Thank you, Madam Chair. Many of the items included in Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1995-96, were discussed and explained during the Standing Committee on Social Programs review of business plans. Although the committee was concerned to see some numbers were higher than originally anticipated, there were not specific concerns with most of the items.
The only item the committee felt needed to be revised was the huge amount requested for medical travel and out-of-Territories hospitals. The department indicates that the amount was the result of poor analysis in making the decisions about things like savings from the Royal Alexandra Hospital agreement and the nearest-centre policy. They also indicated that in the past, there was nothing in place which encouraged those in the regional centres to be vigilant in attempting to save costs in these areas.
These items were reflected as an overall concern the committee had with many items in the supplementary appropriation. It appears that rather than being careful in planning and accountable for budgeted amounts, departments have been able to get away with shallow planning. The process has not held departments accountable for their planning or lack thereof. Instead, departments have used supplementary appropriations as a way of topping up errors which are a base deficiency or where they were not planned appropriately.
The committee believes supplementary appropriations should be a mechanism for dealing with emergencies, not as an excuse and bail-out for poor planning. Madam Chair, I would now like to ask the chairman of the Standing Committee on Resource Management and Development, Mr. David Krutko, to continue.
Standing Committee On Resource Management And Development Comments