Mr. Speaker, I have a return to written question asked by Mr. Bromley on February 27, 2013, regarding GNWT departmental travel expenditures.
I would like to provide the following information:
1. What factors are taken into account in
managerial review for approval of travel requests to ensure managers determine with certainty that travel is required and that businesses cannot be carried out by alternative means before travel is approved?
In approving duty travel, a manager requires written justification for the need for the duty travel. In deciding upon whether or not to approve, the manager will consider the reason for travel; the cost of the travel; the benefit in undertaking the travel; and an assessment of whether the travel is necessary, in the GNWT interest, and if the business need cannot be addressed by alternative means. Once this has been assessed, a manager decides on whether to approve or reject the travel.
In the case of international travel, justification has to be provided to the responsible Minister for their consideration. For other travel outside of the NWT, the responsible department head is provided with justification for the travel.
In addition to the managerial review, employees consider the need to travel; consider the reason for travel; the cost of the travel; the benefit in undertaking the travel; and an assessment of whether the travel is necessary, in the GNWT interest, and the business need cannot be addressed by alternative means.
2. On the basis of a thorough analysis, including a
review of controls used in other jurisdictions, what policy and procedural improvements could be introduced to ensure that travel is approved only after verification that other communication means have been considered and determined to be impractical?
We examined travel policies and procedures in 10 of 13 provinces and territories and the federal government. There was no indication that any jurisdiction implemented any extraordinary internal procedural controls to verify that other communications means have been considered and determined to be impractical.
Only two jurisdictions make specific references to alternatives to travel. The federal government and the Government of British Columbia provide some policy direction.
From the federal government:
“Departments have effective oversight mechanisms and controls in place to ensure that travel, hospitality, conferences and associated expenditures are managed in an effective, efficient and economic manner.
Travel, hospitality and conference expenditures incurred are necessary to achieve departmental mandates and priorities.
The most economic and efficient alternatives for travel, hospitality, conferences and associated expenditures have been considered.”
From the Government of British Columbia:
10.3.2 Travel Approval
The means of travel chosen need to be operationally feasible, cost-effective and consider travel methods that will mitigate the production of greenhouse gas emissions.
The relevant GNWT policy is FAM 2001:
4.2 Authorization for Duty Travel and Related
Expenses
4.2.1 A duty traveller shall use the most direct,
practical, and cost-effective mode of travel. A duty traveller who uses extra travel time during normal working hours shall record it as vacation leave or leave without pay (not sick leave) unless the extra time is practical or cost effective for the government.
4.3 Responsibilities of Duty Travel Approving
Officers and Duty Travellers
4.3.1 Unless permitted otherwise in this policy,
the approving officer shall do the following before duty travel begins:
a.
Determine that duty travel is necessary and, in writing on the specified form, authorize the travel plan and the mode and class of transportation.
It is implicit in 4.3.1 (a) that alternatives to duty travel have been considered and deemed impractical. That particular section could be made more explicit in terms of specific factor that have to be taken into account.
3. On the basis of a random sample of several
hundred travel claims from across departments:
a) What is the proportion of full fare versus
excursion fare tickets?
It is not possible to answer this question based upon the ticketing regime that currently exists. Airline seat costs are now very fluid, and fares change almost daily. They also vary depending upon how far in advance the ticket is bookended. Therefore, there is no longer the ability to compare ticket costs against a published fare.
In addition, fares may vary depending upon the particular flights that are booked. The lowest cost on a particular day and route may not be the best choice as it is at a time that impairs the traveller’s ability to perform their work or may result in the need to overnight, incurring additional travel costs and loss of time.
In addition, the “fare class” information is not provided on invoices/receipts provided by travel agents or airlines. Therefore, it is not possible to review travel claims and determine what fare class was purchased.
b) What is the frequency of ticket changes
incurring additional costs?
We examined 144 travel claims and noted 10 where a change fee had incurred. This represents a rate of 6.9 percent. The additional cost attributed to the change was the change fee itself, and there was no additional cost of the airline ticket. In all but one case, the change free was $50. The one exception was a $100 free which was attributed to the original travel arrangements which required the change of two tickets.
The reasons for the change were for the following general reasons:
• postponement of travel
• meetings ended sooner than anticipated
• meetings
extended
Public Works and Services had the largest incidence of ticket changes; however, these are attributed to the activities related to project inspections which can be delayed if contractors’ work is not ready for inspection.
We did perform a high level analysis of travel by GNWT employees for the 2012-13 fiscal year. During the year, there were 1,522 individual employees that undertook 8,907 trips.
A significant number of trips which occurred in the NWT were undertaken by road and therefore attracted no airfare costs. Similarly, for the most part, air charter costs are not included. These figures do not present travel related to recruitment or employee medical travel benefits.
Later today I will table a report “Government of the Northwest Territories Departmental Travel Expenditures.”