The fog is starting to lift here. I’m seeing some of the numbers more clearly in that perspective and I appreciate the deputy minister’s response to that. I guess the question remains right now, as we speak, how many positons are currently vacant in the Department of Finance?

With these vacancies, which sounds like it’s around the corporate average of 10 percent, and I’m assuming these are funded positions, I guess to the question, do those monies remain in that activity or has the department used those monies in other facets during the course of the year? Or is this money allocated for these positions? Do they stay within the category of wages and benefits?

Historically, has the Department of Finance ever, with unfunded or funded positions, moved any money or appropriated the money by taking it out of this category of compensation and benefits and used it in other areas within the Department of Finance in historical purposes? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. There is an ability to move funds between activities. There is a report that’s done on a regular basis, interactivity transfers where we have to account for all the money that’s moved, how it’s moved and to ensure that it’s moved appropriately. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Committee, we’re on page 149, Finance, active position summary. Are there any questions?

Page 151, Department of Finance, budget, treasury and debt management, operations expenditure summary, $26.860 million. Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a question here with regards to the Program Review Office. I note in the description that the PRO is responsible to… They have formularies of business. One of them is to report on results with a view to recommending modifications or improvements. I think it’s been mentioned once or twice in our discussions of the budget to date, but I’d like to know from the Minister if there is any consideration on the part of the department to make the Program Review Office recommendations

binding on departments. Is that something that the Finance department is considering instituting? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Miltenberger.

Mr. Chair, no, we haven’t contemplated their recommendations being binding. They would cease to be recommendations and that would eliminate all room for discussion or creativity. They may give us a set of recommendations based on what they know. We need the flexibility, as well, to be able to look at those. As we look at the information, we are sharing with committee as well. If they’re binding, it takes away all of our flexibility. I don’t know if we necessarily want to do that. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, thanks to the Minister. I guess it kind of makes me want to ask the question then, of why did we bother having the Program Review Office to give us recommendations, but I say that with a bit of tongue in cheek. If the department gets these recommendations from the Program Review Office, how are they handled? How does the Minister ensure that other departments at least consider them? The goal here is to try and determine program effectiveness I read on page 150, which presumably should lead us to some efficiencies as well. If we have recommendations and they’re not binding, how do the Minister and department work to try and get some gains out of the programs and services that we run through the recommendations from the PRO? Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I am just harking back to the last government where there was a lot of work done on looking for savings and efficiencies. It took almost two years of discussion and debate. When there was a move to act on recommendations, we acted partially on some of the recommendations, not all. There was significant pushback from MLAs when we talked about inclusive schooling and people-teacher ratio, for example, and the re-profiling the overfunding that was going on at the time. When we moved to act on it, it was a hugely contentious issue, which I suppose speaks most clearly to the issue of what would happen if you made all of those recommendations would have been binding on all of us. There would have been some significant change to government. We would have given away our ability as final arbitrators on the budgets and structure of government, and I don’t think that’s the intent of the Program Review Office.

When we get the Program Review Office assisting work, it does things besides reviews. It assists in all sorts of other things. We have to look at what the recommendations are. Are they structural issues? Are they process issues? Are they finance issues? Are there overlap issues? There’s not a

straightforward answer. It depends on the recommendations. I will ask the deputy if he wants to add anything further to that response. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Deputy Minister Aumond.

Thank you, deputy minister. Ms. Bisaro.

Mr. Chair, thanks for the information. I certainly look forward to seeing the reports twice annually. I think that’s a very good step forward. I want to thank the Minister for his commitment to committee.

It is my understanding that the Program Review Office has been doing a review of student housing. I think it goes back to almost a year ago now. Can the Minister advise whether or not that review is finished, and if not, when it will be? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Mr. Kalgutkar.