PACP Committee Report

Each year, millions of Canadians cross international borders for the purposes of travel, business or visiting friends and relatives. Their ease of crossing borders is dependent upon having travel documents that are well regarded internationally. The complex task of issuing travel documents, notably the passport, to eligible Canadians is the responsibility of Passport Canada. As Canadians pay for the service to receive a passport, Passport Canada must provide Canadians efficient service while at the same time ensuring that it has the systems in place to protect the integrity of passports.

Passport Canada has seen a significant increase in demand by Canadians for passports: from 1.8 million travel documents issued in 2000-2001 to 3.1 million applications in 2005-2006, and 3.8 million applications in 2006-2007. Passport Canada, however, has struggled to keep up with the increase in demand, resulting in significant service delays and intense frustration for Canadians wanting to receive or renew their passports. At the same time, Passport Canada must address heightened expectations for security and develop new systems and processes to minimize the possibility of fraud and abuse.

The Office of the Auditor General (OAG) audited Passport Canada in 2005 and found that it was struggling to meet heightened expectations for security and growing demands for service. The OAG conducted a follow-up audit quite soon after at the request of the Public Accounts Committee and reported the results to the House of Commons in February 2007. As the Committee was quite interested in the results of the follow-up audit from the 2007 Status Report, Passport Services: Passport Canada, it held a hearing on June 20, 2007 with the Auditor General of Canada, Sheila Fraser, and other representatives from her office: Richard Flageole, Assistant Auditor Generaland Paul Morse, Principal. In addition, the Committee met with the Deputy Minister of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Leonard J. Edwards; and officials from Passport Canada: Gérald Cossette, Chief Executive OfficerJody Thomas, Chief Operating Officerand Gary K. McDonald, Director General, Policy and Planning.

 

In 2005, the Office of the Auditor General’s audit of Passport Canada found weaknesses in:

• monitoring the quality of examiner decisions on who was entitled to a passport,
• risk assessment,
• security clearances for examiners,
• review and documentation of the information supplied by guarantors,
• control of access to the passport issuing system,
• the completeness and accuracy of Passport Canada’s watch list,
• performance reporting on certain service standards and security issues,
• human resources planning, and
• the way investigations were managed.

The Public Accounts Committee considered this audit in October 2005 and presented its report to the House in November 2005.^[1] The Committee made six recommendations in its report. It asked for a progress report on the implementation of the Office of the Auditor General’s recommendations and a discussion of actions taken in Passport Canada’s performance report. The Committee had concerns about Passport Canada’s financial situation and recommended the creation of a financial contingency fund. The Committee also made recommendations for improving Passport Canada’s action plan.

The follow-up audit examined measures that Passport Canada has taken to address the recommendations from the 2005 audit. Overall, the audit concluded that Passport Canada has made satisfactory progress toward addressing the recommendations in a relatively short time. Of the 19 recommendations made in 2005, the OAG concluded that Passport Canada had made satisfactory progress on 15 of the recommendations and unsatisfactory progress on 4. More specifically, Passport Canada had not yet completed a comprehensive risk assessment of its security functions; the quality assurance system does not address the key issue of entitlement decisions; problems persist in controlling access to the automated passport issuance system; and Passport Canada had not yet developed an integrated human resources plan. In addition, the Auditor General raised concerns that Passport Canada had not yet established electronic links with all provinces and Citizenship and Immigration Canada regarding the integrity of basic identification data. It has also faced problems in effectively utilizing information from the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC).

In his opening remarks to the Committee, Leonard Edwards, deputy minister and accounting officer of the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, provided an update on progress in four weak areas identified by the Auditor General. He told the Committee that a series of draft papers are being completed as part of its comprehensive security risk assessment, and Passport Canada will develop a comprehensive strategy to address any deficiencies. Passport Canada is planning to implement a quality control program for its entitlement decisions during the current fiscal year. Tighter controls and better access practices have been put in place to safeguard the automated passport issuance system. Finally, Passport Canada is developing an integrated human resources planning process, which will be implemented by fall 2007.

In its 2005 report on the first audit of Passport Canada, the Public Accounts Committee recommended that Passport Canada include in its performance report a detailed discussion of the problems raised by the Auditor General and the status of actions taken in response. In its 2005-2006 Annual Report, Passport Canada outlined a number of initiatives it was taking to address the Office of the Auditor General’s observations. However, in its follow-up audit, the OAG included a very useful appendix in which the OAG comments on the progress Passport Canada made in meeting the Committee’s recommendations. With respect to the recommendation on reporting on progress, the OAG commented, “The draft Annual Report describes what has been done but does not fully describe what is outstanding; nor does it always indicate target timelines for those outstanding items.^[2] The follow-up audit made one recommendatio:

In its annual report, Passport Canada should detail the progress it is making in carrying out the recommendations made by the Office of the Auditor General and the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts. It should describe its action plans and include target dates for completion and explanations for any variance with previous plans.^[3]

The Public Accounts Committee fully supports this recommendation and is pleased to note that Passport Canada’s 2006-2007 Annual Report contains a 50 page appendix that details what actions have been taken to address the OAG’s 2005 findings and what remains to be done. In many instances, timelines are included and brief explanations are provided when progress has been delayed. The appendix does not limit itself to OAG recommendations, but references each finding of weakness.

Passport Canada is to be commended for the thoroughness of the latest progress report. It indicates the seriousness with which Passport Canada takes the observations of the OAG, as well as a commitment to improve its practices. The progress report provides clear transparency to the public and Parliamentarians, and enhances Passport Canada’s accountability by making clear commitments whose progress can be assessed. The Committee appreciates Passport Canada’s efforts and would like to see more departments and agencies do likewise. While it may not always be possible include such a lengthy progress report in the departmental performance report, departments and agencies should prepare and make public detailed action plans and progress reports in response to audits by the Office of the Auditor General and subsequent reports by the Public Accounts Committee.

While this progress report is a step in the right direction, it is just a snapshot in time. The progress report indicates that a number of actions have yet to be completed, and some, such as the development of a business plan, have been delayed. While the follow-up audit by the OAG found overall satisfactory progress, there remain four areas where progress was not satisfactory. At the time of the Committee’s hearing, Passport Canada had not yet completed its comprehensive security risk assessment, its quality control program for entitlement decisions, or its integrated human resources planning process. The Committee is particularly concerned about the slow progress on human resources because this area is critical to the operations of Passport Canada and its ability to respond to the increased demand for Passports. Lastly, the sampling procedure used to confirm the validity and necessity of employee access to the system that issues passports was deemed ineffective by the OAG because it did not enable the identification of fake user IDs.^[4]

The Committee believes that it is vital that Passport Canada continues to address the weaknesses identified by the OAG, particularly with respect to security. Additionally, the changing nature of the environment in which Passport Canada is operating means that progress towards meeting its goals could readily be thrown off track, especially if it should experience another surge in passport applications. Given the number of items that are still to be completed, the Committee believes that Passport Canada should continue to report on its progress in its Annual Report. Consequently, the Committee recommends that:

Recommendation 1

Passport Canada continue to provide detailed information in its Annual Report on progress in rectifying the weaknesses identified by the Office of the Auditor General in its initial audit in 2005 and the follow-up audit in 2007.

Security of the passport system is vital because the credibility of Canadian passports depends upon other countries having confidence that only legitimate applicants receive passports. Should other countries lose confidence in Canadian passports, Canadians will have more difficulty traveling and crossing borders. Passport Canada recognizes this and is undertaking a number of projects to improve the security of Canadian passports, such as the development of e-passports, which would have an electronic chip embedded in them.

In light of this, the Committee expected that Passport Canada would have ensured that it made good progress on addressing security issues. However, while the follow-up audit noted satisfactory progress in a number of areas, the weaknesses remained in the critical areas of security and the verification of identity. The Auditor General noted the importance of security in her opening statement to the Committee when she said, “This committee may want to monitor progress and ensure that outstanding issues are being satisfactorily addressed—in particular surrounding security.” It concerns the Committee that security would be an area of weakness.

One of the areas of poor progress reported to the Committee was conducting a detailed security risk assessment of passport examination and security functions. The Committee is pleased that the government appears to have addressed this concern. As the Committee is particularly interested in Passport Canada’s progress with respect to security, the Committee recommends that:

Recommendation 2

Passport Canada provide the Public Accounts Committee with evidence that it has conducted a detailed risk assessment of passport examination and security functions by 31 October 2008.