something more granular than just comparing GDP uh or you know, overall cuz that is just not enough cuz you don't know what would have happened anyway. And I would really like to know that. So, that's just a comment. We could take that offline. Um my question is about how uh we're measuring the debt debt to GDP against OECD countries. And there's been some discussion around Canada including pension funds as its asset that shows a better debt position. My view is that in some of the other OECD countries, they specifically don't show it because it would make their numbers so much worse.

[00:36:29]Uh France, Italy, you know, naming just a couple.

[00:36:33]But their deficit in their pension is truly a liability that they need to include. So in fact, should the argument not be why aren't they including a statutory obligation in their debt figure as opposed to why are we including the asset of our pension fund because we happen to have it, which again is that same statutory obligation.

[00:36:57]Great question, Senator. Thank you. So I I note with interest your interest in by Canadian and look forward to to talking about that and carrying on the work you've started with Jason.

[00:37:07]In terms of you know, this question of debt to GDP versus OECD comparators, you know, it is and whether you do it with pension fund pension obligation included or you know, essentially different different benefit programs, you know, government government pensions included or not.

[00:37:29]I I think it's very important to keep in mind that different measures tell you different things.

[00:37:36]And there's been a lot of focus on which is the right measure. What is the one right measure that will tell us if we're on the right track or not.

[00:37:45]And you know, in our second note that we published yesterday on fiscal anchors and fiscal sustainability, I think one of the points that we want to start a conversation on is that there are many measures that tell you different things.

[00:38:00]And you know, in some in some situations you do want to take account of forward costs of social security social services for comparability across countries as you've put forward very well.

[00:38:15]I might extend that if I if I could to say, you know, I think there's also the question of are Canadians happy, you know, with how much they're spending on debt charges, which relates to the federal debt? And that discussion about what is the preference of Canadians for uh how much of their tax dollars are going towards debt service charges gets lost in that a bit. So, uh I think um you know, already Jason has already pointed uh out different international work about how we could enrich those set of indicators to make sure that uh you know, there's really kind of a menu of of indicators that parliamentarians could use to inform different parts of this question more so than saying one measure is the one measure that we need versus, you know, this other measure is is the good one that's going to do it all for us.

[00:39:14]Um you have 30 seconds.

[00:39:16]>> Okay. Just so that realistically that chart is is indeed accurate, uh and we've been including the the pension for many year, 20 years.

[00:39:25]Uh it's been I don't know when it started, but certainly well before 2006, let's say.

[00:39:32]Uh it's been a long around for a long and I had to go check that out for how long that we've been doing that. Uh so, I'm just curious to note that um should we then just say pensions included or not included that people would feel more comfortable with that? Because clearly we're counting that. And I have to say again, a pension obligation, if you're in Italy, is a liability for that government, and they are not including that information in that chart. So, I I I just want to highlight that it isn't us not being up front, we're actually including what we owe, and in this case, it's not a debt. Um so, It's a point that's well taken, Senator, and uh let us take that away and try and be as clear as possible in our documents about what is included in different definitions and what the government is or is not including when they present usually the better news.

[00:40:24]You know, we're going to keep an eye on well, what are they not presenting and trying to be as clear as you say about what's in what's not in. Okay, thanks.

[00:40:32]Merci Senator Spade.

[00:40:34]Thank you very much and I join the chorus of welcomes to you and incredible thanks to your department for the years and years of work and incredible contributions to our work as a result.

[00:40:49]Yesterday you put out the assessment of the spring economic update departmental spending and new measures and I noted that one of the points raised was the fact that money has been received or in the budget has been allocated to corrections for new departmental spending measures such as extending support for federal correctional institutions by Corrections Canada. But then you go on to mention the absence of any additional information or much additional information. Particularly the absence of key planning and governance detail for many new measures and front-loaded spending profiles.

[00:41:30]I'm curious as to what what you see that we could be doing about this.

[00:41:38]Certainly it's not the first time that your office or for that matter the Auditor General and others and the Correctional Investigator have raised raised concerns about the manner in which spending has been allocated.

[00:41:53]At this committee we have in fact tried to interrogate where money received for instance to replace segregation units and with supports for mental health services went. We have yet to receive that response. So I'm curious as to what the next steps are for you and your office and what uh, anything well not if anything, what we may best do to assist you in that process in uh, gathering that information so Canadians are aware.

[00:42:20]Thank you very much for this question, Senator. Uh, I think that, you know, the the agenda and the objectives that you set forth with this question are are are very much shared.

[00:42:32]I think that, um, you know, there's a lot of space to look at how the departmental plan, uh, process rolls out as well as the departmental, uh, results set of documents rolls out.

[00:42:49]And those documents are meant to be a complement to, you know, essentially, um, both the budget cycle and different, you know, the spring estimate type documents that are, uh, forward-looking and, um, you know, all about the promises.

[00:43:05]And then, of course, you know, you review the main supplementary estimates, which are a very, you know, kind of different focus. It's it's much more about authorizing spending on a on a flat level and you lose that detail from kind of the promises and the objectives to, if I may, the the plumbing of, you know, who's authorized to spend what in what department.

[00:43:27]And so, you know, that agenda of how can we, uh, build the databases, uh, the means to track not just what was in the last budget, but what was in previous budgets, um, by departments.

[00:43:43]And so, you know, taking corrections, for example, you know, how can we look back over the last 5 years, 10 years and match, you know, kind of those objectives of, you know, here's 50 million for mental health services, here's, you know, 26 million to achieve X, Y, or Z. Uh, you know, put doing that analysis on a structured basis is the type of work. This is early days and I'm I'm trying to give a a a directional answer, not a not a promise.

[00:44:11]Uh but that's the type of work that I think could then help you as parliamentarians uh look back at uh what those funds that you're approving in main and supplementary estimates are meant to achieve. This is what they were promised to do 3 years ago. Okay, we're now in year two, year three of implementation.

[00:44:34]I'd like to know where you are on that mental health program that was authorized um you know, 3 years ago at $50 million.

[00:44:42]Has the money been spent? What results have you gotten? So, there's the aspect of giving you the information to be able to ask those type of questions in a targeted and structured way.

[00:44:53]And then I think there's a separate discussion uh to be had um you know, with with TBS in particular about that uh design of departmental plans and departmental results documents in terms of their clarity, their brevity, their focus about building that bridge from budgets to estimates. So, I apologize chair if that's a long answer, but uh uh Madam, that's the answer. Quite excited about this. [laughter] No, Madame La Présidente. Merci.

[00:45:23]Uh moi j'ai une question sur la sur la I have a question on pension funds.

[00:45:30]I find that pension funds don't contribute enough to the Canadian economy.

[00:45:37]If we compare ourselves to what other countries do, like other countries like Australia, wouldn't there be a way of giving pension funds the incentives to invest more in Canada?

[00:45:52]Just the Canada Pension Plan, for example, I was very surprised that they didn't invest in retired uh in in residences for retirees in Canada than they do in Europe.

[00:46:07]So, we're looking for diversification and performance. Their their yields or return targets aren't very high.

[00:46:16]I think it's 3.6 or 3.7% of uh a CPP's assets. So, 25 billion the 25 billion sovereign fund is being funded by debts.

[00:46:28]But if uh CPP funds put maybe 6% more investment or or raise their investment in Canada to six odd percent, that would cover the 25 billion.

[00:46:46]Couldn't uh they look at what other countries do because Canada pension funds aren't uh aren't taxed, so all returns are tax-free.

[00:46:57]We're looking at uh phenomenal fortunes, and that's good. It guarantees retirees pensions.

[00:47:05]But I think retirees, even though we haven't pulled them, would very much like their administrations to invest in Canada and help rebuild our infrastructure.

[00:47:17]Cuz in many cases we're looking at rebuilding infrastructure. What's your view on that?

[00:47:25]You're asking a series of excellent questions, Senator.

[00:47:32]And I think your colleague explored those issues uh in relation with with Norway with the Norwegian fund does.

[00:47:46]The goal for investing CPP funds Sorry, I don't know all the acronyms in French.

[00:47:57]Those funds are structured and their governance is designed to maximize return on investment for uh those who've contributed to the plan.

[00:48:20]So, earmarking a percentage of the fund for goals that serve Canadians more broadly would be a a conflict.

[00:48:39]I think it's important to look at the other goals of that structure.

[00:48:48]But, there ways of uh reconciling those.

[00:48:55]The Quebec government can guarantee a return, so the Canadian government could do the same thing for CPP contributors.

[00:49:11]I think it's important to remember that the fund is managed by provinces and the federal government.

[00:49:24]And the agreement is that the goal remains maximizing returns on investment for CPP contributors.

[00:49:37]It is possible to configure uh the fund in other ways, but we do need to bear in mind what its goal is.

[00:49:50]The difficulty with that rationale is we're being told it's not um profitable to invest in Canada, but we have a globetrotting Prime Minister who's telling everybody to invest in Canada. So, foreign investors would say, "Your own pension funds don't invest in Canada, so why should we?"

[00:50:12]There a number of issues in that debate, very rich debate, but one goal of maximizing the return on investment is this, the fact that Canada's economy is based on natural resources does that Canada is a resource-based economy.

[00:50:43]If you have a slowdown or a retraction in terms of commodity prices, you know, that poses a risk that when that happens, you know, all returns in Canada will be diminished. And so, what you get by investing in other countries as, you know, many of these funds do, is it's it's essentially a buffer. Yeah, yeah.

[00:51:04]So. Okay.

[00:51:06]When you invest outside of Canada, you invest in Australia, you invest here.

[00:51:09]Well, we invest in Australia, we invest elsewhere, but anyway.

[00:51:14]Thank you. That was my question of the day. I think that uh concludes this meeting. Thank you very much for your contribution. I'm sure we'll see one another often.

[00:51:26]So, we'll be back at 1/4 to 7:00 tomorrow under the chairmanship