Categories: Capital Read, Inside the Queensway

Hey, look! The Parliamentary Budget Office is at it again!

by kadyomalley on Thursday, January 8, 2009 12:18pm - 16 Comments

This time, acting on a request from Liberal industry critic Gerard Kennedy, they’ve asked Industry Canada for more information on the $4 billion auto sector aid package that the Prime Minister announced just before Christmas at a joint press conference with Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty.

According to a letter sent to Industry deputy minister Richard Dicerni on December 19th with a response required by January 5, the office plans to “analyze the adequacy of the package given the public policy goal of these measures”. In order to do that, they want to see the “underlying analysis” in support of the package, including “expected outcomes,” as well as the “analysis of the business plans submitted by the automobile companies including financial analysis of the big three”; a footnote asks whether the companies have, in fact, submitted business plans to the government. The office also wants more information on the “transaction structure” – how the assistance would be delivered (loans, guarantees, grants, conditional repayment), any pre-conditions that will be put in place, and the eligibility requirements.

There’s no word yet on whether the department met the proposed delivery date of last Monday — given the holidays, it’s possible that Page’s office is giving them a little extra time to pull all that material together. But since the aid package will almost certainly be end up in the January 27th budget, ITQ is betting that the PBO would want to make sure its report is in Kennedy’s hands before parliamentarians are asked to vote on it.

Tags: auto sector, colleague coyne will be ecstatic, Kevin Page, parliamentary budget office never sleeps, reading the fine print, stimulicious!

More by kadyomalley

http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

I am glad someone wants to have a look at auto bailout package, tho I am not sure I am going to agree with Kennedy’s conclusions. Chrysler is suppose to be major recipient of government aid but it looks like the auto maker is not long for this world and I don’t see why taxpayers should be propping up an American private equity firm.

http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

Don’t worry, jwl – you and Gerard Kennedy will be able to come to your own respective conclusions after reading the report prepared by the Parliamentary Budget Office. That is, provided it can be released publicly during prorogation – if you’ll recall, that caused a bit of a kerfuffle when the report on the cost of the Afghanistan mission wound up being released during the last election, albeit with the agreement of all party leaders.

http://carnewsandviews.com jwl

I do remember that kerfuffle. I assumed the arcane argument on who can do what and who reports to whom was settled but now that I think about it that’s a stupid assumption.

Are our pols and bureaucrats still arguing about Page and his good work?

Bazoo

I would like to thank Mr Harper for helping make clear how in some cases the role of bureaucracy includes holding politicians accountable.
DM

Nicely done by Kennedy….dollars to donuts that Iggy screws him in the critic shuffle given his support for Rae which would be a big mistake by the Count.
herringchoker

It’s also possible that Page was told to get in line behind the Auditor-General and a gazillion ATI requests. Unless Mr. Page was conferred with the powers of a judge (which I don’t think is the case), he can’t compel anything (unlike St. Sheila Among the Frasers). He relies on good will, like most inter-departmental requests. And making demands over Xmas doesn’t really scream out “goodwill”.

Of course, he’s free to try and explain how reasonable he’s being to federal court judge (you know, someeone who can actually compel documents). That hearing should be worth a laugh or two.
Stephen

O, who will rid Stephen Harper of this turbulent Parliamentary Officer!
OttawaGuy

Here’s what the Act says about the PBO’s access to documents:

79.3 (1) Except as provided by any other Act of Parliament that expressly refers to this subsection, the Parliamentary Budget Officer is entitled, by request made to the deputy head of a department within the meaning of any of paragraphs (a), (a.1) and (d) of the definition “department” in section 2 of the Financial Administration Act, or to any other person designated by that deputy head for the purpose of this section, to free and timely access to any financial or economic data in the possession of the department that are required for the performance of his or her mandate.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply in respect of any financial or economic data
(a) that are information the disclosure of which is restricted under section 19 of the Access to Information Act or any provision set out in Schedule II to that Act; or

(b) that are contained in a confidence of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada described in subsection 69(1) of that Act, unless the data are also contained in any other record, within the meaning of section 3 of that Act, and are not information referred to in paragraph (a).

herringchoker

That’s pretty much what I thought OG. He’s entitled to ask for docs, and receive them in due course. Much the same as ATI. I didn’t see anything there about setting his own deadlines.

http://www.macleans.ca Kady O’Malley

There is a good overview of the information protocol on the PBO website, which includes an explanation of how the deadlines for production are established:

3. Timing
Information requests are categorized as: Urgent, Normal, or Low priority. The request specifies the timeline for a department’s response, which may depend on the size of the request and the department’s available resources. As a reasonable guideline, an Urgent request linked to the budget or estimates cycle, for example, may require a response within 24 to 48 hours; a Normal request for easily accessible information might allow five working days; and a Low priority request may require a response within 30 calendar days.
If a department determines that it will be unable to accommodate the PBO’s information request, it should inform the PBO and PCO-LSMP of this decision as soon as possible, but not later than the delivery date specified in the original information request. The department’s notification will specify in writing its rationale for denying access to the information, and will suggest a feasible alternative or subset of the information that can be reasonably provided instead to the PBO by the information delivery date

Also potentially relevant is the section on the PBO’s “recourse to denial of information”:

If the PBO is denied access to the requested information — or alternatively, when there is an unreasonable delay in providing the requested information, which effectively amounts to a denial of access — as is the convention with the Auditor General, the PBO will report the matter to Parliament.
For cases when access to information is denied because the department deems it to be a cabinet confidence, the PBO may request that the Clerk of the Privy Council certify this position in writing.
In cases of deadlock and as a last resort, the PBO reserves the right to seek a legal remedy in the Federal Court of Canada.

Check it out, herringchoker! You might get to see that federal court case after all!

http://www.dwatch.ca Duff Conacher

The systemic problem with the PBO is that he has no power to penalize the head of any federal government institution who refuses to give him the information he requests (all the officers of Parliament share this problem, which is why their reports are usually ignored by government institutions).

However, the PBO has the legal power to identify who refuses to give him information, and hopefully he will do this (at least in cases where there is no dispute about whether Access to Info Act exemptions apply) so that the public will know which of their employees is breaking the law by withholding information the PBO (and the public) have a clear legal right to know.

The PBO should have indentified the people who refused to give him the information he requested for his report on the federal government’s activities in Afghanistan, and hopefully he will at some point identify them

Mike Horn

Sounds like the sort of thing that a Budget Office should be doing.

Actually i just wanted to post the exciting news that Obama mentioned the electrical grid in his economic stimulus speech. Specifically the idea of modernizing it and preventing another rolling blackout rolling across our common border! Talk about your no brainer opportunity.
Karen

As a Treasury Board Secretariat Analyst, the bigger issue that bothers me is how come Treasury Board and Department of Finance with thousand of analysts are not asked by the Assistant Secretaries to udnertake such analysis. The fundamental reason for the existence of central agencies particularly TBS is to provide independent analysis, challenge and oversight. It is a sad state of the public service, that 4 people at the Parliamentary Budget Office can provide more value for money to parliamentarians and Canadians than over 3,000 people at TBS and Finance. Shame on public service renewal.

Part of the reason for this state of affairs of the public service is due to lack of professionals at the middle and senior management. If only one were to look at the resumes of the assistant secretaries or DGs or directors at TBS or Finance, these guys wont be hired in the private sector as junior clerks. There are assistant secretaries at Treasury Board that dont udnerdstand the difference between cash and accrual accounting. Some of them actaully have degrees in physical education…hahahah
Kara

There are rumors of pressures from higher powers for muzzling in and shutting down the Budget Office for telling the inconvenient truth. Apparently the Librarian is just an instrument in the bigger picture, pressure is coming from elsewhere..got it?
Insideguy

Duff, you are right. The PBO should name the bureaucrats who refuse to provide information. Although shame factor doesn’t prompt bureaucrats to do the right thing, fear and loss of job would.

Duff, I am curious how many full time employees does Kevin have compared to Treasury Board Secretariat or Finance?