NDP DISSENTING OPINION

Tony Martin — MP

May 2005

INTRODUCTION

I first recommended our Human Resources Committee study HRSDC contribution programs because in my own community the new rules destabilized a Team Sault Ste. Marie network of non-profit agencies that offered employment supports. With the new funding criteria, agencies that once worked co-operatively found themselves competing for federal contracts. A non-profit sector check-in confirmed that what was happening locally was happening across the country. Non-profit agencies were losing long-standing government contracts to provide job training and employment services.

The Committee Report accurately reflects what we heard from community and government witnesses: the lack of consultation or a transition period strategy; a rushed implementation strategy; widespread violation or ignorance of the Voluntary Sector Accord which states that agencies are to be treated as partners rather than employees of government; a lack of transparency; the under-valuing of experience and expertise that agencies historically brought to their proposals; the “flawed, cumbersome, anxiety-producing” proposal process; a disruption of client services; the ending of longstanding programs; the unhealthy climate of competition among organizations that undermined longstanding partnerships; the favoring of larger organizations, including private companies, because of their resources.

RECOMMENDATION

On its own, this scathing indictment is not enough. I commend the apparently genuine attempt by the Minister and Ministry to fix these problems for the future. However, the NDP believes it is imperative to undo the damage done to so many people. Justice demands repairing the harm done to agencies, communities and vulnerable Canadians harmed by HRSDC’s flawed funding process introduced after the fallout from the Ministry’s previous “billion-dollar boondoggle” scandal. HRSDC needs to reinstate contracts and restore funding to any organization that has lost its contract through the CFP process since it was implemented until such time as the community consultations can be held and the new process is put in place. We heard firsthand of five agencies which deserve to have their contracts restored: The Canadian Hearing Society, (CHS) Sault Ste. Marie, specialized services for the deaf, deafened and hard of hearing;

Gateway Café, Toronto, helping youth; The Learning Enrichment Foundation, Toronto, skills training and employment services; Link Up Employment Services, serving persons with disabilities; The Working Skills Centre, helping immigrant women.

The CHS contract in Sault Marie bears further commentary as three Committee witnesses (The Canadian Community Economic Development Network, The Canadian Hearing Society, Ontario March of Dimes (OMD) — all recommended funding for CHS Sault Ste. Marie be restored. Incredibly, a HRSDC official testified the government will assist OMD in Sault Ste. Marie to offer this service even though it withdrew its proposal, says it is unqualified to offer this specialized service and recommends CHS Sault Ste. Marie be given the contract.

OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS

•

There are situations where the Call for Proposals process should not be applicable, i.e. in rural and smaller communities, or with smaller organizations or established programs that are time-proven and serving well the constituency for which they are designed. The criteria should be based on whether or not a program has proven itself effective or beneficial to the community or the program is taking a new, creative approach to a long-standing program.

•

HRSDC stagger the Call for Proposals with only two to three sectors affected in any one year. This contains the administrative work on both sides to a level that is achievable within existing staff levels.

•

HRSDC needs to include in its assessment grid a clear acknowledgment of the expertise of specialized services. A full consultation with services provides is necessary as a prelude to change in policy.

•

HRSDC cease its micromanagement of contracts, and rather monitor for performance and adherence to the agreement while staying out of managing the business of the agencies.

•

In any results-based performance criteria, weight must also be given to the quality and value of training as well as the numbers through a program, e.g. that a program that delivers skills to help women deal with gender or race discrimination in the workplace will likely have fewer graduates, but ones more qualified to make it in the workplace.

•

There needs to be a comprehensive strategic review of the Employment Assistance Services programs, including an assessment of services for those facing employment barriers from such groups as immigrant women, the disabled, youth. Individuals who are not EI or Reachback-eligible into employment are seeing programs being removed without a plan to replace them. These EAS guidelines are removing access to services to Canadians, including youth, immigrants and persons with disabilities, many of whom are the most vulnerable in the community.(Paul Hubert, Pathway Skills London)

•

To help ensure real transparency and accountability, a permanent third-party advisory group be established for HRSDC programs, whose work and findings will be made public. (Matt Wood, Ontario Association of Youth Employment Centres)

INTIMIDATION AND POLITICAL INFLUENCE

I urge readers to study firsthand the testimony of witnesses who reported intimidation of agencies by HRSDC staff (ASPECT, The Canadian Hearing Society, The Learning Enrichment Foundation’s loss of a promised extended contract after a Committee appearance, a 10-day suspension of a HRSDC staff who spoke out against the new funding process). These all need to be investigated. There is no place in a professional civil service for such intimidation. We received evidence that some winning agencies or their staff or board, including some private companies, contributed financially to the Liberal Party of Canada. It is regrettable that good non-profit agencies recognize today’s culture of affluence and feel a need to buy memberships in access-promising political clubs or to attend political conventions.

CONCLUSION

A strong community-based non-profit sector is vital to our cities and our country. The social economy is predicated on the kind of employment and skills development services through these contribution programs. HRSDC created a mess with its new administrative measures. We can and must correct this mess — past, present and future.