Leonard Preyra - MLA for Halifax Citadel – Sable Island

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS COMMITTEE

Ms. Diana Whalen (Chairman)

Mr. Leonard Preyra (Vice-Chairman)

Mr. Clarrie MacKinnon

Ms. Becky Kent

Mr. Mat Whynott

Ms. Lenore Zann

Hon. Keith Colwell

Hon. Cecil Clarke

Mr. Chuck Porter

[Mr. Maurice Smith replaced Ms. Lenore Zann]

In Attendance:

Mrs. Darlene Henry

Legislative Committee Clerk

Ms. Kim Leadley

Legislative Committees Office

Mr. Jacques Lapointe

Auditor General

Mr. Gordon Hebb

Chief Legislative Counsel

HALIFAX, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2010

STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

9:00 A.M.

CHAIRMAN

Ms. Diana Whalen

VICE-CHAIRMAN

Mr. Leonard Preyra

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much everyone. We’re a little late starting this morning but we are here with the Public Accounts Committee and I would like to call it to order now. We’ll begin with the introduction of all the members who are present this morning and some of our staff. Just introduce yourselves and we’ll go around, for the record.

[The committee members and staff introduced themselves.]

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much everyone. This morning we have a short agenda. It’s very unusual for us to have a meeting where we haven’t got witnesses at the Public Accounts Committee but last week we had a snowstorm, as we all know, on Wednesday so we had to cancel the electronic health records group that was coming in from the Department of Health. They were unavailable to come this week and I should mention that usually we allow them a few weeks to prepare. It’s difficult getting deputy ministers, particularly, to come in on short notice so they weren’t able to reschedule.

We did send an e-mail to all members of the committee, asking that perhaps we reschedule and include the P3 school issue, which was in the recent Auditor General’s Report that everybody had a chance to review on February 3^rd. However, that was not in keeping with the normal processes of this committee, which is that we have the full committee endorse any suggested topics that are going to come here and we have a subcommittee that sets the agenda. Unfortunately our subcommittee had met only the day before, on February 16^th, so we had hoped to endorse the entire list that we’ve got before us today on the 17^th, and because of the snowstorm that didn’t happen.

1I’m disappointed that we don’t have any witnesses with us this morning but we are getting back on schedule by looking today at the subcommittee’s report to us, that’s the main item on our agenda today. If you would just have a look at that, it’s before you, it’s in sort of a form there indicating four different items that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures agreed to in their meeting on the 16^th. So I would need a motion to adopt that committee report.

MR. CHUCK PORTER: I so move.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Porter. Mr. Preyra.

MR. LEONARD PREYRA: Madam Chairman, we’re not exactly sure what will happen with the House resuming on March 25^th, but as I understand it, committees will cease to function for a brief period when it’s prorogued and it may well be that the committee itself will be reconstituted as part of that. I’m wondering if maybe we should approve of topics that would work within that framework and then have a decision about it after we’ve cleared up the second issue.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Porter has a comment.

MR. PORTER: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I appreciate the fact that Mr. Preyra may be new to our committee but during the House, at least since 2006 when I’ve been a member, we met weekly during the House sitting. As it’s Wednesday mornings, the House generally doesn’t go in until 2:00 p.m., as a rule, on Wednesday afternoons. I don’t think it would be rare that our committee – and the clerk may be able to speak to that more clearly. You were on the committee, obviously, as well, but we met while the House sat. It’s one of the few committees that does meet and does regular business while the House sits.

I would move that we continue on that path, I don’t really see a need to make too much in the way of changes there. We’ve got some decent agenda items, witnesses to bring forward as well that we’d like to see. We are missing a number of weeks as it is and we probably should try to get back on some kind of normal track if we’re going to maintain that schedule.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Porter. Mr. Colwell.

HON. KEITH COLWELL: I agree with Mr. Porter. I’ve been on this committee longer than anyone else in this Chamber today and we have never, ever stopped when the House was sitting, to my memory, having meetings of the Public Accounts Committee. It’s one committee that does continue to meet. We have missed a lot of weeks of meetings and I think that’s not all positive but I would support Mr. Porter’s motion, at least to work through the Legislature when the Legislature is in session, and that’s the way it has been.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Preyra.

MR. PREYRA: Madam Chairman, maybe I wasn’t clear enough. I was distinguishing between a sitting of the House, a new sitting of the House, and a new session of the House. When a new session of the House begins, the committees that were constituted under the old session cease to function and the membership of that committee changes as well, so it really is more of a political science observation than a statement on procedure. We’ve never said we don’t want the Public Accounts Committee to meet and we would like the Public Accounts Committee to meet as often as necessary but in this case, given that we’re starting a new session of the House, that is, I think, what the technical, legal, constitutional precedents are.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Porter.

MR. PORTER: Thank you. Just on that, if I’m not mistaken, the House will be prorogued for what, three hours, four hours? So it’s not like we’re going to go through a lengthy stretch of the House being prorogued, where business may or may not get done. I appreciate your comments, Mr. Preyra, but I would say that business should be carrying on here and moving forward. If we do nothing until that point, we’re that much further behind again, for the proroguing of two or three hours, whatever that time frame may be, I really would hate to see us delayed for weeks over a couple of hours, so I guess I’ll just make those comments.

[9:15 a.m.]

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Well, I appreciate that. Did you have another comment, Mr. Preyra?

MR. PREYRA: We’re willing to go ahead with the couple of topics that are on the list, until that point. The committee will continue to function until that point.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Very good. If I might – Mr. Colwell.

MR. COLWELL: Maybe Mr. Preyra has some information we don’t know, that the government is going to change the structure of the committees or something, I’d like to hear about it.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Well, that certainly would be interesting. Do you have any further information for the committee, Mr. Preyra?

MR. PREYRA: I’m talking purely in terms of legal, constitutional, procedural rules and nothing – I have no particular knowledge of it.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: If I could, my comment on your suggestion would be that we definitely go forward and endorse these four items that are before us today. As Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee it’s my concern that we continue to meet on a regular basis. If you remember from the training session that we held at the beginning of January, which was the CCAF organization, they pointed out that one of the things we do well is have a good frequency of meetings, that was something we stood out for.

On the three years they had studied we had averaged 20 meetings a year and I think that’s important because that means we’re doing our work here. As of this point in the year we’ve only had four meetings, one of them was a training meeting. We’ve had a delay from last week, we have no witnesses this week. I think next week is the NDP out-of-town caucus, so there’s no meeting next week.

As chairman, I’m feeling that we are going to be hard-pressed to keep up with our schedule that we have actually set in the past. In terms of the rising of the House or a new Speech from the Throne, which would indicate a new session rather than a new sitting, we have had that happen in the past. Certainly in 2007, a new speech was read when Rodney MacDonald was the Premier and there was no interruption to the work of this committee. So I think if we look at precedent and the momentum this committee has had, we have never stopped our work as a result of something that’s really more procedural. Mr. Preyra.

MR. PREYRA: Madam Chairman, it’s my understanding that there are some rules that the chairman and the committee just can’t change and that is one of them.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Another point of the committee is that the constitution of the committee should remain roughly the same over time and that was another recommendation made for the best Public Accounts Committees. The point of that is that people become experienced and hopefully become a little less partisan and become more knowledgeable about Public Accounts and what we’re here for. It is a very special committee in terms of all of the committees of the House. Mr. Preyra.

MR. PREYRA: We do want the committee to meet, we would like the committee to continue and to continue to examine the province’s books and spending, and this doesn’t change anything other than it respects the Rules of the House and of the committee.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Can I just ask, is there a motion on the floor yet for the four items before us?

MR. PORTER: There is, I moved it.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Porter. So it has been moved and our discussion really is whether or not we can move forward with these four, bearing in mind that there is a lot of administrative support that’s required for this committee and our clerk is required to take our agenda and then try to fill in the weeks that are coming up. Again, as I mentioned, it’s difficult to get senior bureaucrats, to get deputy ministers and executive directors and other senior people in government to come before us, they need time to prepare. Mr. Smith.

MR. MAURICE SMITH: I have a question and it’s procedural, and I guess it shows my newness to the committee. The question that’s being asked, do we have any authority, are we properly constituted after the prorogation, that’s my question? So if we aren’t, we might all well be back again, but don’t those committees have to be reconstituted at the beginning of the new session? So once it’s prorogued, I don’t know that we have any authority to sit or to be . . .

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I think what you’re talking about is procedural and as I say, the experience of this committee has been that that is routine, that we do roll over and continue to do that. Your Party has the right to reconstitute your membership, and I suppose that would be true for each Party Leader, but we have continued to do our work. I think it’s part of the commitment of government to this committee that it do its best to ensure that it continues to operate effectively and that was, again, a big part of what we talked about in our training session.

I should also mention and offer a welcome to you, Mr. Smith, because this is your first meeting of the Public Accounts Committee and I’ve neglected to do that, so welcome.

MR. SMITH: Thank you. I guess my question was just whether or not we have any authority to go after March 25^th when the House is prorogued.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Perhaps it’s time to turn to Mr. Hebb. Mr. Hebb is our legal counsel here for the committee.

MR. GORDON HEBB: I can’t tell you the exact year but a few years ago the House of Assembly Act was amended to provide that committees of the House can, if the House authorizes it, continue after prorogation and that committees, after a new session commences, can pick up the business of the committee before a prorogation. Question, has the House done that? The resolution establishing this committee and all the other committees for this Assembly provided that the committees would be for the Assembly, not just for the session. So that to me suggests that the House determined the committees would stay the same and continue throughout the whole Assembly and not need to be reconstituted.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Hebb. Mr. Whynott.

MR. MAT WHYNOTT: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I just have a quick question about timing. Obviously, because the government caucus is away next week, so then are you

thinking the following week would be the government-wide technology and then the following week would be basically going in order?

MADAM CHAIRMAN: No, actually our next meeting that is scheduled, the only one we have scheduled now is March 10^th and that is going to be the rescheduling of electronic health records. We have one scheduled and then we have a break for March break, and then I would like to see our momentum continue with the new items. What I’m looking for, we haven’t actually prioritized these directly, we’ve just got the four items there and again, it’s not an exact science as we try to schedule these in. Mrs. Henry has to try to see who is available on which weeks and so she does some juggling to try to make sure we continue every week. Mr. Preyra.

MR. PREYRA: Can I propose an amendment then so that we can move ahead?

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Certainly.

MR. PREYRA: March 10^th is already scheduled and we’ve already agreed to move on that. Why don’t we move ahead on the government-wide information technology and set a date for that and then we’ve got two weeks to address the rest of the agenda and we’ll come back to that.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Preyra, there’s a motion on the floor and I know you want to amend it, but the motion is that we accept the four items before us. It is hard work to get four items from the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures that we all agree on. Every item on this agenda comes from a previous Auditor General’s Report which is exactly what we’re charged with doing. I really am not comfortable with amending it to have only one or two items; I, in fact, believe this committee should have 10 items so that we can continue the momentum of the committee.

The reason we’re here today without a witness is because we didn’t have any other items that were pre-approved so that Mrs. Henry could schedule someone else in. That, to me, is an inefficient way for this committee to be here today, with only the item of setting the agenda. Mr. Porter, you have some comments?

MR. PORTER: Just a very short one, Madam Chairman. I think we’ve had ample discussion and I would call for the question and the vote, please.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Porter would like a call for the question. Would all those in favour of the motion, the four items before us, please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.

The motion is defeated.

Now the four items that have been duly constituted by the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures have not been moved forward. I’m led to believe the reason is constitutional or based on Rules of the House, but Mr. Hebb has already told us that the Rules of House and the past experience has been that we continue the work of this committee. Mr. Preyra, perhaps you’d like to explain more why you’re looking for an amendment.

MR. PREYRA: Madam Chairman, I’d like to propose a new motion: that the committee meet on March 10^th to look at the electronic health records as scheduled and that we meet at another future date, perhaps the next available date, to look at government-wide information technology security.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Preyra, I think that we have to pick at least a couple of items to go forward into the future. It’s not fair to our committee staff and support to have only one item to go forward with. We have a full-time clerk assigned to this committee and I just believe we should make full use of the resources that have been allowed to us. If we are the Public Accounts Committee, of all committees we should be concerned about the costs and the operation of this committee. So can I ask for your indulgence to go a little further than one item on this agenda?

MR. PREYRA: Madam Chairman, we’re proposing that we look at these two topics and we’ll get some advice on whether or not the committees will be reconstituted and what our status will be and we’ll make that decision then.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Preyra, excuse me, but we have had advice. Would you like to hear any further from Mr. Hebb? Would you like any further explanation or a longer explanation from Mr. Hebb?

MR. PREYRA: No, I understand what Mr. Hebb is saying. We have a new member on the committee today, by the way, so the committees are reconstituted all the time. I’m not sure how that . . .

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I understand that, but I’m not sure why we can’t set an agenda to allow this committee to be active and, in fact, more effective. We need to set an agenda. One item is grudgingly moving forward, as far as I can see. Mr. Porter.

MR. PORTER: Madam Chairman, it appears obvious that we’re not going to get co-operation from the government caucus today and I would suggest that we move forward. We have March 10^th scheduled and I agree with you, all of you have said there’s a tremendous amount of work in getting these things put together by the clerk and staff and so on. We do have lists, we have more lists within our caucus.

I know there’s a subcommittee meeting scheduled, I believe, in the near future that once again we will try to come back to that subcommittee, reconvene, put together an agenda

and see if we can give ample time, perhaps to the government caucus, if that’s what they need, more time, discussion, new members, but we need to get moving here as to whether we’re going to meet or not. If the government caucus is saying listen, we’re not interested in meeting, then they should just come out and say we’re not interested in meeting and we can move forward as needed, as an Opposition, from there. Those would be my comments, Madam Chairman. Thank you.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Preyra, do you have some comments?

MR. PREYRA: Yes, Madam Chairman. What happens at the Agenda and Procedures Subcommittee is precisely that. We all come to the committee with a lengthy list of topics and those topics are discussed and brought forward. We, too, would like to see an extensive discussion of the Public Accounts.

As you know, the meetings that have been cancelled over the last three weeks have not been cancelled because of the government caucus, they’ve been cancelled for other reasons. The initial meeting was changed at the request of the Auditor General because we had agreed that he would present his report in January instead of in December. Another meeting was cancelled because the Progressive Conservative caucus was unavailable and the third meeting was cancelled because of the snowstorm. The government caucus was quite willing to move ahead on any of those three dates, we were able to do that, and we were not able to do that.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Colwell.

MR. COLWELL: Mr. Preyra is indicating that they haven’t had any committees cancelled, so am I understanding from him that next week, when the NDP caucus is away, they’re willing to meet? Is that what I’m understanding? That’s basically what he said. He said when the PC caucus was away that there was a meeting cancelled and they haven’t cancelled any so they’re cancelling one next week, is that correct? Do I understand that properly?

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Next week we have no meeting because the NDP caucus is out of town. I will say as well, the Liberal caucus was also out of town for one week. That is our practice, to allow the caucuses to take those weeks when they’re meeting outside of Halifax for their caucus meetings. That happens periodically through the year, which is another reason why I’m anxious to keep the number of items on our agenda and the scheduling moving forward, because we have made allowances for those things. Thank you, Mr. Colwell. Mr. Porter.

MR. PORTER: Thank you, and just a follow-up to Mr. Colwell. It’s common practice in this committee and other committees that from time to time we’ll miss a week due to out-of-town caucuses and I think that has never been an issue, I wouldn’t foresee that being an

issue. I’m not talking about previous and cancellation dates, I’m talking about moving forward with an agenda. We are either going to get on track or we are not.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Yes.

MR. PORTER: We have witnesses on a list, we have more to come. I know that we need to even prepare more than four that lie before us, we probably should have seven or eight or 10. I’m sure that would make the clerk’s job much easier moving forward and allow us to book some weeks up. Again, we just need to make a decision here today as to what we’re doing and where we’re going.

Again I’ll state, let’s go with March 10^th, and if we need to set a date then let’s come back for a subcommittee. Mr. Preyra said it’s incumbent on the whole committee, then maybe the subcommittee has no value in meeting any longer. Maybe it needs to all come here for a meeting of itself, a day, a couple of hours, full discussion, line up our witnesses and move forward from there. Maybe it will take that to get the agreement that is required here, so thank you.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Colwell.

MR. COLWELL: It’s my understanding that these four items that are here were agreed to by the subcommittee, is that correct?

[9:30 a.m.]

MADAM CHAIRMAN: They were, we met on February 16^th.

MR. COLWELL: Isn’t Mr. Preyra a member of the subcommittee?

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Preyra is a member of the subcommittee.

MR. COLWELL: So there must be some reason why the NDP caucus doesn’t want to move forward with these four items. Legal counsel very clearly indicated that there’s no justification for cancelling these because the House is going to be prorogued for a couple of hours. It seems just strange, is the NDP trying to stall the working of the committee so we can’t get to some other topics beyond these? It’s just a question I’d like to find an answer to.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I don’t think we’re going to get the answer today, is my sense.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Question.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The question has been called for. Can we just reiterate what it is that’s on the agenda? Mr. Preyra, you chose just the first one on our list. Is there any reason that one was chosen over any other one? We did not prioritize them.

MR. PREYRA: No, it’s just because – well, it was something that we had approved of in October, I think, at one of our very first meetings. We had also decided that we would look at technology as a theme and the protection of privacy, and this is a report now that’s about a year old, it’s a very important issue. I think we would like to look at issues that have pretty significant implications for the public in terms of public security and public health.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Lapointe would like to say a few words. He’s our Auditor General.

MR. JACQUES LAPOINTE: Madam Chairman, following the conversation, I’d just like to suggest that if it comes down to a single topic that would be selected in all of these, I would like to voice my preference for this committee taking a look at the P3 schools and contract management, that is my most recent one on these. I consider that in all of the media attention lately, it has not had a lot of attention and I think it’s quite significant. I would just ask you to consider, if one is taken, to take that one.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. With that, would there be any willingness to reconsider the one item that you have chosen? Mr. Preyra.

MR. PREYRA: We would be willing to consider any topic that is significant. The only reason we didn’t put – the Agenda and Procedures Subcommittee was really the one making the recommendation and that’s coming out and I was just looking at them in the order that they were presented. We have looked at P3 in an introductory way when the Auditor General presented it and sure, there are some huge issues in there that we need to look at.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Could I ask that you change your motion to make the single item we’re going to pass today the P3 schools issue? Mr. Preyra.

MR. PREYRA: Am I allowed to amend my own motion here or would we just . . .

MADAM CHAIRMAN: You could just make a new motion.

MR. PREYRA: Sure. Let it be so amended then.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. So that being said, I think the committee would like to vote on that. The item before us is that from this list of four subjects we will move forward only the Department of Education, P3 schools contract management.

Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.

MR. PORTER: Just a quick question, I’m sorry, Madam Chairman.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: You’re in favour of that, aren’t you?

MR. PORTER: Sorry, I thought Leonard’s motion also encompassed the March 10^th meeting, did I miss that?

MADAM CHAIRMAN: We will set the meeting – I have that for the next meeting for the subcommittee, I will set that later.

MR. PORTER: I didn’t know whether you were – okay, that’s fine, sure. We can move on with your . . .

MADAM CHAIRMAN: So perhaps I should phrase that again. Mr. Preyra, you have agreed to make the motion that the P3 schools be adopted as an item for this committee to consider at a future date. That’s the motion?

MR. PREYRA: Sorry, I wasn’t listening, Madam Chairman.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I’m just reiterating the motion because I didn’t hear any people in favour of the P3 school issue. There might have been some confusion. I’m going to call the vote again to see if there has been any confusion. Are you in favour of the P3 school meeting?

MR. PREYRA: I think the question was the original motion which said that we do March 10^th and the March 17^th – that’s not changing that, yes.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: That’s not necessary to reiterate. The March 10^th one is already set and it was pre-approved, so that’s already set, that’s listed on our agenda as the next meeting. All we’re looking for is approval for a few more items, and I guess we have a motion for one item and with that our clerk will be able to try to arrange to have the Deputy Minister of Education in as soon as possible. So the motion is just to approve one item, we don’t know the date she’ll come. Is it clear to the members?

MR. PREYRA: I’m sorry, it’s just a question of the date, whether we respect the dates of the House, so . . .

MADAM CHAIRMAN: We always meet during the sitting of the House and, in fact, that’s one reason why – on Opposition Day, which is a Wednesday, we don’t start until 2:00 p.m. generally on House hours and it allows for the Public Accounts Committee to meet in the morning. So there is no reason for us to interrupt that schedule, so we would hope to set

further items on the March 10^th meeting and I’ll get to that, our next meeting of the subcommittee. Right now, we just have the motion to set one more item.

Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.

The motion is carried.

We have one item for our clerk to schedule as she can later in March.

I’m just going to go back to the agenda then, and we’ll have to postpone the other items that are on this to be returned to the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures. I have that as No. 4 on – yes, Mr. Preyra.

MR. PREYRA: Just to clarify, we were not objecting to the topics that were on the list, it doesn’t need to go back to Agenda and Procedures. We’re certainly willing to look at it once the House resumes.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Well, because it hasn’t been adopted today it will have to appear on the next recommendation from the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures, because it has been rejected today. As I mentioned earlier, all of those items were coming directly from Auditor General’s Reports, they’re all important items. Our hands are kind of tied, we only have one item now to move forward with.

So with that being said, I think the next urgent matter for this committee is that we set another meeting for the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedures. I’ve suggested on the agenda, Item No. 4, that take place March 10^th which is our next scheduled meeting. That’s the meeting when we’re hearing from the electronic health records issue. I think it’s very important that we continue the momentum which, again, has been the practice of this committee, that the agenda-setting subcommittee meet every month to see where we’re at and make sure that we have adequate items on the agenda to continue the meetings of this committee. Otherwise, I can tell you we’ll be very hard-pressed to continue anywhere near the frequency of meetings that we’ve had in the past and that would be, I think, a travesty for the province not to have an active and strong committee.

So March 10^th is the date and I’m going to ask that all three caucuses send in a list of the items. I know at our last meeting we didn’t all have lists and we didn’t all get them in advance. I brought mine to the meeting. So I would ask that the three caucuses have a list of items that you would like to see sent forward by March 5^th. I realize the NDP caucus is out of town that week – March 5^th is the Friday. So if we could get a list to our clerk, Mrs. Henry, by Friday, then I will ask that the clerk then send it to each of the caucuses so members of the subcommittee will have an opportunity to review it in advance. I think that will make the committee move a lot more smoothly when we do get together. With that being said, I hope

that’s agreed to and again, we’re going to be on that schedule of meeting once a month with that subcommittee.

We also had a request at the subcommittee meeting from Mr. Clarke and that was that we get a list from the Auditor General’s Office of items from previous reports in the last few years – I think it was going back to 2007, so from 2007 forward – items that the Auditor General has reported on that we have not had here at the meeting of our Public Accounts Committee. So that will be sent to you, that list is available and we’re going to have it sent out to the three caucuses. Please look at that as well when you’re setting our next agenda, I think it may help us come up with items for subsequent meetings. So that’s a very important thing – we don’t need a motion to do that.

The only other item that I had put on the agenda was the indication there of a recommendation that as a Public Accounts Committee we endorse the idea of looking every year at the Public Accounts themselves. Just for the new members of the House and of the committee, September is the month that the government sort of wraps up all of the accounts for the previous year, which ends March 31^st. Generally, those are presented to the public, usually the House isn’t sitting, and they are presented once through the Finance Minister but are never really looked at in more detail. This committee has a mandate that would include looking at the Public Accounts and is, in fact, what we’re named after. So looking over the information we got from CCAF, which was the group that we got the training from, they say that it is a best practice. So I’m putting it on the agenda today so that we can consider that. Perhaps, Mr. Preyra, you’d like to say a few words on it.

MR. PREYRA: Yes, Madam Chairman. The normal procedure is for these things to be introduced at Agenda and Procedures and then brought forward. That being said, the annual Public Accounts volumes of the province are contained in the estimates, as I understand them.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: No, they’re not. The estimates are your budget going forward and the Public Accounts are what happened last year.

MR. PREYRA: But the report is to the House directly, right?

MADAM CHAIRMAN: The Public Accounts are not looked at here. We do spend an exhaustive amount of time on the estimates going forward, a lot of time, 40 hours of debate on the estimates, before the year begins. But when the year is wrapped up and complete there is very little attention here in the House – in fact, next to none.

MR. PREYRA: I suggest we refer it back to Agenda and Procedures to have a look at it and get some advice before we do that. My sense is that’s something that we normally do through the House directly through the estimates process.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: I think it would be a good one for the caucuses to discuss individually, but I believe that would actually make this committee better versed in the Public Accounts and better prepared to do the other work that we do through the year. I simply wanted to mention it today so that all three caucuses could review it in advance of the next subcommittee. That was really just to allow you to give it due consideration. With that, I ask that you do exactly that, take it back to each caucus and consider that as an improvement to the committee.

Also, on that agenda, moving forward we do want to look at more of the suggestions from CCAF on what would make a stronger committee. I think there are a lot of good suggestions and good advice in the training they gave us and in the material that we were presented with so I’m hoping that we’ll have a chance to adopt some of their best practices. So with that being said . . .

MR. PREYRA: Madam Chairman, before you go on, I just want to point out that CCAF commended Nova Scotia for having the most open and most active Public Accounts Committee of all of the provinces. We are happy to be part of that committee and to support that process.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Preyra, that is true and that’s one of the things I want to maintain because one of our outstanding points was that we meet frequently and we meet roughly 20 times a year. That requires the co-operation of all three caucuses for us to continue and, in fact, requires government co-operation. That’s one of the underlying features of a strong Public Accounts Committee, so I do look forward to that continuing.

MR. PREYRA: Madam Chairman, if I may just put it on the record, I think the implication is that the government caucus is not interested in meeting. As you know, the Public Accounts Committee has set a record for meetings over the last several years and we have not suggested in any way that we are going to change that and we will continue that. I don’t see what the issue is here, other than a question of setting dates, which have been cancelled by Parties other than the government caucus.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Well, the government caucus will also have their week off as well, that is normal practice here. I’m not questioning the practice of caucuses discussing items and having a week off. What I’m discussing is that we make ample use of every other week. I have to reiterate, we had an opportunity today to have the Deputy Minister of Education before us, discussing the P3 issue, which is very current and very urgent. They’re not here today because it was not procedurally normal to approve that by e-mail, that we had not met as a committee to approve that. That is troubling because we want to make the best use of our time here.

MR. PREYRA: Madam Chairman, I would like to respond to that, if you don’t mind. The Agenda and Procedures Subcommittee is an advisory committee of the Public Accounts

Committee. The Agenda and Procedures Subcommittee has no authority to make decisions about approaching witnesses or setting dates in the absence of an endorsement from the committee itself. It seemed to me unusual for the chairman of the committee to go out and set a meeting in advance and approach witnesses without getting the approach of the Public Accounts Committee. That was the only issue there.

The Agenda and Procedures Subcommittee had agreed on topics. The Agenda and Procedures Subcommittee had, in fact, come out of that unanimously, I believe. It was in my mind, and certainly there is no precedent for that, that it was a violation of the rules and it was for that reason that we objected to it. It was to protect the autonomy and the sovereignty and the responsibility of the Public Accounts Committee to make decisions about its agenda, about witnesses and about times. You know, to me it’s an important point of principle, it’s an important point of procedure, and I think we should respect that.

The Agenda and Procedures Subcommittee works very efficiently, with one exception as I recall, we have not had any problem getting unanimity, but we do have a problem with meetings being organized outside of the authority of the Public Accounts Committee itself.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Preyra, and that is good to have an explanation of what the objection was from the NDP caucus.

My understanding from the clerk and from looking at our rules is that an e-mail would have been sufficient if the members of the committee agreed by e-mail or by phone call, in the absence of a meeting, because we were – this is unusual, we were cancelled because of snow and we had no other items on our agenda that we could move forward with. So, in that regard, I think there are times for informality, there are times for collegiality and times to bend a little bit in terms of the rules. It was not intended to circumvent or diminish this committee in any way, it was involving the committee members by e-mail.

[9:45 a.m.]

That being said, I think the committee members are – Mr. Colwell, you have one more comment? Certainly.

MR. COLWELL: Well, I’m surprised at Mr. Preyra’s comments because we just denied a motion to move forward with four items here so we could plan for the future, settled on one even though the subcommittee had recommended this unanimously, and then he says the government is going to co-operate. I don’t see this as co-operation, I see this as a real big problem.

This is going to be an issue if this continues and, indeed, why bother with the subcommittee? As Mr. Porter has said, I mean if the representative from the NDP caucus isn’t authorized to represent the NDP caucus, well, why are we bothering with the

subcommittee? Why don’t we just come to the general committee and have a meeting, our meeting, after a regular meeting, set an agenda and move forward? At least then we’ll know where the NDP caucus stands. It appears that they don’t want to bring these topics forward and they want to stall the workings of the committee, which I’m very concerned about, very concerned.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: Mr. Preyra.

MR. PREYRA: Madam Chairman, not to tell tales out of school but as you know, in the Agenda and Procedures Subcommittee many of those issues were put forward by the NDP caucus and we would like to see those topics go forward.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: And again, Mr. Preyra, you are vice-chairman of the committee, and you and I are going to be meeting later to hopefully discuss some of these issues because I think it’s important that we work together to ensure that this committee is as active and as relevant as possible.

With that being said, I’m going to ask if there’s any other additional committee business. You have the opportunity to discuss it today.

MR. COLWELL: I move that we adjourn.

MADAM CHAIRMAN: All right, very good, we have a motion to adjourn. Our next meeting then is March 10^th and we will hear then from the Department of Health on electronic health records. Thank you very much for your attention.

[The committee adjourned at 9:47 a.m.]