Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
National Finance
Issue No. 4 - Evidence - March 8, 2016 (morning meeting)
OTTAWA, Tuesday, March 8, 2016
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met this day at 9:30 a.m. to examine the expenditures set out in the Supplementary Estimates (C) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2016 and the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2017.
Senator Larry W. Smith (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance. My name is Larry W. Smith, a senator from Quebec, and I chair the committee.
Colleagues and members of the viewing public, the mandate of this committee is to examine matters relating to federal estimates, generally, as well as government finance.
Before we get to the specific topic of today's meeting, let me introduce the other members of our committee, those of us who are present today: To my left is our deputy chair, Senator Campbell, former mayor of Vancouver. To my right are Senator Nicole Eaton, Toronto; Senator Percy Mockler, New Brunswick; and Senator Elizabeth Marshall, former Auditor General of Newfoundland. This is a lady that doesn't fool around.
[Translation]
This morning, we are continuing our study on Supplementary Estimates (C) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2016.
[English]
We must also address the 2016-17 Main Estimates, so we will be examining a dual topic. However, in our first panel, one organization, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, has asked to present only the Supplementary Estimates (C), and the representatives are prepared to answer questions on this topic. We agreed to the request, and we understand the volume of work that you folks are pressed with going forward. I guess we'll be able to call you back shortly to discuss estimates.
From Immigration, we have Mr. Tony Matson, Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer; Ms. Stefanie Beck, Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services Sector; and Mr. David Manicom, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy Sector.
From our second group, Canada Border Services Agency, we have Ms. Christine Walker, Vice President, Comptrollership Branch; and Ms. Caroline Xavier, Vice President, Operations Branch.
I understand each department has an opening statement. We will begin with Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada on the supplementary estimates, followed by a series of questions. Then we will move to CBSA, who will first present on Supplementary Estimates (C), followed by questions on the Main Estimates, followed by another question period.
Mr. Matson, please go ahead.
Tony Matson, Assistant Deputy Minister, Chief Financial Officer, Finance Sector, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair and honourable senators. I'm pleased to be here with my colleagues today to present Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada's Supplementary Estimates (C) for fiscal year 2015-16.
[Translation]
I will highlight the most significant items, but we would be happy to respond to questions on all items in the supplementary estimates. I am sure you are aware IRCC is at the forefront of a great national effort to resettle thousands of refugees from Syria in our country in a relatively short period of time.
[English]
Since last fall, officials across the department have worked extremely hard, here in Canada and in the Middle East, to bring people fleeing violence and unrest to safe haven on our shores.
Canadians everywhere have responded. All sectors of our society have extended helping hands to the newcomers. Thanks to the collaboration of all these partners, we were recently able to announce that we successfully met, and even slightly surpassed, our goal of welcoming 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada between November and February.
[Translation]
Of course, our work on this project continues, as we have to integrate Syrian refugees into communities across the country and ensure that resettled refugees continue to get the support they need. We will also continue to welcome new Syrian refugees to Canada — about 8,500 more government-assisted refugees are expected to arrive by the end of the year.
[English]
It should not surprise you, then, that some of the most prominent items in these estimates concern the #WelcomeRefugees initiative.
In terms of adjustments and transfers to do with Syrian refugee resettlement, the department is seeking access to funding of $17.7 million under the government-wide project contingency for the Syrian refugee effort, if required. Such funding was previously approved and earmarked for this purpose. The request to access this contingency included funding to ensure that interim lodging sites would be ready to receive refugees should the capacity of existing temporary accommodation be exceeded. However, thanks to the involvement and efforts of all stakeholders, we were able to expand our use of welcoming hotels and did not need to rely on these lodgings.
The contingency funding is being utilized to support temporary accommodation costs for refugees in the regions. Any unspent funds will be returned to the fiscal framework at the end of the fiscal year.
The department is seeking $4.5 million in funding to provide an updated amount to the Canada-Quebec Accord on immigration. This addition will bring the annual grant the federal government provides to support settlement and integration services in Quebec to $345.1 million.
Under the accord, as you may be aware, the Government of Quebec is responsible for providing reception and integration services to all immigrants. At this time, when large numbers of people are arriving in Canada as part of the #WelcomeRefugees initiative, this funding is particularly important.
[Translation]
IRCC is also seeking approval to realign previously approved resources. This involves $20 million for services provided by the International Organization for Migration in the overseas processing of Syrian refugee applicants under the department's Resettlement Assistance Program. The transfer of previously approved resources would see funds from operating expenditures go to grants and contributions. As such, it does not represent a request for additional funding.
[English]
In terms of adjustments and transfers to do with other programs, a significant allocation in these estimates is the $14.8 million in funding to continue to implement reforms to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program and the International Mobility Program. The reforms to the TFWP were aimed at ensuring that Canadians are given the first chance at available jobs. Introduced in 2014, the reforms limited access to the program and introduced stronger enforcement, with penalties for those who did not comply.
Budget 2015 authorized funds of $42.7 million from 2015 to 2017 for Citizenship and Immigration Canada. In 2015- 16, funds were used to reform both the TFWP and the International Mobility Program.
Another major adjustment involves funding to expand biometric screening in Canada's immigration system. Funding of $5.6 million would be used to develop plans to define, build and deploy a larger biometrics program.
[Translation]
In June 2015, it was announced that Canada would expand the use of biometric screening over a five-year period to foreign nationals applying for work or study permits. U.S. citizens would be excluded from this measure. Biometric screening would also be used for foreigners applying for a visitor visa or permanent residency in Canada.
[English]
The expansion was meant to build on the success of the Temporary Resident Biometrics Project. Under that initiative, citizens from 29 countries and one territory must go in person to provide their fingerprints and have a digital photo taken when they apply to come to Canada temporarily to visit, study or work.
[Translation]
Biometrics are a reliable and accurate tool. They enable us to confirm a traveller's identity. Biometric immigration screening is used in about 70 countries. Its expansion will ensure that Canada keeps pace with our partners, including the United States and the United Kingdom, as well as other countries in Europe.
[English]
The department also proposes to continue support for Canada's migrant smuggling prevention strategy with funding of $3 million under these supplementary estimates. The strategy is an effort to disrupt organized human smuggling operations believed to be destined for Canada. Migrants intercepted are provided assistance by IRCC through the Global Assistance for Irregular Migrants Program.
Finally, I would draw your attention to a reduction in Canada's statutory appropriation with regard to Federal Skilled Worker fees.
The department has terminated most Federal Skilled Worker program applications received before 2008. The fees were returned to applicants. These estimates include a $23 million negative adjustment reflecting reductions in the anticipated requirement for fee returns for 2015-16.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair, my colleagues and I are ready to answer any questions from committee members about these supplementary estimates.
[English]
The Chair: If it's okay with everyone, we'll go to Ms. Walker for her comments, and then we'll discuss the statutories between our two groups. Then our first group will be able to leave when that's completed and we can continue on with the estimates with the Border Services. Is that all right? Please go ahead.
Christine Walker, Vice President, Comptrollership Branch, Canada Border Services Agency: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee to discuss the Canada Border Services Agency Supplementary Estimates (C) for 2015-16.
My name is Christine Walker. I'm vice-president of the agency's Comptrollership Branch and the Chief Financial Officer. My colleague, Caroline Xavier, is the vice-president of operations.
I'd like to begin by offering the committee some context on the CBSA and the environment in which it operates.
The agency, created in 2003, supports Canada's national security and economic prosperity objectives by preventing the entry of those travellers or goods posing a potential threat to Canada, while at the same time facilitating the flow of people and legitimate goods across our borders. Today we are the second largest law enforcement organization in the federal government, enforcing over 90 statutes on behalf of federal departments and agencies.
To ensure an appropriate balance across our dual mandates of traveller and commercial facilitation, border security and integrity and revenue collection, the CBSA applies a risk-based border management strategy that balances key government priorities.
We are a large operation that functions 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. Our workforce of 14,000 employees includes approximately 6,700 uniformed border services officers who operate across Canada at airports, marine ports, land ports of entry and remote border crossings, as well as overseas.
[Translation]
To support this work, the agency had a total budget in 2015-16 of approximately $1.9 billion, the majority of which covered the operating expenditures required for ongoing border management.
[English]
The CBSA's 2015-16 supplementary estimates totals a net increase of budgetary expenditures of approximately $59 million. This amount includes a $53 million increase in voted appropriations and a $7 million increase in employee benefit plans and a small net decrease in transfers.
The increase in voted appropriations is being sought to enhance the Canada Border Services Agency's capacity to ensure the safety and economic prosperity of all Canadians, assist in the government-wide efforts to resettle the Syrian refugees, expand biometric screening and address labour or skill shortages within the agency. More specifically, within this $53 million are the following requests: $14 million to respond to the Syrian refugee crisis. This effort includes security screening to help inform Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship officers' decisions on the issuance of permanent residence visas, the processing of refugees once they arrive at the Canadian ports of entry and immigration enforcement within Canada.
[Translation]
We also anticipate $21 million to improve the integrity of front line operations, which will allow the CBSA to maintain current levels of border service officers.
[English]
Twelve million dollars to expand biometric screening, which allows Canada to deploy self-service kiosks at Canada's top eight airports to strengthen identity verification procedures through the systematic fingerprint verification at primary inspections.
In addition, verification and enrolment capability will be available at secondary inspection at 20 additional airports and 36 land ports of entry.
This initiative also builds on the Canada and United States Beyond the Border Action Plan commitments.
The agency is also requesting the following: $4 million for activities related to Division 9 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which includes the development of risk assessments and the monitoring and attention of those persons who are deemed inadmissible to Canada on the grounds of national security; $2 million to reform the Temporary Foreign Worker Program and create the International Mobility Program.
[Translation]
Finally, we also anticipate almost $1 million to increase investigative resources for countering terrorism.
[English]
Mr. Chair, should CBSA receive the funding for the initiatives outlined as part of Supplementary Estimates (C), the related adjustment to the statutory authority for the employee benefits plan is $7 million. This includes cost to the government for the employers' contributions and payments to the public service annuation plan, the Canada and Quebec pension plans, employee benefit plans and the Employment Insurance accounts.
The following items are related to internal and intergovernmental transfers, beginning with an internal transfer of $20 million from the CBSA's vote 1 operating expenditures to its vote 5 capital expenditures to be in alignment with the common definition of capital.
Mr. Chair, this transfer has no effect on the agency's overall budget.
[Translation]
The agency will receive a small amount — less than $1 million — to its vote 1 operating expenditures from the Department of National Defence for the assessment, management and remediation of federal contaminated sites.
[English]
Finally, the CBSA will transfer about $1 million to other organizations, namely, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada for improvement to the global case management system; and Global Affairs Canada to provide support to Canadian Border Services Agency staff located at missions abroad.
Mr. Chair, this concludes my presentation of the CBSA's 2015-16 Supplementary Estimates (C). My colleague and I would be pleased to take your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I'd like to welcome also Senator Neufeld, Senator Bellemare, and of course Senator Mitchell today. We're ready now to go into our question period for both groups on Supplementary Estimates (C). I'd like to start off with Senator Eaton, from Toronto.
Senator Eaton: My first question is to immigration. We know we have received 25,000 Syrians in the last six months. What is the total number of refugees that Canada accepts every year, and will they all get the same financial help? Do you budget the same thing for everybody? The Prime Minister raised a question the other day when he said that you're considering paying the travel costs for Syrians. Will that apply, and does that apply to other refugees?
David Manicom, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy Sector, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: Thank you, senator. I'll take that question.
We haven't yet announced the final totals of all refugee arrivals in 2015 but, in addition to the Syrians who arrived, we had thousands of refugees arriving from other countries and met all of our targets with regard to our commitments to refugee populations in South America, in central Africa and Eritrea and elsewhere that we had made.
Senator Eaton: How many people come to Canada every year as refugees?
Mr. Manicom: There is no number that comes every year. It's different every year, senator. It is very different in 2015. The number that came in 2015 would be, on order of scale, 20,000, if we mean resettled from abroad.
Senator Eaton: Is it 20,000 plus 25,000 Syrians?
Mr. Manicom: No.
Senator Eaton: Is it 20,000, total?
Mr. Manicom: It is 20,000 total in 2015, order of scale, of resettled refugees, compared, for example, to about 7,000 resettled refugees in 2014, so from 7,000 to about 20,000.
The Syrian commitment is primarily 2016 numbers. There were 6,000 or so who arrived by December 31 and the rest of the 25,000 in the first two months of this year.
Your second question was with regard to financial support.
Senator Eaton: Just to finish on the numbers, do we ever put a cap on the number of refugees that come? Do we ever say 50,000 is what we can do, or 100, or is it just open?
Mr. Manicom: There are two types of refugees. There are those resettled voluntarily by Canada from abroad as a humanitarian commitment, and there are those who seek asylum in Canada and are adjudicated by the Immigration and Refugee Board as part of our convention obligations to those who arrive on our shores.
The volume that the government controls, if you will, is resettled refugees, and a target is established every year under the immigration levels plan, normally raised in the house in November but, because of the election this year, it will be done today or tomorrow, as I understand it.
Senator Eaton: Thank you. Is it an even playing field for all refugees in terms of the help they get? I'm talking about the resettled refugees seeking resettlement.
Mr. Manicom: It is the same in almost all respects. There was one exception for the Syrian effort. Because we are doing a large-scale airlift involving organizing on very short timelines, leasing of aircraft and even the use of military aircraft at times, the government is providing the transportation costs for the 25,000 Syrians resettled under this initiative and for the additional 10,000 government-assisted refugees that the government has committed to bring to Canada by the end of 2016.
Other refugees, but not all, normally use a transportation loan to come to Canada, which they then repay to the government. That program is, as you may know, under review at this time.
Senator Eaton: May I ask a question of Border Services?
The Chair: Please go ahead.
Senator Eaton: I think the cost to entry and exit is being discussed in Washington or is in negotiation; is it not?
Caroline Xavier, Vice President, Operations Branch, Canada Border Services Agency: You're saying the cost? Is that the question?
Senator Eaton: No. I guess the whole program of entry-exit is being discussed, is it not? Are you not in negotiations right now with the U.S.?
Ms. Xavier: The entry-exit was a commitment of the Beyond the Border accord that was signed previously between the two countries. In terms of exactly what the agenda is going to be between the two heads of state, I'm not privy to say. All I can say is it continues to be a commitment of Beyond the Border, and it is possible that it will be part of the dialogues that will occur between our two countries.
Senator Eaton: Have you here at home thought about the costs it would entail?
Ms. Xavier: Yes. As part of Beyond the Border, there was a Treasury Board submission as well as a cost estimate provided with regard to the estimated cost for the implementation of the program, and I can ask my colleague Christine to speak to that.
Ms. Walker: The CBSA received $108 million over six years for the entry-exit program. A portion of that was to develop systems to be able to manage the entry-exit information.
Senator Eaton: Now you have to wait for the ink on the paper to go ahead and implement it?
Ms. Xavier: Just for clarity, the Beyond the Border initiative had already reached an agreement that Canada would be implementing an entry-exit system.
Senator Eaton: I thought we discussed that the last time you were here.
Ms. Xavier: That's right. However, there is a legislative requirement that has to be put in place. We've already implemented two of the four phases of entry-exit, and the remaining two phases require additional legislation to pass, and that has not yet occurred.
Senator Eaton: Can you explain to us what you need in the legislation?
Ms. Xavier: Right now, the first two phases have permitted us to be able to collect exit information at the land ports of entry on all foreign nationals and permanent residents and not on citizens of the U.S. and Canadians. As a result, the legislation is required for the citizenship aspect.
Senator Eaton: For me to go across the States, you need legislation so you can stamp whatever it is so you know I've left the country.
Ms. Xavier: It's for the collection of the data, to be able to allow us to collect that information on Canadian citizens primarily. Right now, the information that we are collecting is only on foreign nationals and only at land ports of entry on exit.
Senator Marshall: My question is for Mr. Matson and relates to the Syrian refugees. What's the money used for? Is it used for living expenses and rental? With the $17.7 million that's in the Supplementary Estimates (C), what exactly are we paying for?
Mr. Matson: The funding we asked for in Supplementary Estimates (C) was for access, if required, to the government-wide contingency. When we asked for the funding, we knew that there would probably be increased costs related to accommodation principally for the immigrants when they landed in Canada and were welcomed. We had made provisions for housing on military bases, and we also accommodated them in hotels. A combination of those activities required additional funding that was not originally requested in Supplementary Estimates (B) so, in managing our finances, we felt it prudent to ask for access to the government-wide contingency in case that funding was required for that purpose.
You have to understand that when we asked for the funding, it was in January, and we had to make a call at that time whether or not we should have access, and we did ask for access. As it turns out, we did require that funding for additional hoteling for the refugees.
Senator Marshall: Is it just for housing and accommodations? What about expenses for food and clothing? Is that also covered in the 17.7?
Mr. Matson: Yes. There are other requirements. It's principally for housing and accommodation, but there are other welcoming costs like addressing their immediate needs when they land in Canada and other supports.
Senator Marshall: There seems to be, according to the media reports, two groups. There are ones coming in sponsored by the federal government, and then there's another group that are privately sponsored. Would there be any expenses for the privately sponsored group in the 17.7, or is this all for federally sponsored refugees?
Mr. Manicom: I'll take that, senator. My colleagues may wish to add.
To separate it out from the 17.7 specifically, the general costs for government-assisted refugees include a year of income support and other settlement services surrounding that, like language training and so forth.
For private-sponsored, the income support portion and the basic day-to-day care is provided by private sponsors. In the Syrian initiative, the costs are considerably larger to the government for the government assisted but, as part of the large-scale initiative, privately sponsored refugees were brought in through the welcome centre and housed in a hotel for a day or two before their private sponsors took responsibility for them. The cost is much smaller to government for private sponsored, but it isn't zero.
Senator Marshall: Who disburses the money? I'm talking about the government-sponsored refugees. Is the money disbursed by your department, or does it go to the province to disburse through their income-support system? I'm just trying to get a handle on what exactly the process is.
Stefanie Beck, Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services Sector, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: It depends on which part of the costs. For all of them, we use some sort of third party. For instance, for the airlift, the transportation went through the International Organization for Migration. For the services at the hotels and the welcoming centres, we used the Canadian Red Cross in Montreal and one of the resettlement assistance providers in Toronto, the Malton group, which has been providing services for us for years in Toronto. For across the country, the money went directly into our resettlement assistance providers through grants and contributions agreements.
Senator Marshall: Is the department disbursing some money to individual families?
Ms. Beck: No, but we wouldn't normally.
Senator Marshall: That's why I was wondering what your network is.
Right now you have a target as to the number refugees we are going to bring in. I would think that, as we go along, somebody is doing an assessment of what's working and what's not working. You have two groups, the government- sponsored and the private-sponsored. Now, the private-sponsored should obviously be cheaper. Is there any work being done on the quality of what's happening with the government-sponsored versus the private-sponsored, or are we waiting until next year to do that? What's happening now?
Ms. Beck: David can add to this. We do a lot of performance measurement, if I can call it that. Much of it is very long term because, if we are looking at outcomes of the resettled refugees, it will not be anything immediate, for instance, with this particular group of refugees who are here now. The demographics are different for each cohort, if I can say that, but, for the Syrians, they tend not to speak much English or French, so those who are arriving now are unlikely to go straight into a full-time job that could lead to a decent career. Most of them will be going straight into language training.
We do track, for instance, how many people have been assessed on their level of language and how many people have started language training. We are watching all of those things on a monthly basis. We have been tracking as well how many go into permanent housing. Over 60 per cent of those who have arrived are already in permanent accommodation. We are pleased about that, and that number, of course, is going up daily.
We track those kinds of settlement services on a regular basis using metrics but also, on the qualitative side, we have studies checking outcomes. David knows more about that.
Senator Marshall: Okay. At this point in time, would you have any feeling or has there been any assessment done that would give you any indication as to who is faring better, the government-sponsored or the community-sponsored refugees? Is there any preliminary information available that you could share with us?
Mr. Manicom: About the Syrian population, no, not really. Many of them have only been in Canada a couple of weeks. Our initial early metrics are how quickly we are getting them into housing and into programs to prepare them for Canadian society, such as language training. We already have a considerable amount of data on those who have already started their language training.
This is a very recent group of arrivals. Most of the 25,000 arrived in the last eight or nine weeks. We are setting up a number of initiatives to track the performance of Syrian refugees at earlier phases than we normally would. Normally we rely on indicators of use of social assistance or income through our links to the income tax database, which takes a year or two to really show results. We will do an extensive sampling with our researchers on this population in the coming months. However, historically, privately sponsored refugees do considerably better faster than government- assisted.
Senator Marshall: That's what the media is reporting.
Mr. Manicom: Yes. That's true for two reasons. First, the populations tend to be different. The populations of privately sponsored tend to have family or community ties in Canada, so it is perhaps somewhat normal that they integrate into the labour market particularly more quickly. Over time, the gap narrows a good deal. If you look five or six years out, the average income of a privately sponsored refugee is still somewhat higher, but the gap is quite narrow by that point.
Senator Marshall: I have one final question concerning Canada's migrant smuggling prevention strategy, which is at $3 million. Is that going to a third party, or is that being spent by the department?
Mr. Matson: That funding is principally delivered through third parties that help us help refugees reintegrate back into their country of origin. We do that principally through third parties.
Senator Campbell: Thank you. I will switch channels here a bit. I would like to know what role the agency plays in the Temporary Foreign Worker Program and also the International Mobility Program.
Ms. Xavier: The CBSA?
Senator Campbell: Yes.
Ms. Xavier: The CBSA is the enforcement arm of the temporary foreign worker in terms of the investigative aspect of it. Working with our colleagues at IRCC as well as our colleagues at ESDC, who are the prime owners of the program, we are the ones who would follow through with regard to any potential tips, leads or intelligence that lead us to determine that somebody could be in violation or perhaps not complying with the rules of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program or the International Mobility Program.
As well, we play a role at the ports of entry to ensure those seeking entry under these programs are, again, compliant and adhere to the proper rules of the programs prior to admitting them into the country.
Senator Campbell: You are asking for $63.9 million to fund this. How will these funds be spent?
Ms. Xavier: It will primarily be spent on increasing our investigator base, because this is an additional workload for us. We will be able to follow the leads that are provided and in investigations. Investigations take quite a bit of time. As well, it's for the additional investigative, technique-type training that is required for the officers to be able to perform these duties.
Senator Campbell: How many investigations would you do under these programs?
Ms. Xavier: We estimated that approximately 50 investigations could be opened in a year related to tips and intelligence.
Senator Campbell: So 50 investigations and a $63.9 million ask? That seems like an awfully expensive investigation.
Ms. Walker: For CBSA, the amount in the supplementary estimates was around $2 million. The total program may be up to $6 million. I will dig out the number here.
Ms. Xavier: Our part of the program is smaller than the totality of the program that you have costed there.
Senator Campbell: So you are looking at $2 million to train your officers in investigative techniques, et cetera?
Ms. Xavier: Correct.
Ms. Walker: The amount is $2.2 million in Supplementary Estimates (C), that's correct.
[Translation]
Senator Bellemare: My first question is for the Canada Border Services Agency.
You say that the agency is requesting $4 million for activities related to section 9 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which includes the development of risk assessment and the monitoring and detention of those persons who are deemed inadmissible to Canada on grounds of national security.
I would like to know how you assess risk. Is risk assessment included in the $4 million?
Ms. Xavier: That money will be used to cover the costs of the research required to assess risk, which is part of the agency's activities under this program. We have to issue a danger opinion against monitored individuals, who may be worried about returning to their country. So we carry out an assessment to determine whether the individual represents a risk for Canadians and for national security, and also to confirm that the individual will return to their country, if there is a risk. So those are the assessments we have to carry out.
Senator Bellemare: How do you carry out those risk assessments? Do you use questionnaires completed by refugees who arrive in the country or do you use external data?
Ms. Xavier: We use a combination of several tools. We can conduct risk assessments based on interviews and information the refugees provided when they arrived. We may be talking about information we shared with our colleagues in charge of security or information we receive from other colleagues or partners. We use all the information available to us.
Senator Bellemare: Is everyone's personal risk assessed?
Ms. Xavier: Yes.
Senator Bellemare: My second question is for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. I had never noticed this before, but in the Supplementary Estimates (C) documents, the total of statutory items is negative for the year. You can see an amount of $93 million in brackets under "Authorities to Date''. In these supplementary estimates, the amount is also negative — $23 million.
That's strange because statutory spending is usually positive. In this case, the figure is negative. What is it negative in relation to? Can you shed some light on those missing statutory expenditures? What are they missing from?
Mr. Matson: That is a good question. You are correct. Normally, the figures are positive in supplementary estimates.
[English]
However, this negative amount reflects our returning funding to the fiscal framework for the return of fees. As I mentioned earlier in my speech, we anticipate requiring less funding to return fees to federal skilled workers. We have been doing that for the last two years. However, the forecast for this year has changed, and we don't anticipate returning as much this year as we thought, so the funding is being returned to the fiscal framework.
There is $25 million that we are returning to the fiscal framework. There is a positive amount that brings the $25 million to negative $23, and the positive amount is related to employee benefits that we are asking for, in combination with the other items we are asking for funding. When we ask for salary funding, we get employee benefits as well. The negative 25 plus the two from employee benefits brings you to a "negative,'' if you will, for statutory benefits.
[Translation]
Senator Bellemare: So you previously received that money?
Mr. Matson: Yes.
Senator Bellemare: And it was in a fund?
Mr. Matson: Exactly.
Senator Bellemare: So it's the money from the fund. Is any money left in the fund?
[English]
Mr. Matson: Yes. It's statutory, so we have an obligation to pay.
This item is very much for information purposes. If people apply to have their fee returned, we have an obligation to pay them, and we will. This is reflecting the fact that we don't anticipate requiring all the funding that we previously asked for.
Senator Mitchell: Thank you to each of you.
I am concerned about two areas that are not unrelated, but it is about the comings and goings of people from Canada. Are you now matching the non-Canadians who enter Canada to see that they exit Canada, and how many do you think may still be here who haven't exited even though their visa or temporary foreign worker time limit is up?
Ms. Xavier: For clarification, you want to know if we are doing matching on Canadians who are —
Senator Mitchell: Non-Canadians first.
Ms. Xavier: Okay. As I was explaining earlier, with regard to the entry-exit program, the only phases that have been implemented are related to the land port of entry. As a result, our exit becomes the entry to the United States, and the U.S.'s exit becomes our entry. We are exchanging information in that manner so we are able to do as you said: Matching and confirming if any of those foreign nationals are in our current warrant inventory of renewals have already departed.
The one point worth making is that this is only happening at our land ports of entry, while a large majority of our travelling public can still be in our air mode or other modes. The result is that it's not a one for one. It's not a complete picture, but it is a percentage of the travelling public who travel on land for which we have that information.
Senator Mitchell: How many do you think are still in Canada who shouldn't be?
Ms. Xavier: I can't really confirm that to you because I have no way of knowing with any type of certainty, other than if they have told me themselves, because, again, I am only getting a portion of the populations that is travelling in and out in the exit-entry aspect.
Senator Mitchell: The $2 million that Senator Campbell asked you about would be for?
Ms. Xavier: The $2 million was related to temporary foreign workers — not necessarily the traveling public, but all foreign nationals.
Senator Mitchell: My next question relates to that and to the privacy implications with respect to biometrics. First, why do you have to track Canadians coming and going?
Ms. Xavier: We are not tracking anybody, actually. Canadians are free to come and go as they please. The only thing is that the CBSA's mandate is that all individuals entering the country report to the CBSA's entry at a port of entry in some manner. That is the primary role of the CBSA. We also have an exit and export role as well.
Even if entry-exit were in place for all citizens, it wouldn't be a mechanism for tracking anybody. It would be purely for having a better understanding of those who are in and out of the country to help us better manage some of our programs, such as the foreign nationals in our warrant inventory.
It is not for the purpose of tracking citizens; citizens would still have the opportunity to come and go as they want to.
Senator Mitchell: But it is different to match the coming and going of a non-Canadian versus the coming and going of a Canadian. Whose business is it if a Canadian leaves and never comes back?
Ms. Xavier: As you said, they are free to come and go as they please. The general purpose of the entry-exit program is not related to tracking Canadians and their comings and goings. It is for them to continue to be able to move freely, as they need to.
What you should know, though, is that as Canadians re-enter into Canada, they have to present themselves, as any other traveller must, and they are permitted entry as Canadian citizens into the country. When you are giving us that E311 card — the declaration card — you are already telling us at what point you left. The reason we require that information is primarily for the collection of duties and taxes. It is to ensure that the goods you are bringing in are properly accounted for and that you are doing due diligence.
It is not for tracking them leaving or departing. You are already giving us that information when you come back by telling us you left on X date, and that is what you are entitled to X amount of duties to return with.
Senator Mitchell: I have a quick question on biometrics. Clearly, they facilitate all of this. I am sure there is a residual or latent concern among some Canadians about that process being invasive. What is your answer to that? How important is it that we utilize biometrics in the exit-entry process?
Ms. Xavier: We will not be using biometrics as part of the entry-exit process. Biometrics are linked to the foreign national management of temporary entries, as it is right now. In terms of the future expansion, I will ask by leagues at IRCC to respond to that, but it is not linked to Canadian citizens at all at this time.
Senator Mockler: Looking at capital investment with CBSA, could you bring us, across Canada and in all regions, when you are asking for an additional $28 million, where will that be affected in that vote?
Ms. Walker: Are you referring to the $20 million that was transferred from operating to capital?
Senator Mockler: Yes.
Ms. Walker: That is primarily related to an investment in an information system for which we received the funding actually in the operating budget. The system is an asset, because we have spent a significant amount of money. It is an information system that was developed within the National Capital Region.
Senator Mockler: In the National Capital Region?
Ms. Walker: Yes.
Senator Mockler: Have we had any other improvements, even in buildings across the regions of Canada?
Ms. Walker: We have 117 custodial ports across Canada, and we have a capital plan upon which we invest annually in our ports of entry. It will depend upon the need of the port rather than the region in which the port exists as to where we invest our money. A good example is that over 53 per cent of our ports are over 35 years old. It really is on an as- needed basis.
Senator Mockler: How is that 35 per cent being distributed?
Ms. Walker: Pardon me, senator. I was not clear enough. About 53 per cent of our custodial ports are over 35 years old, and we have a five-year capital plan of approximately $25 million, plus we did get some extra investments from the Government of Canada in four other ports: Emerson in Manitoba; North Portal, Saskatchewan; Lacolle, and I've forgotten —
Senator Mockler: In Quebec?
Ms. Walker: Yes.
For the other ports, we actually have a capital plan that we plan over five years. Based on the need and urgency of the investment needed in that port, that is how our investments are decided.
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: Mr. Matson, is the Official Languages Act complied with, if we take into account the fact that a certain number of refugees must be sent to francophone regions, compared with other regions of Canada? Can you give us an approximate number of refugees being sent to the Atlantic region?
M. Manicom: Refugees are not sent to a specific community based on linguistic criteria. Normally, refugees are sent to a community because of private sponsorship and, in the case of government-assisted refugees, the criteria is based on the necessary medical care, family ties and community ties. A refugee will not be headed to a francophone community simply because of linguistic criteria.
Senator Mockler: So how can we ensure that refugees are sent to francophone regions across the country? What mechanisms will be implemented to do that?
Mr. Manicom: The government is responsible for the care and well-being of refugees. There are centres across the country to which refugees are sent and where we can meet their needs during that very difficult stage of their lives. No program is in place to ensure that a certain number of refugees are sent to francophone communities.
[English]
The Chair: I have a couple of questions I would like to ask the immigration folks.
Looking at Supplementary Estimates (B) and (C), we are up to $429 million so far with the refugee settlement, if I understand correctly. I know you don't want to talk about moving forward, but let's do a question on where you are at this particular point vis-à-vis your target for your total budget. Are you on track? Will you be going over, or will you be asking for more?
Mr. Matson: The short answer is we are on track, absolutely. We are anticipating a surplus this year, mostly related to our operations. We had a number of costs that we had asked for funding in anticipation of potentially requiring those funds for those purposes but, as the initiative rolled out, and I like to say that through prudent management, we were able to avoid some costs. We will have a very modest surplus this year. We received funding this year to the tune of about $298 million between Supplementary Estimates (B) and (C), and we will spend approximately 75 per cent of that funding on this initiative. I think it shows that our planning was very prudent.
We did ask for contingencies. We are returning the vast majority of the contingencies that we asked for. We did require some contingencies, as I mentioned earlier, for housing requirements. Other than that, in all phases of the initiative, we are showing slight surpluses.
I guess the short answer is we will live well within our budget this year, and we anticipate doing so for future years as well.
The Chair: If I understand correctly, we have brought in 25,000 refugees at this particular point, and you are planning for another 8,000 approximately in 2016. Is that correct?
Mr. Matson: That is correct.
The Chair: Budget-wise now, you are moving forward. Have you set up your budget for that particular group of folks?
Mr. Matson: Absolutely. Between the Syrian initiative and our normal levels plan, we will have sufficient funding to meet all of the commitments that we have made.
The Chair: There have been some articles, and I know we are getting in the weeds a bit, but it is an issue in terms of management. You folks have done a great job in a very short period of time. You had the previous government's plan for 10,000 refugees for 2015, and you took that plan and added the new dynamics to that plan.
As we look at what has transpired to this point, for example, with simple things like airfares, we probably pay premium prices for airfares — and there have been a few articles on that — or did you not? Do you have some comments on costing? When you move quickly — and this is always the fear of an old business guy — sometimes some things fall through the cracks. Do we have assurances that we got the best possible deals for the operational elements in this program, such as your accommodation? It is cheaper to put 2,000 people in Valcartier, and I know the general in Valcartier was panicking because he said, "What am I going to do with these folks after 90 days?'' That was not to be negative about it, but it is the truth.
Are we on board with getting the best costs in terms of our dollars?
Mr. Matson: I would say we are very on track to ensure that we are spending our resources very prudently.
In terms of transportation, for example, our costs will come in some $10 million less than what we had budgeted for, and our budgeting is based on very prudent estimates. As it turns out, we got much better prices on the travel than we had budgeted for. That is mostly because of the scrutiny through which we procured those services. In that respect, I think you can be very assured that we did get good value for money for the Canadian taxpayer.
Stefanie, do you have anything to add?
Ms. Beck: I would add that all the normal procurement practices were followed. You would have seen up on Buy and Sell, for instance, when we needed hotel space, we would ask for it. Bids were submitted and were evaluated. We always ensured we had best value for money.
As I said earlier, we gave the transportation role, if I can call it that, to the International Organization for Migration. They followed similar procurement practices. They do call for proposals, they have bids that come in and they choose the best value. We were pleasantly surprised to find that the transportation costs were less than what we had seen.
What you are referring to in the media and what the journalist was able to access was one number that was a comprehensive number that included not only airfares but baggage handling, ground transportation and a whole series of other costs. He included that as if that was the total per person for the airfare alone. It was not actually reflective of what we were paying.
The Chair: Another question that has come up is giving money to the UN agency and the effectiveness of money. Having done a lot of philanthropic work, like many of you folks probably have done, you were always checking with agencies to see what percentage of the money actually went to people.
When we give $100 million to the UN agency, the UN agency doesn't necessarily have a great reputation on the percentage of dollars that actually get to aid people. If you have a situation where you would get only 30 to 40 points of a dollar to the actual recipients versus 80 to 90 per cent from other organizations that may not have the same popularity or position in the world, I wonder how you folks manage that. As Canadian taxpayers, we are living in very tough times, and we want to make sure that we maximize where our dollars are spent. Do you have a comment on that?
Mr. Manicom: Sure. I served as our representative in Geneva for a couple of years. I can't speak to the providing of funds to UNHCR for general humanitarian work, which falls under the responsibility of Global Affairs Canada.
With regard to the resettlement program, the way we got resettlement referrals from UNHCR for this initiative was an innovative initiative that had never been done before. We did it on a short time frame for a very low cost. I don't think we would be exaggerating to say that in Washington, London and Geneva, folks are agog at what Canada has done. The cost we provided UNHCR for this entire program was something like $10 million. It was very small to resettle this large number of refugees.
I would note that the amount of funds that are relieved or not needed to now care for and feed these refugees in the region, of course, is the substantial saving, as well as providing hope for others in the region to discourage them from undertaking dangerous journeys across the Mediterranean this spring.
The Chair: In our Supplementary Estimates (C), we have the supplementary estimates between Canada Border Services Agency, $13.6 million; Citizenship and Immigration Canada, $17.7; foreign affairs and trade — I guess that's the UN — for $108 million; Public Health Agency of Canada, $2 million; and Shared Services Canada of $5.4 million. Could you comment on the type of interaction that takes place between you folks? Could you give us a comment on how these elements of money and spending are done?
Mr. Matson: My comment would be that it's quite complex and we are fully engaged with our partners, so the activities are being coordinated very closely, and the funding is being managed by each department very prudently. There's a lot of interaction at the operational level to make sure the activities are coordinated, and the funding is managed by each department separately in order to ensure that it's managed prudently.
The Chair: To the Canada Border Services Agency, the President of the United States said he was content that Canada brought these Syrian refugees into the country because they, I guess, passed through the U.S. intelligence network. For people who may not be in the know, what does that mean?
Ms. Xavier: He was referring to the fact that what we aim to do as much as possible here is to not compromise anything with regard to security. We use a multi-layered approach to the management of security, both with steps taken overseas as well as steps taken here at the port of entry as the refugees arrive.
One of the things he was probably referring to in that statement is the fact that as part of our assessments, we access several databases, including that of immigration, national security, law enforcement, which included databases of the U.S. From that perspective, he probably felt assured that we had accesses to the information we needed to have access to within his databases in order to help protect the perimeter of both Canada and the U.S.
The Chair: When you get into your post-mortem, when the bulk of this is done, I know the Treasury Board is working very hard to reorganize how the estimates and the budget is done, and hopefully we'll get a budget out early and it will be a policy document with an envelope of money, and then your estimates will be cutting the money up and putting it in the right places so we can manage this thing on a more reasonable basis and have a better understanding of what's going on. How do you organize your post-mortem with the various departments you're interacting with on a horizontal basis?
Ms. Beck: It's actually not as simple as you might think because there are so many partners involved.
The Chair: I didn't think it was. I wanted you to tell me that.
Ms. Beck: As a matter of fact, we have about five exercises under way to have one big comprehensive evaluation at the end. We have a quick and dirty right now with sort of key people being interviewed across government, including our colleagues from CBSA, of course, the key partners. We will have an internal review at the end of this month, the third week of March. Then we will have another broader one with all of the partners inter-governmentally, and then we will go to the stakeholders. We want to discuss this with the IOM, the UNHCR, the Red Cross and, indeed, the resettlement assistant providers.
We did this in a whole new way. This has created the foundation for a different relationship with all of these communities in the future, and indeed the cities and the mayors, Vancouver and other major cities. Mike Savage in Halifax has done some phenomenal work as well. All of those things will be part of the lessons learned. It will not just be the numbers; it will be how we did it, the governance, the reshaping of the relationship.
The Chair: When the money has gone to the other groups in the horizontal relationships, how is accountability managed?
Canada Border Services Agency, when you received your $12 million or $14 million to do what you did, which was probably some form of screening, what do you give back to the people in Immigration or Treasury Board? What type of accountability are you showing? Is it just the numbers of how many people there were and what you did in terms of your reporting? How does that work?
Ms. Xavier: You're absolutely right; there's quite a bit of reporting that has occurred throughout the process. IRCC, which has been the lead on the majority of that reporting, has been quite transparent with regard to their website in trying to keep Canadians informed as to the refugees arriving and how many are landed. We continue to do that ongoing tracking. That will be part of the ongoing reporting that we will do. We work very closely with our IRCC colleagues with regard to all immigration processes and the people who are landing. There is an ongoing reporting that will continue to occur.
As well, similar to what Stefanie was saying, we will also be doing our own internal reviews. There is quite a rigorous process with regard to lessons learned and the whole assessment of how the process has occurred. We will be doing that due diligence in addition to whatever internal audits and evaluations exist. As was committed by the minister of IRCC, I do believe, there will be an expectation of an OAG audit as well.
From that perspective, we have to be accountable to Treasury Board and our deputies and others on what we've done.
Mr. Matson: Another point to add to that, as part of the approval of this funding, we are committed to doing horizontal reporting across governments as part of the Treasury Board requirement. That will begin in the new year.
The Chair: Does that mean you're sort of the lead on making sure everyone gives you the proper reports and information?
Mr. Matson: We'll be working with our partners to compile the relevant reports on a horizontal basis government- wide, absolutely.
The Chair: Senator Eaton has a quick supplementary question.
Senator Eaton: Say you give money to the Red Cross. You're talking about different agencies. At the end of the year, do you get a reckoning from the Red Cross, $10 went to this and $5 went to that? Or do you just give them the money and take their word for it?
Mr. Matson: No. With all interactions we have with third parties, there is an accountability protocol.
Senator Eaton: A strict audit?
Mr. Matson: We review with them what the money was spent on. There are evaluations. We have an internal control framework, and there is reporting required, both from an activity level and a financial level. There is reporting required with all of the third parties that deliver our services, including the Red Cross.
The Chair: As a last quick point, will you meet your budget, which you had stated publicly I think was around $700 million for this exercise with the refugee program? Will you surpass it? Will you be under it? You've talked about how much you've already reduced your costs by.
Mr. Matson: I'm confident that all of the partners — and I have been speaking with them recently on this, and everybody is committed. Everything I've seen, particularly with respect to my department, indicates that we will live well within the funding for the six years in all government departments for this initiative.
The Chair: I guess the only question I would have, and maybe some of my confreres and colleagues may have, when we get Foreign Affairs in, we would like to know where that $100 million is going and who will benefit from it. It will be an interesting question.
We thank you folks from Immigration. We will bring in the health folks, get into their statements, get right into the sups and then we'll be able to get into estimates with Canada Border Services Agency. Is that correct? Do you have some time?
Ms. Walker: Unfortunately, Mr. Chair, we have another committee appearance at eleven o'clock. We had planned to be here from 9:30 to 10:30. We're very happy to return to this committee to be able to speak to you about our Main Estimates.
The Chair: In other words, you need to be somewhere else for 11:00. Is that correct?
Ms. Walker: That's correct. My sincere apologies.
The Chair: We'll bring you back another time. Thank you very much for your time.
For our second panel this morning, we are pleased to welcome the officials from the Public Health Agency of Canada: Mr. Carlo Beaudoin, Chief Financial Officer; Elaine Chatigny, Branch Head, Health Security Infrastructure Branch; and Kim Elmslie, Assistant Deputy Minister, Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention Branch.
Mr. Beaudoin, do you have an opening statement?
Carlo Beaudoin, Chief Financial Officer, Public Health Agency of Canada: Yes, I do. Mr. Chair and honourable members, good morning and thank you for the opportunity to discuss the Public Health Agency of Canada's Supplementary Estimates (C) for 2015-16 and our Main Estimates for 2016-17.
[Translation]
I have had the pleasure of appearing before this committee before, and I look forward to this opportunity to share with you again some highlights of the agency's main and supplementary estimates.
I would like to start by providing some context to you in terms of the organization of the Public Health Agency of Canada. The agency's mission is to promote and protect the health of Canadians through leadership, partnership, innovation and action in public health. We have three core business lines, which support the achievement of this mission: public health infrastructure, health promotion and disease prevention, and health security.
[English]
Our first business line, "public health infrastructure,'' facilitates and strengthens Canada's public health workforce capacity, information exchange and federal-provincial-territorial networks. This is done through enhancing scientific capacity and working with federal, provincial and territorial stakeholders in planning for and building strategic and targeted investments in public health infrastructure, which includes public health research, training, tools, best practices, standards and mechanisms to facilitate information exchange and coordinated action.
The "health promotion and disease prevention'' business line carries out primary public health functions of health promotion, surveillance, science, and research on diseases and associated risk and protective factors to inform evidence-based frameworks, strategies and interventions. A fundamental objective of this business line is to improve the overall health of the population, with additional focus on those who are most vulnerable. This is achieved by promoting healthy development among children.
Under our third business line, "health security,'' the agency seeks to bolster the resiliency of the populations and communities in order to enhance their ability to cope and respond to public health emergencies and/or events. In doing so, the agency takes an all-hazards approach to the health security of Canada's population, which, in turn, provides the Government of Canada with the ability to prevent, prepare for and respond to public health events and emergencies.
[Translation]
The work of the Public Health Agency is important to all Canadians, as we are at the forefront of many important public health issues. As you are probably aware, the agency played a critical role in combatting the Ebola outbreak in western Africa and continues to provide this support internationally as we work collaboratively on eradicating this virus. The agency has also participated in the efforts of its partners and supported them across government in the Syrian refugee resettlement, which, as you know, to date, has achieved its target of 25,000 refugees in Canada.
Now, I would like to talk to you about the 2015-16 Supplementary Estimates (C) for the agency. The agency is requesting a new increase of $13.7 million from its reference levels. This includes $2.18 million in 2015-16 as part of the commitment to resettle 25,000 Syrian refugees in Canada and for Canada to take a leading role amongst resettlement countries.
[English]
Through this initiative, the agency is seeking funding to implement the Quarantine Act at $200,000; to support health infrastructure at interim lodging sites, $800,000; and to facilitate national coordination and public health support to provinces and territories for $800,000.
The supplementary estimates also includes $4.9 million for the Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities programs, specifically for supplementary funding for strategic investments. The strategic fund will provide ongoing, stable funding for off-reserve Aboriginal health promotion and disease prevention programs to the existing Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities program.
This program's ongoing funding of $4.9 million annually will continue to reach at least 4,600 children; support effective, quality programming through promising practices, capacity-building and training initiatives on program components and emerging priorities; and increase a number of parent resources and trained staff in areas such as special needs, parental involvement and the development of culturally competent, early-childhood-development services and assessment tools.
[Translation]
The final element of new funding as part of this round of supplementary estimates is to acquire medical countermeasures for small pox and anthrax preparedness. Specifically, the agency is seeking access to vote 1 operating funding of $1.5 million in 2015-16.
The total cost for the Public Health Agency of Canada to procure and stockpile medical countermeasures for small pox and anthrax is $34.25 million over four years. This investment will protect Canadians from the deadly effects of a small pox or anthrax release by enhancing emergency preparedness and response. I will have more to say on medical countermeasures as part of my remarks on the 2016-17 Main Estimates.
[English]
The supplementary estimates also includes a number of transfers between the Public Health Agency of Canada and other governmental departments. The most significant of these include a $4 million transfer from the Federal Economic Development Agency of Southern Ontario to the Public Health Agency to support the establishment of the Canadian Centre for Aging and Brain Health Innovation.
It also includes a $1 million transfer from National Defence to support the Canadian Safety and Security Program, which provides science and technology solutions, support and advice for responding to the Government of Canada's public safety and security policy imperatives.
Thank you for providing me with the opportunity to give a brief summary of our Supplementary Estimates (C). We would be happy to take your questions before moving on to the Main Estimates.
The Chair: Let's maybe do that and then we'll go on to the Main Estimates, if it's okay with our group.
Senator Mitchell: Thanks very much for being here. Perhaps I'm just putting in a plug here, but are you aware of the recent study by the Senate Social Affairs Committee on obesity and its impact and focus, among other things, on children's health? You mentioned the vulnerable. Have you considered those recommendations, and what are you thinking about?
Kim Elmslie, Assistant Deputy Minister, Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada: Thank you very much for that question, senator. Yes, we find that Senate report very useful. We're in the process of analyzing all of the recommendations at this point in time. As all of you know around the table, the issue of childhood obesity and adult overweight and obesity is a serious public health problem for the country, and we're looking at ways to support healthier choices among Canadians. You will know that our Minister of Health, in her mandate letter, has very specific objectives in regard to healthier eating. Those are things that we'll advance over the course of time.
From the perspective of healthier active living, that's an area where the Public Health Agency of Canada is working very specifically with our partners like ParticipACTION, the provinces and territories and the private sector to support Canadians in adopting healthier lifestyles.
The report that has just been released will be an important part in informing the work that we are doing in those areas. It is very well-aligned with what we believe from a public health perspective is most important to make a difference for Canadians.
Senator Mitchell: Thank you. The finding was that between $4.6 billion and $7.1 billion annually are expended in extra health care costs due to obesity. Have you given any thought to the idea of a tax on sugary drinks?
Ms. Elmslie: Clearly that was a recommendation. At this point in time, officials at Health Canada would be looking at those recommendations. From that perspective, in the area of healthy eating and measures to reduce the use and consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages, that would be something that our colleagues at Health Canada are analyzing.
Senator Mitchell: I have a quick question on the Zika virus. I just read yesterday that there's at least one pregnant Canadian who has it, and a number of other Canadians who apparently have it. Do you have it in your budget to deal with the virus? What do you see as the prospects for its spreading in Canada?
Elaine Chatigny, Branch Head, Health Security Infrastructure Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada: Thank you very much for that question. We do have a colleague from the Infectious Diseases Prevention and Control Branch, if you would like to supplement that. However, currently, all of these cases in Canada are travel-acquired, so individuals who have travelled to endemic countries and have come back with infection. We are working very closely with colleagues in the U.S. and other G7 countries to look at the research and development needs and how we can contribute to the global effort to find the vaccine or other countermeasures for Zika.
Last week, we met with the World Health Organization and the Pan American Health Organization in Washington trying to map out what kind of additional support we could provide Brazil and the Americas and the Caribbean in particular with support such as epidemiology, additional surveillance, laboratory diagnostic, because clearly with having to develop the panels, the diagnostic capability, the ability to read the test results, with cross-reactivity with dengue fever, which is really problematic, there's a lot of work that need to be done to support our colleagues. We're mapping that out and we hope to be in a position quickly to be clearer on how we're going to support the effort.
In terms of budgets, I think Carlo can speak to that.
Mr. Beaudoin: At this point, as Ms. Chatigny says, we're really looking at where Canada can best contribute the effort. From there, we'll be mapping out what resources we have internally to contribute, what resources other departments involved in these international issues have to contribute, as well as what we need to request in terms of further funding to expand our contribution. Those amounts are still being determined based on where Canada can best contribute to this and where the agency can have the most impact.
The Chair: A quick supplementary from Senator Marshall.
Senator Marshall: Would there be advisories going out? There are a lot of people now travelling to South America for vacation. What would be the role of the agency with regard to advisories? On the Government of Canada website, there are some web pages for travelers, giving them advice when they're visiting different countries. What would you do yourself? Is there any relationship with the Government of Canada? What's being done with regard to people going to South America?
Ms. Chatigny: Thank you for that question. Within my branch, actually, we have the travel border health program. With an expert advisory panel on tropical diseases, we developed the guidance for Canada. It is aimed at travellers for those parts of the world where there is Zika infection or outbreak. We have been developing advice for travellers since December. We adjusted that advice early in the new year, when we started seeing more evidence of a potential association between Zika infection and microcephaly and other neurological diseases. We updated that advice to say, "Here's the protection you need to consider when you go to these endemic countries. If you are pregnant or considering getting pregnant, you may wish to consider postponing travel to those parts of the world. If you have to go, here is the protection or the actions you should take to protect yourself.'' We're constantly readjusting our advice, or considering readjusting the advice, as new evidence becomes available to us.
We work closely with Global Affairs Canada in establishing the advice and ensuring it gets on the travel.gc.ca website or the Government of Canada website. We have worked closely with the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, with the Canadian Pediatric Society and others to ensure that the advice we're giving is appropriate not only for travelers but also for practitioners here in Canada who then would see potential travellers with signs or symptoms of disease and giving them advice on how best to test. Then, of course, through our national microbiology lab in Winnipeg, our scientists developed the capability to do the diagnosis for something that we've never tested before. We have developed that capability, and that's how we know about the 20 cases that Senator Mitchell referred to.
Senator Campbell: Thank you for coming today. You're asking for $4.6 million for health promotion, disease prevention and health system transformation for the Aboriginal population. What are the specific activities that you'll be funding for those Aboriginal populations?
Ms. Elmslie: Thank you. That investment, senator, refers to Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities. This is a program that we have been delivering for many years. It supports a larger investment that we make in a number of sites across the country that are providing preschool school-readiness programs for Aboriginal children living off-reserve.
This amount of investment is intended to help provide training for the Aboriginal community-based organizations that are delivering these programs; provide them with more tools and resources to support the children that they are serving; and allow them, on an ongoing basis, to address other issues that might be important to them, such as fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.
Senator Campbell: I think I might have the figure wrong. Is it $4.9 million, or $4.6?
Ms. Elmslie: It is $4.9 million.
Senator Campbell: Okay. In British Columbia, we have the First Nations Health Authority. What role do you play as a public health agency with this agency in British Columbia?
Ms. Elmslie: Our regional office in British Columbia would work with the First Nations Health Authority on particular programs the agency is delivering. Aboriginal Head Start would be an example of one in which we would share best practices and work together. The responsibility more broadly in the context of liaison with that health authority would be through Health Canada's First Nations and Inuit Health Branch.
Senator Eaton: To continue on Senator Campbell's line of questioning, when you talk about the Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities program, how many programs are there? Are they in every city across Canada? How do you allocate the money specifically?
Ms. Elmslie: That a good question. In terms of the specifics, we provide about $32 million annually through this program to our Aboriginal community-based organizations. These are programs for kids three to five years old.
Senator Eaton: How many communities?
Ms. Elmslie: We are serving about 133 sites and covering about 4,800 kids in those 133 sites and communities.
Senator Eaton: That is wonderful. Do you go on the ground in those communities and initiate the programs? Does it come up from the bottom and you train people? How does it happen?
Ms. Elmslie: These programs have been in place for probably 25 years or more. They come from the ground up. Our job is to support those community organizations that want to deliver a preschool readiness program. We work with them, but they identify, in their local areas, what the needs are. We want to ensure that cultural capacities and cultural respect is front and centre in these programs, as is preservation of their languages. All of these things are values that these organizations have themselves developed and brought to us. In short, it is ground up.
Senator Eaton: Do you ever go and evaluate? You say they have been going for 25 years. How often do you actually go on the ground — because it is quite a bit of money — and evaluate whether they are working or if they could be improved?
Ms. Elmslie: Yes. That is an excellent question. They are formally evaluated every five years. In the meantime, we have performance measurement data that we are gathering on a regular basis, so that programs know and we know what kind of results are being achieved.
I am happy to tell you that, based on the evaluation evidence that we have, these are very effective programs. They are very effective in equipping these indigenous children to move from the preschool environment into the regular school environment.
As a result of these programs, we are seeing a great deal of parental and familial engagement with their children and with the school system. Also, the support that these programs provide to their families is based on the strength of the family. The family, then, is able to use these programs in whatever means they deem most appropriate to support their kids moving into the school environment.
There is really good evaluation evidence. If you are interested, I can certainly provide this committee with the evaluation report on the program.
The Chair: Would you do that?
Ms. Elmslie: Yes.
The Chair: We will ask the clerk to make sure we follow up.
Senator Eaton: Is there any difference in what you do in an urban context? Often when we have Aboriginal Affairs here, for instance, we see what their budget is — and from other departments, what their horizontal budget begins to feel like. But most of the money goes to reserves and communities, and so many First Nations people now live in cities.
Ms. Elmslie: Exactly.
Senator Eaton: Do you have specific programs for First Nations people who live in cities?
Ms. Elmslie: This program is urban and northern, so we are providing funding through this program specifically to the population off-reserve.
Our funding and our program are complemented by our colleagues in Health Canada with their Aboriginal Head Start On Reserve Program. That is important because, as you know, families will move on and off reserve, so we want to ensure there is that continuity of programming in both places.
Senator Eaton: So you will have two or three in Toronto, some in a Vancouver, all across the country, depending on the needs?
Ms. Elmslie: That is right. I will also provide you with our map of all these sites across the country, because I think you will be interested.
Senator Eaton: That would be interesting. Thank you.
We often read horror stories of children in care in Winnipeg. They are put in hotels. Does that fall under Health Canada to some degree, or is that completely provincial?
Ms. Elmslie: That would be provincial.
The Chair: I will ask my colleagues to allow the folks here from the Public Health Agency to go on to their Main Estimates. Then we will go back to the list of questions. We need to move forward, because we need to be out of here at 11:35 at the latest.
Mr. Beaudoin, will you continue on with your mains? Then we will get back to questions that will tie in with the mains and sups.
[Translation]
Mr. Beaudoin: I now turn your attention toward the Public Health Agency of Canada Main Estimates for 2016-17. The Main Estimates capture departmental budgetary changes to the Public Health Agency of Canada since last year. The Main Estimates increase the agency's 2016-17 spending authorities by $22.6 million, to a total of $589.7 million compared with the 2015-16 Main Estimates. of $567.2 million.
[English]
The major factors contributing to the net increase consist primarily of the following: $14.2 million in funding to acquire medical countermeasures for smallpox and anthrax preparedness; $10.5 million in Ebola reprofile for the Ebola preparedness and response initiative to protect Canadians at home and abroad; $6 million transfer for the establishment of the Canadian Centre for Aging and Brain Health Innovation; $4.9 million in funding to maintain health programs for Aboriginal populations; and $2.9 million in funding for the renewal of the Chemicals Management Plan. Please note that this item has been renewed and will be in our fall supplementary estimates, as well.
I would like to talk to you in more detail regarding the acquiring of medical countermeasures and the transfer to establish the Canadian Centre for Aging and Brain Health Innovation. The Public Health Agency of Canada is the Government of Canada's lead in preventing, preparing for and responding to public health threats. The agency stockpiles emergency health supplies, including medical countermeasures such as vaccines, antidotes and antibiotics in the National Emergency Strategic Stockpile, commonly called the NESS. More specifically, the NESS maintains medical countermeasures for the intentional or unintentional release of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear agents. The assets serve as surge capacity to provinces and territories, as required in times of emergency.
[Translation]
Regarding the transfer, the Public Health Agency of Canada is very proud to provide up to $42 million over five years, starting in 2015-16, to Baycrest Health Sciences, based in Toronto, to support the establishment of the Canadian Centre for Aging and Brain Health Innovation.
In addition to $10 million in new funding, allocated over the next four years, $32 million from existing reference levels will be transferred to the agency from the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario through these and future estimates.
It is to be noted that the Main Estimates increase was mainly offset by sunsetting programs such as: $5-million sunset of funding for Ebola preparedness and response initiatives to protect Canadians at home and abroad; $4.4- million sunset of funding for the Government of Canada's provision of essential federal services to the Toronto 2015 Pan American and Parapan American Games; $2.9-million sunset of funding for the chemical management plan, which as mentioned before, has been renewed; and $2.1-million sunset of funding for the installation of automated external defibrillators and associated training in recreational hockey arenas across the country.
Thank you for providing me with the opportunity to give a brief summary of our Main Estimates. We will be happy to answer your questions now.
[English]
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Beaudoin.
Senator Marshall: Thank you very much. Looking at the Main Estimates but also at Supplementary Estimates (C), a good portion of your funding is categorized as grants and contributions. How do you select who receives a grant? Do you go out and identify organizations or do you advertise in the paper with an RFP? How are these organizations selected?
Mr. Beaudoin: A lot of these grants are already determined ahead of time. For example, you will see international health grants. These are grants that are already predestined to certain organizations. They are part of our estimates.
Then we also have grants at the community-based level as well to some of the children's programming.
Senator Marshall: How do you determine what they have to do for their money? Is there a contract every year? Is there an annual contract signed saying, "We will give you $5 million, and you have to do A, B and C?''
Mr. Beaudoin: You will note, if you look at our expenditure trend for the previous year, that most of that grant money gets actually converted into contribution on an annual basis. We have very little grant money going out the door. It is mostly going out as contribution at the community level under contribution agreements that detailed specifically the requirements and expectations of these recipient organizations.
Senator Marshall: Okay. I guess at some periodic point somebody determines whether they have actually delivered on what they have promised to do.
Mr. Beaudoin: Yes. We do an annual review of their finances to see what they have expended, and we also do an annual report on what they have actually achieved. For every one of our agreements, there is a look at both financially what they are spending and project-wise what they are actually delivering and contributing to.
Senator Marshall: Is that done for every contribution every year, or is it sporadic? For example, you might do five this year and next year you do the next five. How is it set up?
Mr. Beaudoin: The reporting is done annually. We also do recipient audits on a portion of our recipients, and we also do sample monitoring. We don't monitor 100 per cent of our agreements every year, but we tend to go by risks. We will identify the recipients we deem to be the most risk from a project delivery or financial perspective. Those will be selected more often for audits and/or monitoring. It is all risk-based.
Senator Marshall: Have you ever encountered a situation where an organization hasn't delivered on what you have paid for? Do you get the money back? What happens in a situation like that?
Mr. Beaudoin: We have a compliance framework that basically identifies when we start identifying early signals that the recipient is having problems. Often, we will have some of our regional people do a site visit to see what is happening on the ground. Then we will work with the organization to try to get them back in line. Often, what will happen with some of these organizations, if we determine they can't deliver their program, is we will transfer the program to another organization to continue delivering the program.
Senator Marshall: You wouldn't get money back, but you would redirect it.
Mr. Beaudoin: We try to get money back, but usually, if these organizations have gone under, there is not much money, but we redirect the assets. In the case of Aboriginal Head Start, we sometimes own the building, and we transfer the building and the assets over to another community association that will take over those programs.
Senator Marshall: Okay. When you were making your opening remarks on the Main Estimates and you listed off the $5 million sunset of funding for Ebola preparation and then $4.4 million for something else, is that under the contributions and grants, or is that budgeted under your operating expenses?
Mr. Beaudoin: It is a bit of a mix. Ebola funding was actually operating funding.
Senator Marshall: It is operating?
Mr. Beaudoin: Yes. It was to develop treatments and vaccines for Ebola. It has taken a bit more time to develop the vaccine, so we are reprofiling the money forward into the next few years as we continue to develop treatments.
Senator Marshall: My last question relates to your remarks about the agency stockpiling emergency health supplies. Has there ever been an audit or an assessment done of your preparation for this type of disaster? Reading your remarks, it is quite a heavy responsibility. Has a second independent party ever come in and assessed your plans?
Mr. Beaudoin: I will pass that over to my colleague who is responsible for emergency operations for the agency.
Ms. Chatigny: Our programs are audited and evaluated on a regular basis. We had an internal evaluation conducted of the emergency preparedness and response program in 2009. As a result of that, we did develop a new strategy for the national emergency stockpile, looking at the mix of assets and what was still required and what was, perhaps, a new strategic direction to go in.
For example, we know from working closely with provinces and territories and their emergencies social services that there were assets in the federal stockpile that were not necessarily as useful. Perhaps where we needed to go was in bolstering our medical countermeasures for chemical, biological and radio-nuclear events, which is a key federal role in the event of an incident or an attack. We have tried to strategically reassess, based on evaluations, the value of the stockpile and the direction we need to go in into the future.
Senator Marshall: Would those assessments be on your website, for example, the internal assessments or internal audits?
Mr. Beaudoin: All the internal audits we do are published, as well as our evaluations, so a lot of that information is in the public domain, yes.
Senator Marshall: Thank you.
Senator Mockler: First, to follow up on Senator Campbell's questions, we all know the challenges we have in our communities when we look at Aboriginal people. How many Aboriginal children receive services under the initiative of Aboriginal Head Start in Urban and Northern Communities? Do you have that figure for the last five years?
Ms. Elmslie: It will vary a bit year by year, but generally it is 4,800 children receiving services every year from that particular program, which is off-reserve.
Senator Mockler: Do you see any improvements?
Ms. Elmslie: Absolutely, we do. I am going to provide that.
Senator Mockler: Can you share that with the committee?
Ms. Elmslie: I will provide you with the evaluation results. This is a very effective program.
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: Can you explain to us why the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario is asking for the authorization to transfer $4 million to the Public Health Agency of Canada to support the establishment of the Canadian Centre for Aging and Brain Health Innovation? Why is your agency the vehicle for that transfer?
Mr. Beaudoin: That's basically because it comes under our mandate. Perhaps Ms. Elmslie could explain in more detail, but it was deemed more appropriate to transfer the funds to the Public Health Agency of Canada.
[English]
Ms. Elmslie: To follow up on Mr. Beaudoin's point, dementia and healthy aging among seniors is a public health priority for us. The innovations in providing better supports to those living with dementia and to seniors in general is an area that we are working with our partners to understand more and to make more investments in. Consequently, the investment in the Baycrest Health Sciences work in the centre for brain health is allowing us to bring together the expertise of researchers across the country in that area of work, a very important one for us as we move into the future.
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: There is another instrument that provides health services. I am talking about the Société Santé en français, which was created in 2002. When we look at the activities of the Canadian Centre for Aging and Brain Health Innovation, the Atlantic provinces currently feature some alarming statistics. The same situation is unfolding in Quebec and Ontario, but much less in Western Canada.
Here is my question. Given that 2.6 million francophones live outside Quebec. What are you doing to ensure that the Société Santé en français, outside Quebec, has a direct relationship with the Canadian Centre for Aging and Brain Health Innovation? We have to be present in that institution. Francophones have to be able to obtain the same services as part of studies on population aging.
Ms. Elmslie: Yes, that is a very important issue. Researchers from across the country will play an important role through that centre. We are talking about a national collaboration that uses the talents of researchers from across the country.
Senator Mockler: When did you meet with the representatives of the Société Santé en français? Do you have a direct relationship with them?
Ms. Elmslie: We do not have a direct relationship with that society.
[English]
I will look into that a bit further to determine what the relationship could be.
Senator Mockler: Will you provide that to the chair, please?
Ms. Elmslie: Yes.
Senator Neufeld: I want to go back to Senator Marshall's question on the $206,779,000 in grants and contributions. How are those grants and contributions determined? Is this something that is ongoing? That is, you started something 10 years ago and it is ongoing? Or are there new suggestions that come in that actually take the place of some old ones? Is it every year everything is re-evaluated on whether you get the best bang for your dollar or moving ahead with things that will help Canadians? How is that determined? I don't think you really answered that question, and I would like a fuller answer to it.
Mr. Beaudoin: I can probably give you an overview of the portfolio as a whole, and then Ms. Elmslie can probably elaborate on our children's programs, as she has the vast majority of the funding.
Aboriginal Head Start, Canadian Pre-Natal Nutrition Program and Community Action Program for Children are community-based programs that Ms. Elmslie's organization administers. They represent about $114 million of the $200 million envelope. These are programs at the community level and have been around for probably over 25 years. Predominantly, we tend to enter into three-year agreements with organizations. By and large, we have been renewing mostly with those organizations. There are minor changes as we renew every three or four years, but primarily these are community-based organizations that have been around for a long time.
On the healthy living side, we have about $20 million, which is a program that is solicitation-based, and a lot of the innovative work that the agency does happens there. We receive solicitations, and there is a lot of partnership happening with the private and not-for-profit sector on multiple fronts. Some very innovative work has been done there, most predominantly on everything that is healthy living.
We have $26 million towards HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C, that is also community based. That has been around for a number of years. Typically, these are three-year agreements that we sign; typically most of those organizations are renewed on that front.
We have international health grants that represent about $15.5 million. That is predominantly a payment to the Pan American Health Organization of $12 million U.S. every year that we provide. That is one where the amount of the partner organizations is revisited every two years, but for Canada our contribution has been around the $12 million U.S. mark for a number of years.
We then have our Innovation Strategy. That is about $10 million. Again, Innovation Strategy is solicitation-based, so that gets opened up for new projects and ideas. Maybe Kim can elaborate on the Innovation Strategy and Healthy Living and what we are doing there.
Ms. Elmslie: Sure. In answer to your question do we solicit, invite in new proposals, yes, we do. We invite those in under the Innovation Strategy and under our Healthy Living Program. On a regular basis, we are bringing in letters of intent that we evaluate. On the basis of the evaluation of the letters of intent, we invite full submissions from applicants. These are rigorously evaluated to ensure that they are in line with the objectives, that the organizations have the capacity to complete the projects and that there is a high optimization of results. A stringent review process is ongoing, and organizations are constantly bringing in applications to us.
In the children's program, we have a slightly different model. That is because we are working in partnership with provinces and territories and with other funders. Our work in the children's program necessarily is done through joint governance committees with provincial and territorial governments. As you can imagine, once those programs are established, because the need is so great, it is not conducive to a situation where you are constantly changing the programs and inviting in new applicants. Right now, our programs are fully subscribed in the children's area. We are funding at the order of $112 million a year across all of these programs. They are evaluated. There are waiting lists for these programs, and we are looking at new partnership ways to meet the demand.
As many of you will know, the vulnerable populations across our country are in need of these services. They need stable funding to support that, and the children's programs contribute to that.
Senator Neufeld: To go back, you talked about "community-based.'' Where would I find, in my community or in any community, that some of this money is being spent by your agency? Can you provide that rather than trying to give a long answer here, because we are pressed for time? Can you provide some of that information? I would like to look and see where my community gets that.
Mr. Beaudoin: I think the community mapping that we talked about earlier will address this question that you have asked about, namely, where are you located.
The Chair: Thank you very much. Any concluding comments from our panel?
Mr. Beaudoin: I'd like to thank you for inviting us here today. It's always interesting to be here.
The Chair: Listening to the feedback and some of the comments that you've made, possibly one of the biggest challenges you may have is the number of programs that you have in terms of your outreach programs. You mentioned that you have a lot of long-standing relationships. When I hear "long-standing relationships,'' it always makes me wonder how effective the relationships are over time. It's like anything else; relationships over time are only dependent upon the input and the energy and the continuity of these particular groups. As we go forward, there are so many needs. If you take the top five or ten needs that the public needs to have support on, how are we doing with these long- term relationships in terms of our effectiveness? I know that you do have measurements, et cetera, but it would be interesting to see how that works out.
Thank you very much, panel. We appreciate your time. We look forward to seeing you again.
(The committee adjourned.)