STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
COMITÉ PERMANENT DES COMPTES PUBLICS
Wednesday 29 October 2014 Mercredi 29 octobre 2014
The committee met at 0900 in room 151.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): I call the meeting of the public accounts committee of October 29 to order. We’re meeting to discuss committee business. The first order is to finish the discussion on the Ornge report, and that was in camera. So the committee will be in camera to start with, and then we’ll move into the public part of it when we get that finished. So with that, we’ll just wait a minute until we move out our sound system.
The committee continued in closed session from 0901 to 0908.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): I call the meeting back to order, and turn it back over to the Clerk for his presentation.
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. William Short): Just as a follow-up to what we were discussing last week: I’m in the committee’s hands as to the schedule going forward. There were a couple of suggestions that were out there on whether there would be a pick from the 2013 report, to start some hearings going forward before the Auditor General’s 2014 report is tabled, so I’ll leave it open to discussion as to where the committee wants to go with that and what kind of schedule you guys want to have going forward.
As I did say last week, we do usually give any ministry a two-week heads-up if they are selected to appear before the committee. So if that was to happen today, I would go back to my office and talk to the deputy ministers’ offices to organize a schedule going forward, but like I said, we would give that two-week heads-up so that they can prepare themselves to appear before the committee. I’ll leave it open to you guys for the rest of the discussion.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Okay. Further discussion? Mr. Fraser.
Mr. John Fraser: Just in terms of what’s coming up, we have the 2013 report in the next two meetings. I know there are some special reports. Are any of those going to land before we get the 2014 report? Because we’re kind of jammed up against your next report, which is in early December. Right? There are four special reports. Are any of them coming out between now and then? And do you have a date, so we can—you know?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Yes. We’ll be issuing two specials before we table the December annual report. We were requested by PAC to look at the collective agreements that were in place for the teachers, so that will be coming out in a couple of weeks; I think three weeks into November. Then, the week after that, we’ll be tabling the Pan Am security. So those two will be tabled in November.
Mr. John Fraser: They’re still fairly far out, then, in terms of—
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Three weeks. One’s in three weeks.
Mr. John Fraser: Three weeks or so, so that’s—okay. With all this stuff that’s coming up, I want to make sure that we don’t put the Clerk and the staff, and your staff, through any unnecessary preparation if we’re going to change our mind and we decide that we want to move on to something else that’s newer, more relevant and fresh. We’ve had some discussion trying to sort out the best thing to do.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): I’ll just ask the Clerk. Maybe he can explain. Obviously, if you look at the special reports that are coming out in November, they will not be able to be dealt with until after they come out, of course. What’s on the agenda between now and when we come back from constit week?
Mr. John Fraser: Maybe just to clarify: Do we get briefed on the special report? In other words, will that special report come to this committee before it’s issued, and will we be briefed on it by you?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: No, because we report to the Legislative Assembly. The protocol is that the report is tabled in the Legislature, and then it gets referred to this committee. So depending on the day we table it—if it’s the day before we meet here, then the next day I can brief PAC on that report, or if it’s the same day or if it’s the following week, I’ll brief you as soon as the report is tabled in the assembly.
Mr. John Fraser: That’s what I’m trying to sort out: If you’re going to table the report, and we’re going to get a briefing on it, I wouldn’t want to say we asked a bunch of people to come before us when in actual fact we want to talk to you about that special report. Do you see what I’m saying? I’m trying to figure out the schedule.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: The process is a little bit different. Right? In terms of your selections, once you select a report, we actually do a little bit more detailed preparation, and we’ll give you a briefing on that in camera. The one I’m referring to—if a new report comes out, it would just be a 10- or 15-minute discussion on the report, not preparing you to have witnesses come before you.
Mr. John Fraser: Okay. Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): I would suggest that when the reports come out, they don’t automatically become the issue that the committee wants to review. That’s the process: When they’re referred here, then the committee would have to decide, “Yes, we want to do a thorough review on that report.” So I guess my question is, again to the Clerk: What do we do between now—and anything we pick today would not be able to have any work done on it until after we get back from constit week, because next week we’d still be here and then we’re off for a week, and it takes two weeks’ notice for anyone to come before us. I guess if we could get some description of what’s on the table and what we could be doing between now and then.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Thank you, Chair. Good morning. Just so I’m clear, the two reports that are coming soon are the collective agreements on the teachers and the Pan Am security. The collective agreements on the teachers: Is that because the previous government jumped into the teachers’ collective agreement and made changes unilaterally and you were asked to look into whether that was constitutional? What was the question?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: No. I don’t have the motion in front of me, but the motion basically asked us to—there was an amount that was communicated as a potential savings as a result of the collective agreement, and then the amount changed. We were asked to look at whether that original amount was reasonable and whether the changed amount that was communicated as to the savings associated with those collective agreements was reasonable. That’s what we did.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Okay. On the Pan Am security, in the House we keep hearing that there are all these hidden costs and the security keeps escalating. You’ve been asked to look into what the original was and where it is now?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Again, I don’t have the motion in front of me, but what we looked at was the contracts that were issued for Pan Am security. We looked at the status of the issuance of contracts regarding the security that will be needed right to the end of the games.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Okay, and you expect to release those reports to the House when?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: I believe, in the briefing document that I provided you, both of them would be issued toward the end of November.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: End of November.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: I think I provided the committee with dates in our in camera session.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Thank you for that clarification.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Mr. Potts.
Mr. Arthur Potts: So then in clarification, when you release those reports and we have a briefing—let’s say it is the next day; it’s a Tuesday release and a Wednesday briefing—that wouldn’t take up all of our time. It would be a piece, so there is still time that we could be doing the work of the committee on those days—so we should be looking for something to do in the next seven meetings before we recess?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Yes. In my opinion, there is a lot of work that the office has done from the 2012-13 report and a couple of the specials that were issued this year, so that if the committee desired, you could pick a couple of chapters from those reports and we could, between now and the beginning of December, brief you in the morning on those reports. And if you’re so inclined to call witnesses in the afternoon, you could explore those subject areas further. So that’s really your choice as a committee.
Mr. Arthur Potts: Okay. I think part of the thinking is that we want what we’re doing to be as current as possible and not be going back into older reports, so I stand that the Chair’s and Clerk’s recommendations—what we should do next.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Do you have anything to add, Will?
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. William Short): Like I said, it’s completely up to the committee what direction you want to go, in terms of making selections from current reports that are already referred to the committee or waiting for special reports or the 2014 annual report. That’s up to you guys, what to do.
In terms of any other things that are before the committee, the only other thing I can think of right now would be if you wanted to actually have some discussions about those follow-up processes—that I did send you guys the memos from research on the briefings that the committee has had over the last couple of years that there wasn’t any sort of final decision on what to do with it. The committee may have completely different ideas now as to what they want to do with those follow-up processes.
Bonnie may have something to add to that as well.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Yes. I would just comment, though, on the report that came out in 2013—the content in that report is pretty current. I think the advantage you have in pulling a chapter from that report just to get your feet wet in terms of how this process works is that now the areas that we’ve audited have had time to look at those recommendations and implement them to some extent, and so what you’d be getting, if you heard one of those chapters, is how far people have progressed in implementing the recommendations.
So I actually think there is some value to looking at a couple of those chapters before we issue the 2014, because those chapters have been out there for a year now. Again, it’s your choice, but given that we’re not issuing the broader report until the beginning of December, if you want the committee active, my office would gladly prepare a couple of these chapters for a presentation to you.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): I just want to add, for the special reports that are coming out, the committee will not be restricted to the fact that you have to deal with them right after they’re tabled and come here—they can be chosen a year later, too. Whatever you’re doing at that time, you don’t have to quit doing it because those reports came out. It’s just part of the process.
Yes, Mr. Hatfield.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: If I could, on page 21 of last week’s document, the recent value-for-money audits tabled 2013: for example, “Ontario Power Generation Human Resources”—what were you asked to look into? Was that contracts?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: With respect to OPG?
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Yes.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: That audit was a selection from our office, so the audits that you’re seeing in the 2013 volume were not requested by PAC. They were audits that my office chose based on some risk criteria that we use. In that particular one, we looked at how OPG manages their salaries, benefits, compensation to the staff in that organization.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: So if I wanted to see that report, I’d go through the committee? I make a formal request for that to come to the committee so we can take a look at that and see?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Like Will had indicated, you would be able to say, “We’d like to have this report, ‘OPG Human Resources,’ dealt with by this committee. So then what would happen is, between Will’s office and my office, we coordinate who the witnesses would be that you would discuss this report with. They would be invited.
On the day that they are attending, in the morning, we would give you a briefing on that chapter; as well, research prepares a compilation of a lot of material to prep you even more and gives you some potential questions that you could ask the witnesses. We would do the briefing to you in the morning, you would break and then, in the afternoon, people from OPG—for instance, the CEO from OPG and maybe the chair of the board, in this case—would come here and they would do an opening statement, they would talk about the audit and where they are on the recommendations, and then it would be open for questions. Traditionally, it’s been 20 minutes for each group. Each party would be able to ask questions: five, five, five; then five, five, five again. At the end of the day, the committee would hear what’s said. After that there would be a discussion in terms of what your views are, and if you want recommendations with respect to this report to go back to OPG as well. Then the researcher would go away and write the report about what was heard in the open meeting, and also draft your recommendations.
At the meeting after that, you would go through that draft report page by page in camera, similar to what they did on the Ornge report, come to some consensus around that report and finalize that report in the next meeting. That’s kind of how this plays out once you pick a chapter. That report then goes to the assembly, it’s tabled, and then the committee’s report is public.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: I don’t know about the process—I don’t know if the government side picks a topic first and the opposition picks one second and we get one third or whatever it is—but if no one else has picked “OPG Human Resources,” I would like to suggest, from the third party, that I’d like to take a look at that and delve into that. Whatever is in there, I have no idea.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): I think that’s maybe the one point that wasn’t discussed. What’s in the report is what we all should know prior to making your choice. That’s a public document. You read that, and after each party or each person on the committee has read it, you then pick those that you have questions about, what the problems are and how they could be solved. You would know what was in there. That’s the way it will work. Each party will get—generally it’s two choices for the foreseeable future. To put a work plan together, each party would make two choices and then we would just alternate as to which ones you were dealing with—one, two, three, four, five, six.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Chair, what happens if all three parties pick—one of their two choices is the same?
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. William Short): If you have a duplicate, then you just make another—you have an alternate pick.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): You can pick more. You can have an alternate.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: And who goes first to pick one?
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. William Short): Usually we just go around the table. Usually we just go official opposition, third party, government.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): One, two, three, four, five, six.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: I’m number two, because I try harder.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): I think that’s generally the way it’s always been done—it’s just circulated—excepting the fact that hopefully we can move along and get them all done and it doesn’t make any difference who was first, second or third.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: So process-wise, when do make that selection?
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. William Short): You can do it today—
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Today we need some type of direction as to what you want to do for the next four meetings.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: I’ll sit back and listen for a while and take it from there.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): But, like I say, we can’t really set a work plan for the committee until we have those choices.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Got you. Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Mrs. Munro?
Mrs. Julia Munro: I was looking at the calendar, thinking that for anything we chose today, the 19th would be the earliest.
Interjection: Of November.
Mrs. Julia Munro: Of November. And that then, if I understand the Auditor General’s timeline correctly, we would have two more meetings at the most before the 14th comes. I just wanted to clarify that that’s kind of our timeline target.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Mr. Fraser.
Mr. John Fraser: I want to go back to the process. It would seem that if we chose two, we’d be well overlapped because, first of all, we don’t have the new report in front of us and, as Mr. Percy said, we all don’t have the 2013. We see what’s listed; we really haven’t had a chance to review that material. I don’t know whether anybody is prepared to make a choice today.
On top of that, from a procedural point of view, it would seem that if we were to make a decision today or next week, it wouldn’t make much sense to have two choices. It would be, say, let’s take a choice, let’s split it down the middle, because you would push out the 2014 and the special reports. I know we’ve lost a lot of time in terms of 2013, but are we going to make this cascade? We have to figure out: What’s the right thing to do? What’s the right balance? I’d just like to put that in there.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): I would suggest—and that’s what I kept saying—that to set the long-term work plan of the committee, you need to make your choices so you can work it in, because for the decisions made today, no action can really take place till a couple of weeks down the road.
Today, we really are at: What are we going to do in the short term? I think all three parties would not be prepared to make two choices—
Interjection: Or one.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): —or even one, when all the new information is going to come out in the next three months. To pick six months’ worth of work just doesn’t make any sense, so I think today we’re really looking at some discussion on what you want to do in the very short term.
Mr. John Fraser: Apart from going through this process, in the auditor’s opinion and the Chair’s or the Clerk’s opinion, what would be a good use of our time, given what you’ve said?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: If you’re hesitant to make a selection because you want to wait until the December report, what I could do, just to get you into some of these chapters that we’ve done already and give you some understanding so you may want to consider them is, at the next meeting, I could give you a briefing on these chapters and why we looked at them and what some of the issues are. So I could give you an orientation to the autism service, the human resource, the health school, because maybe you might be interested—and we’ve got follow-ups there—in still selecting one of these, even though there is a report coming out.
In terms of the committee’s time, I could give you a flavour of the work of our office, why we looked at some of these and how our process was handled in each one of these, just to give you a flavour of our operation, if that appeals to you. I don’t want to waste the committee’s time, but if that’s something that you think, going forward, you’d be interested in hearing about—when the new report comes out, I’d give a high-level briefing. But at least you’d know why we set the report up the way it’s set up and why we think things are issues versus not issues. But I’ll leave that to your discretion.
Mr. John Fraser: That might be something useful to those of us who are new to the committee in understanding what’s going to be coming in the middle of December. There are already some members who have been here before, so I wouldn’t want to impose that on them, but I like that idea.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Anyone else?
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Bonnie, on page 21, those one, two, three, four, five, six, seven topics: Did you pick all of those, or did the committee pick some of them?
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: You’re referring to the annual report topics?
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Yes.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: We picked all of those.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: You did; okay.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Yes. Anything you see in the annual report, we have picked all of those. Usually when the committee requests something, it’s coming out as a special.
Mr. Percy Hatfield: Okay.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Unless we thought we’d put it in here, but the better practice is to keep it separate from our chosen work, and we put them out as specials.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Mr. Potts.
Mr. Arthur Potts: Also for clarification, as we pick the reports we want to deal with in order—one, two, three—then they’ll be dealt with in the same order?
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. William Short): Not necessarily.
Mr. Arthur Potts: No? So the committee decides which ones they want to pick collectively?
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): We’ll ask William.
Mr. Arthur Potts: Good. I appreciate that.
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. William Short): We try to balance it as best we can, but a lot of it is based on the schedules of the ministries, agencies, boards and commissions. We try to balance it out as best we can, but really, when we’re talking to their offices, you’re usually scheduling multiple people from multiple organizations. You’ll have a ministry DM and ADM and then you might have a CEO, chair or board members or presidents from one of the boards, agencies and commissions. We do our best to schedule them in the order that they were selected, but it rarely ends up being that way.
Mr. Arthur Potts: Okay; fair enough.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Mr. Fraser.
Mr. John Fraser: Just to go back to the auditor’s comments, how long in terms of that suggestion that you had in terms of briefing us on the 2013 report—what kind of prep time? When can we do that? When would be the best—
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: We could do it next week, if you’d like.
Mr. John Fraser: Okay.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Yes, that would be no problem.
Mr. John Fraser: I’d just like to put forward that that’s what we do: that we get briefed on that report, so that, in the event that we do want to make choices, at least we’re coming at it from—we’ll get a copy of the report, we’ll be able to ask you some questions next week, so we’ll be able to come at it from a point of view of using the committee’s time well, the Clerk’s time well and your time well if we decide to make three selections from there, or any selections from there, as part of how we go forward. Because we could mix it in with other selections, too, with new reports and—
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Oh, yes.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Mr. Hatfield?
Mr. Percy Hatfield: I didn’t want to interrupt Bonnie. I agree with that: I don’t want to waste anybody’s time. I want to use our time to the best, and use Bonnie’s time and Will’s time to the best that we can. So that briefing—you know, why we did it, some of the things we found, and perhaps a recommendation on whether it’s worth looking into a little bit more—would be great. I’ll go along with that.
I don’t have an axe to grind; I picked that one for the sake of a topic. But if we can agree on the briefing, and see what’s there and what we should delve into—I keep reminding myself that it’s a nonpartisan committee. We want to get to the bottom of and try to get improvements out there, and if there’s changes that have to be made, that’s what we want to do. Right?
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Ms. Munro?
Mrs. Julia Munro: Yes. I’m in agreement with this proposal. I’m back to my calendar, and it would seem to me that if we then say “conclusion” to the activity next week, we could make a recommendation as to what we would want to hear before the 2014 report comes out. We’ve still got time to be able to fit in one or two discussions, so that would be, I think, a clearer way to proceed for members of the committee before the 2014 report comes out.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): I think it’s important in the process—obviously the preparation the Auditor General would make would be similar to what it would be for any one if we were taking the next step. When you decide which one you are going to do, the first thing that we do is to have the Auditor General speak about it, to get everybody in the frame of mind of what it is we’re looking at, why we are doing this one.
I suppose it’s possible, after you read it and pick at that, if you’ve got the explanation, you really aren’t interested in talking to many people because there’s no benefit in going much further. That would be a possibility, so I think it would be a good idea, as you’re suggesting, to have an explanation of some of these—the same explanation that the other people had when they started on those same issues.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: I should comment as well, in chapter 4 in the same report—the annual report—and in the one we’ll table in December, there’s a section called “follow-ups.” Those are also potential choices for you. Those are follow-ups of audits that were done two years previous, so what we’re doing is that we’re actually capturing what’s been done on those recommendations since the original report was issued. I’ll highlight a couple of those; you may be interested.
This year in the annual report, we’re doing something a little bit different on those as well. We are actually, in each chapter, for the follow-up, including a little table at the front of the follow-up. It’ll say, “Here’s what the recommendations were, here’s how many actions were associated with those recommendations, and here’s the status in a chart.” Obviously, when we put recommendations in and they’re accepted by the ministries or the broader public sector, we’re hoping that they are implemented, so we’re actually monitoring to see what the status of them is. So in the next annual report coming up, you’ll see what the status is. That may be something you look at, to determine whether or not you do want to have somebody from an organization that perhaps isn’t implementing something come forward and explain why they’re not implementing. Counter to that, you’ll see that somebody has been successful in making a change, and you may be interested in exploring why they were successful in making changes when others aren’t.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): That would be one way where the committee would get some satisfaction in thinking that what you’re doing does make a difference, because two years later you could see whether anybody did anything about it.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: Yes.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Yes, Mr. Fraser?
Mr. John Fraser: So where do we go from here? Is there a motion? There seems to be consensus around the table.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Yes. As long as we have consensus, that’s all we need to move forward with that.
Mr. John Fraser: Okay.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): And I would suggest to the Auditor General to make sure that we do connect some of the reports that you’re talking about and the follow-ups to them, to see how we’re coming, so we can all understand how we expect the process to work. I think that it would be of great assistance as you’re writing your next report as to how you would word that to get the results that we’re looking for.
Mr. John Fraser: We can all get a hold of the report and have a chance to—
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Yes, and the Clerk just mentioned he will bring some committee reports as to how—and how the follow-up worked. We’ll kind of set it up for an orientation meeting based on the business that was before the committee.
Anything else? I don’t know—this is a great way to start. Last week we had only half the day required to do our business, and we’re going to manage that again. I’m running an efficient ship here.
Mr. Lou Rinaldi: Chair, you’re doing a good job.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): We thank you all for participating. It would be nicer if we could get the work before us a little quicker, but this is the way it works, incidentally. I think you’ll find that it takes that long to get most of it done, too. It doesn’t just happen, because there will be a lot of times where you have trouble hearing from people, and then you have to switch to another topic for the next meeting because you couldn’t get the delegations. Hopefully we can move it along and serve a purpose.
Mr. Potts, you have a comment?
Mr. Arthur Potts: I hope you’re not suggesting that the Auditor General audits this committee about its efficiencies moving forward, so that we can get the work of the—
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): The which?
Mr. Arthur Potts: —the work of the people can move forward faster. We’ll have the AG audit this committee.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Yes.
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk: I should, in humour here, say that there is a chapter in the annual report on the operation of the public accounts committee. It’s chapter 6, and it’s in there every year. It basically talks about the committee’s procedures and the meetings.
Mr. Arthur Potts: I believe last meeting we were going to get—I haven’t seen the report yet; it may be in my office.
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. William Short): I mailed them out to your offices, so your office—
Mr. Arthur Potts: I never get to my office; that’s the problem. I’ll have my staff bring it over. Thank you. I appreciate it.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): That’s one of the things, I think, that’s important, that if we have a bit of a communication glitch in the system, if someone is getting it to an address where you don’t get it, if there is a way we can change that to make sure we have—
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Particularly on the government side, they have more than one person in the office; maybe it’s going to the wrong person, then.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): We want to make sure that the communication is proper.
Mr. Arthur Potts: William, would it be to my PA office or my constituency office?
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. William Short): It would have been to your PA office.
Mr. Arthur Potts: Thank you.
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): Anything else, for the good of Rotary?
Mr. Han Dong: Is there an afternoon session today?
The Chair (Mr. Ernie Hardeman): This will be the end for today. The committee stands adjourned.
The committee adjourned at 0938.
Wednesday 29 October 2014
Committee business P-5
STANDING COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
Chair / Président
Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford PC)
Vice-Chair / Vice-Présidente
Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean–Carleton PC)
Mr. Han Dong (Trinity–Spadina L)
Mr. John Fraser (Ottawa South L)
Mr. Ernie Hardeman (Oxford PC)
Mr. Percy Hatfield (Windsor–Tecumseh ND)
Ms. Lisa MacLeod (Nepean–Carleton PC)
Ms. Harinder Malhi (Brampton–Springdale L)
Mrs. Julia Munro (York–Simcoe PC)
Mr. Arthur Potts (Beaches–East York L)
Mr. Lou Rinaldi (Northumberland–Quinte West L)
Substitutions / Membres remplaçants
Mr. Randy Pettapiece (Perth–Wellington PC)
Also taking part / Autres participants et participantes
Ms. Bonnie Lysyk, Auditor General
Clerk / Greffier
Mr. William Short
Staff / Personnel
Mr. Ian Morris, research officer,
Ms. Erica Simmons, research officer,