HUMA Committee Report
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
I. INTRODUCTION
The Committee commenced its hearings on Human Resources Development Canada’s (HRDC) 1999 internal audit report on grants and contributions with the appearance of the Minister of Human Resources Development on 10 February 2000. This audit uncovered shortcomings in the administrative management of discretionary spending delivered under several program areas spanning the period from April 1997 to June 1999. The Committee’s terms of reference were to "study and report to the House no later than 1 June 2000 [on] grants and contributions by the Department of Human Resources Development, providing that an interim report be tabled by 15 April 2000." Our interim report provided details on the audit results, the Action Plan to address HRDC’s administrative problems and raised a series of questions around which our final report is based. The Committee commends HRDC for developing and commencing the implementation of its six-point Action Plan.
Members of the Committee commend the hard work and dedication exhibited by HRDC frontline workers, who, for some time now, have had to deal with extremely difficult conditions. The Committee is convinced that a number of factors have contributed to these circumstances including, for example, a substantial and seemingly incongruous departmental restructuring, new modes of service delivery, insufficient resources and the absence of a senior managerial commitment to sound project management and clear direction. These circumstances contributed to a situation where the primary focus became the delivery of funds, while the importance of sound file management slipped away.
Our hearings have covered a range of topics, some of which extend beyond HRDC. Since tabling our interim report in April, the Committee has examined issues pertaining to the role of senior and financial managers, program officers, Members of Parliament and other interested parties in the selection of projects funded by grants and contributions. We have examined how other grant dispensing organizations deal with administration and accountability. We have examined the role of third-party assessments and some of the electronic tools that are being used throughout the country by various organizations to administer their funds. Representatives from the voluntary sector told us that the real crisis was the retrenchment of HRDC funding and a preoccupation with file data instead of performance-based results.
It is the Committee’s view that Canadians want grants and contributions to be properly dispensed and to achieve the objectives for which these funds are intended. They want government to find a better balance between serving those who are supposed to benefit from this spending and the need for proper accountability. The recommendations in this report represent the Committee’s contribution to finding this balance and to re-establishing Canadians’ confidence in these programs.