Thank you. This is obviously related to the internal auditing and so on as well. I’m just wondering if we know what those issues are that have caused the Minister to suggest that this should be reviewed by the program review office.

The Minister has said that there may be compliance issues at play in the collection of the payroll tax and that he was considering having the program review office take a look at it with that in mind. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have to ask the Member to tell me when I said that, because if he’s talking about today, it’s something that I have no recollection of saying in this House. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Bromley, is that something you heard today?

No, it isn’t, Mr. Chair, but I’ll see if I can dig it out. It wasn’t said today; I’m referring to before today. But within the last year, I think, the intent was to put the program review office to

looking at compliance issues on the collection of the payroll tax, but I’ll try and dig that out.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We, as well, will take a look at our discussions and if that was brought up possibly during a committee briefing at some point. We did make reference at some point to bringing on a new payroll compliance officer. I’m not sure if that’s maybe what the Member is referring to.

Anyway, we’ll commit to also check to see if that issue has come up. Thank you.

I’d appreciate that. Would the Minister have the information handy why we’re considering another compliance control officer for this tax collection? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Kalgutkar.

Thank you, Mr. Kalgutkar. Thank you, committee. For the record, the vote on Mr. Dolynny’s motion was a tie. As the Chair is responsible to break the tie to maintain the status quo and allow the House to discuss the matter further, I voted against the motion. This is why the motion was defeated. I apologize for that.

Next on my list I have Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a question with regard to the huge increase in compensation and benefits. I presume that it’s for the transfer of employees into Finance from elsewhere. Can I get an explanation, please? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Deputy Minister Aumond.

That’s good. Thank you.

Committee, I’ll take this opportunity to recognize the mayor of Hay River in the gallery. Welcome, Andrew.

Next on my list I have Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you very much. I just wanted to get right into the financial shared services and amalgamating people into the financial shared services. I’ve been trying to find some documentation on this from the last time the committee had an update on it. I think it was just before our election in 2011, so I don’t know if P and P have had an update on where financial shared services is going.

The original intent, of course, was the logical thing to do was when we split the Department of ITI and ENR and there were some similar functions so we just kept shared services. I’ve spoken earlier in the House about how a seemingly innocuous group of government employees started gaining momentum and now we’ve got almost like this fairly significant group of people in our government. I don’t know if they’re going on their own mandate or they’re prepared to give committee an update on where financial shared services are going.

Talking with some people, this is how we used to do things about three governments ago, 12 years ago or even more, then we’ve done other things and now we’re amalgamating back to the old Department of Finance way of doing things. People are saying we’re going backwards by creating this again, so I want to get the Minister’s thoughts on that.

As well, the reason that came to my attention is because employees were telling me that when they were considering this two years ago – because it’s been in the works since we got re-elected in 2011 – is they went out to all the departments and said, look, we’re amalgamating our services – if that’s the word they’re using – no employees will be impacted, yet in Fort Simpson I’ve got two employees potentially losing their jobs.

As well, when they created these new positions in shared services, once again they’re doing the same thing to employees that they’re doing to our public, is over-qualifying those positions and giving no regard to years of service. So we might potentially lose two long-term service employees in Fort Simpson, not to mention the other areas because I understand there are other impacted employees and frustrated employees. They’re Aboriginal and they’re long-term Northerners and they’re frustrated internally as well. My fight was always trying to get people in there, but when they’re in there, these are opportunities for growth, these positions, they got sold to the employees as opportunities for growth, yet one of my constituents has been asked to go backwards. The person had 10 years of services in the same type of job, offered the same position in shared services at a retraining level, which means

after six months they’re not even sure they have that job, and it’s kind of like a blow. Somebody who’s growing in government, trying hard, there every day, knows the system, yet when there’s an opportunity for growth – and this person is Aboriginal – they make them go backwards. I don’t think we should be doing that to our own employees, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We would be more than happy to meet with committee for a full and comprehensive update and review of this financial shared services amalgamation which has been fast-tracked and is more pressing than ever to have it done, given we’ve on the eve of devolution.

In regards to the specific issues with the Member’s constituents, I would suggest that an appropriate venue for that would be an opportunity for the Member and myself and some staff to sit down and we could review the particular circumstances so that we all have the same information and we can make sure that we deal with it in a way that respects that confidentiality factor. Thank you.

I thank the Minister. I think it might be the Standing Committee on Government Operations that takes the lead over finances. Perhaps at that time we can invite as many Members as we can to that briefing. I’m glad for that commitment because this is almost becoming a department that we almost need a deputy minister here for. It has taken on a life of its own. I have checked with my colleagues to try to find out more, so here’s a good opportunity while we’re doing the budget. I’m glad for the commitment and I’ll be interested to see where government wants to go with this department. It continues to grow. It has objectives and it’s impacting internal employees and causing grief as well.

With that, I look forward to a briefing, hopefully before we leave this session. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We’ll wait for any direction from committee, Government Ops, if that’s the appropriate committee. Thank you.