CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

Mr. Chairperson (Marcel Laurendeau): This section of the Committee of Supply will be considering the Estimates of the Department of the Civil Service Commission. Does the honourable minister responsible have an opening statement?

Hon. Vic Toews (Minister charged with the administration of The Civil Service Act): Mr. Chairperson, in introducing the budget Estimates for the Civil Service Commission for 1996-97, I would point out a slight change in the provision for the French Language Services Secretariat. It has now been transferred to the Department of Energy and Mines whose minister is also Minister responsible for French Language Services (Mr. Praznik).

The remaining Estimates for the Civil Service Commission show a decrease of approximately $215,000 over 1995-96. Close to one-half of this amount, that is, $91,000, is associated with renegotiation of the government's contract with ISM for the provision of mainframe computer services. This new agreement has resulted in lower costs across all government departments using these services. The balance of the reduction has been achieved through internal reorganization, economies and efficiencies impacting the salary and operating budgets within the commission.

Collective bargaining has been a major focus of attention within the civil service over the past several months. As minister responsible for the civil service, I was very pleased that the majority of civil service employees voted against strike action and that subsequently a tentative collective agreement has been achieved with the major civil service bargaining unit. That agreement is currently in the process of being referred to the membership for ratification. The tentative agreement has been reached within a framework that will meet the government's fiscal objectives. The essential components of the agreement include, firstly, that the existing rates of pay will be maintained from March 30, 1996, to March 28, 1997. In respect of a reduced workweek, agreement has been reached to continue this program in 1996-97, consistent with the 1995-96 program, including seven Fridays between July 5 and August 16 and three days over the Christmas-New Year's break. Corrections component employees are exempt, although they may request unpaid leaves of absence.

In respect of the benefit plans, improvements have been negotiated to both the dental and maternity leave plans. As Minister responsible for The Civil Service Act, I am very pleased that both the civil service agreement and the negotiations pursuant to the riot at Headingley jail have been achieved through the collective bargaining process and without significant disruption to the public.

Mr. Chairperson, I am also pleased to highlight the fact that our workforce adjustment process continues to operate with significant success in reducing the impact of potential layoff within the civil service. Members may recall that, in January of 1996, notice of termination was sent to the MGEU identifying a potential of 193 layoffs. At that time, we indicated fewer than 100 employees would be laid off without an alternative employment opportunity. In fact, as a result of the success of the voluntary severance incentive program and the continued effort across the service at redeployment, only 40 employees were actually required to be given layoff letters on March 28, 1996. Re-employment efforts continued for these employees, with a final result that fewer than 17 employees who were available for work will have been laid off without an alternative employment offer.

Mr. Chairperson, I would also like to inform members that over the past year the Civil Service Commission has been working toward the development of a new employment information service. This new service will completely modernize and update the way we advertise and bulletin available employment opportunities both internally and to the general public. Utilizing a combination of current technology, which includes interactive voice response, Internet, fax and a 1-800 line, service and convenience to the public will be greatly enhanced, while at the same time maintaining the existing level of central cost and offering potential advertising cost savings to departments of government. Through utilization of existing technology, government employment information will now be available 24 hours a day, seven days a week by telephone or Internet, through 1-800 for rural Manitobans, from the convenience of home or office, with fax on-demand service, in both official languages and through single-window access in partnership with the City of Winnipeg and federal government. These new and enhanced services are targeted to be brought on line in June of this year.

With these very view and brief opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, I would now welcome the questions from members opposite on the Estimates.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the minister for those comments. Does the critic for the official opposition, the honourable member for Wellington, have any opening comments?

Ms. Becky Barrett (Wellington): No, Mr. Chair, I do not.

Mr. Chairperson: We thank the critic for those short remarks. I would remind members of the committee that the debate on the Minister's Salary, item 1.(a) is deferred until all other items in the Estimates of the department are passed.

At this time, we would invite the minister's staff to take their place in the Chamber.

Is the minister prepared to introduce his staff present at the committee at this time?

Mr. Toews: I have with me today, Mr. Paul Hart, the Civil Service Commissioner; Mr. Gerry Irving, the Assistant Deputy Minister Labour Relations; and, Mr. Bob Pollock, who is the Director of the Human Resources Programs Branch.

Mr. Chairperson: The item before the committee is item 1. Civil Service Commission (b) Administrative Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits.

* (1540)

Ms. Barrett: Before I begin questioning in this particular area, I am wondering if the minister can tell me when it would be appropriate to ask questions about the SOA organization and staff development.

Mr. Toews: Given that they are included in these Estimates, at any time convenient to the member.

Ms. Barrett: Boy, oh, boy, thank you; so I think I will wait. On the Salaries and Employee Benefits, I notice--this is on page 21 of the Estimates--that the professional/technical SY is being held vacant for the current fiscal year. I am wondering if the minister can tell me what that position entailed and why that position is being held vacant for this fiscal year?

(Mr. Frank Pitura, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

Mr. Toews: The reduction in that staff year came about as a result of, primarily, a decline in the number of appeals heard by the Civil Service Commission Board. For example, in 1990-91, there were 18 appeals. That has now been reduced to about a third of that number; it is at approximately six. So the position as secretary to the Civil Service Compensation Board has been held vacant. Formerly, the person who occupied that position was Mr. Pollock who is now the director whom I have introduced you to, and the support services that are required are provided. They continue to be provided through the director and the staff of the Human Resource Programs Branch.

Ms. Barrett: So the appeals that are sent before the Civil Service Commission are held, are dealt with, and the person who was secretary and is now director of Human Resource Programs Branch takes on and deals with those appeals. Is that correct?

Mr. Toews: The person who is supporting the director in those types of duties, in fact, reports to the chair of the board. That person is a lawyer and has been reassigned to do that work along with the regular duties. The director is still available to provide practical assistance when required and when appropriate.

Ms. Barrett: I would like to ask the minister if he can give a reason, or reasons, for the decline in the number of appeals heard by the Civil Service Commission Compensation Board.

Mr. Toews: Again, this indicates, I think, some improvements in the way in which appeals have been heard over the past. In government, we are constantly trying to improve services, ensuring that people are getting the information that they need. The Civil Service Commission is no different in that respect.

Although the actual number of appeals heard have decreased from approximately 18 in '90-91 to the number of six in '95-96, in fact, the number of actual appeals filed were the same. So it is the hearings that have declined, and one can ask why in fact that has taken place. I think one of the reasons is that when one takes a less adversarial approach to these types of proceedings and is direct in terms of providing information, or additional information, than used to be provided, then all of the parties have the information in front of them before it ever gets to an appeal, and they can make an informed decision beforehand.

Just getting back to some of the discussions that I had with the member for Transcona (Mr. Reid) in respect of the worker's advisors, one will see the same thing happening in that area, where the Workers Compensation Board, in that case, hands more information to the worker advisor and then the worker advisor can advise the specific client as to what the full nature of the case is.

Similarly, the Civil Service Commission, I think, has been taking a less adversarial approach, putting the facts on the record, that is, opening up the books, letting the other side see what, in fact, the case is and, thereby, dissuading many people from proceeding because the case is either not warranted, or, in fact, there may be a resolution in favour of the claimant without the necessity of an expensive, formal hearing.

So I think one sees this happening in many areas where tribunals adjudicate rights. It is certainly something that is going on in the legal area generally, and I am pleased to see that this trend is being introduced in the Civil Service Commission with these beneficial results.

Ms. Barrett: Is it possible to get a report of the number of appeals that have been filed and the general type of appeal they have been, sort of like the--[interjection] It is in the annual--[interjection] page 14. Okay, thanks. I have no further questions in this area.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Pitura): Item 1. Civil Service Commission (a) Executive Office (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $165,400--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $57,600--pass.

Item 1.(b) Administrative Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $606,300--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $281,700--pass.

Item 1.(c) Human Resource Management Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits--$1,012,100.

* (1550)

Ms. Barrett: Mr. Chair, I have a couple of questions under the Human Resource Programs Branch. Can the minister refresh my memory as to the difference between delegated and nondelegated staffing?

Mr. Toews: Very generally, where we have a delegated situation, the Civil Service Commission enters into a formal agreement with a particular department, and what that agreement does is set out the criteria in respect of how staff, for example, are hired. All the particulars are set out in that agreement, and the staffing then is done by the delegated department in accordance with that agreement.

The audit is then conducted by the Civil Service Commission to see whether that delegated authority should continue. That audit may well take place depending on the nature of the department or the types of--the size of the department and various things like that, but the Civil Service Commission continues with that audit.

I understand that there are 17 departments with that delegated authority. Essentially, the current delegation, the staff looks at what the status is and audits it, and I have some records involving that. I am prepared to release that to the member. It is entitled Delegation of Recruitment and Staffing Authority (Staffing Audit Reports as of May 1996). The document bears a date at the left-top corner, 96/05/05.

Ms. Barrett: I appreciate receiving that information.

I think I will go to the Expected Results on page 29 of the Estimates book. I would like to ask the minister if he could table the current statistics regarding the four target groups under the last Expected Results at the end of that page 29, which says, “ . . . a strategic approach to Affirmative Action resulting in greater representation of,. and more opportunities for members of the four designated target groups.”

I would like to know what the current stats are regarding those four target groups by the major representations of managerial, professional/technical, admin support, if that is available. If it is not available, if the minister could see that I get a copy of those current stats when they can be put together.

Mr. Toews: Perhaps I could let the member know what I do have available. The affirmative action continues to be a very important aspect of the government of Manitoba's program. The Civil Service Commission has been very, very diligent in ensuring that the appropriate balance has been struck.

One can recognize that in many situations the union itself would have concerns about the possible effects of an affirmative action program onto existing members that they represent. So even the union may not be that receptive to this idea. I think this has to be done in a way that balances all needs: the needs of existing employees and also those groups in our society that have been traditionally underrepresented in the civil service.

What the statistics in fact do indicate is that there has been continued progress achieved in all designated groups. There has been a comprehensive handbook that has been put out for managers, and it is called Putting Equity to Work. I would commend that to the member for her reading. Of course, not wishing to snow her under with paper, but I think it is a good document for her to read to let her see what managers in government are being told in respect of affirmative action. This document, I might add, was developed in consultation with the departments and has been recently distributed, and so her input and her comments in that respect would probably be very, very helpful.

Just very briefly before I get into some of the statistics, the more detailed statistics, the government commitment to affirmative action has been demonstrated with the appointment of two new female deputy ministers, Alex Morton of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and Tannis Mindell in Family Services. I am mindful of the concern sometimes that members say that, yes, we hire people, but we do not necessarily promote people from within the branches into these senior departments and senior positions. I think it is very important that government promote suitably qualified people into those positions. I think that the government track record in that respect has demonstrated its commitment to ensuring that groups of people who have been traditionally underrepresented in the civil service, in fact, are achieving a certain equity.

One of the things that one can say is that despite the fact that the size of the civil service has generally been declining--for example, on March 27, 1995, we had 15,879 people, public servants, that number is now at 15,674--despite the fact that the overall numbers have been declining, the proportions to the whole of those four designated areas, in fact, has been increasing. So, again, I have to commend the Civil Service Commission and the policies that have been implemented by the government to ensure that people are mindful of those kind of criteria.

For example, in the '95 figure that I mentioned, 49.01 percent of people were male; in the present statistics, it is relatively stable at 49.64. In respect of female, the '95 figure was 50.99 percent; the present number is 50.36 percent. In respect of aboriginal people, in March of '95 the number was 963 for 6.06 percent; the present number is 1,009 for a figure of 6.44 percent. In respect of persons with disabilities, that number was 436 in '95, and it is now at 470 representing an increase from 2.75 percent to 3 percent. The visible minorities category is 422 people in '95 to 454 in '96 going from 2.66 percent to 2.90 percent.

* (1600)

One can appreciate--and I know the member opposite does appreciate--the sensitivity in which these types of opportunities and efforts have to be made. As I indicated, there are certain vested rights that people view in terms of seniority, and that is an issue that has to be dealt with always by the collective bargaining agent. I think the civil service in a very low key but very positive way has moved in co-operation with the bargaining agent to ensure that these types of considerations are borne in mind, and that people who fall into one of these four categories, that is, excluding the male category, are taken into account in making any downsizing decisions.

Ms. Barrett: I thank the minister for those statistics. I would like, if he has them, not necessarily to put on the record, but to table the statistics for the various categories, the managerial, professional/technical, and admin support by the four target groups.

Mr. Toews: Yes, unfortunately, I do not have those documents, but I will instruct staff to obtain that. If it is available, I will table that here in the House.

Ms. Barrett: I appreciate the minister’s looking for those statistics. I would assume they would be available because that would appear to me to be another indication of how equity is working. It is not just numbers, but it is where those numbers occur. I please would like to ask the minister to see that I get a copy of Putting Equity to Work, and he should not worry about snowing me with documents.

I have many more questions in this area, but in the interest of time I will be prepared to pass this section.

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Pitura): Item 1. Civil Service Commission (c) Human Resource Management Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,012,100--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $627,800--pass.

1.(d) Labour Relations Services (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $1,134,800--pass; (2) Other Expenditures $278,400--pass.

1.(e) Organization and Staff Development Agency.

Ms. Barrett: I assume that this is the appropriate spot to ask some questions about the special operating agency, of which I have a couple. I would like to ask the minister, and I do not see this in Part 4 of the Supplementary Estimates book, and I certainly did not see it in the Annual Report of OSD, if he can get me a list of the revenue sources. I am particularly referring to page four of the annual report which states under Progress Towards Goals and Objectives that 1994-95 public-sector revenue was 111 percent higher than projected. I am wondering if the minister can give me a listing of those revenue sources.

Mr. Toews: Just very generally in respect of the special operating agency organization and staff development, I could bring the member's attention to page 51 and on of the Estimates, which essentially sets out the objectives and the initiatives in terms of the marketing of its services and the reasons why we have been or the agency has in fact been as successful as it has.

One of the keys of the agency's success is that it has been marketing its services not just to the general Manitoba civil service but, in fact, has been marketing its services to the broader public sector, including the federal government and other Crown corporations such as that. When the federal government has gotten out of areas, we have gotten into those areas in order to market very similar services that had been provided prior to this time.

We market the services to the broader public service without getting into the issue of competition with the private sector, and so the types of clients and initiatives would be public sector rather than private individuals.

Ms. Barrett: That is very clear, not only from the statement in the annual report, but also in the material provided in the Estimates book. What I would like specifically, if the minister can provide it, is the types of services that were provided to which public sectors? I guess I am looking for a definition, if you will, on page 51, in the statement in the Estimates book that says, the opportunity to enhance its self-sufficiency for the OSD is to stick to and assertively market what it is good at and to avoid, minimize or contract out that which is better provided elsewhere.

I guess I would like to know just what it is that OSD thinks it is particularly good at and what does it feel that it should avoid, minimize or contract out?

(Mr. Mike Radcliffe, Acting Chairperson, in the Chair)

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Radcliffe): The honourable Minister of Health.

Mr. Toews: Mr. Chairperson, it seems I--

The Acting Chairperson (Mr. Radcliffe): Sorry, the honourable Minister of Labour. Excuse me.

An Honourable Member: Oh, Oh.

Mr. Toews: You heard it here first, I guess. Let me tell you, this is where I first heard of it. Gave me a heart attack. [interjection] Why not, everybody else has been leaking stuff.

* (1610)

An Honourable Member: Oh, yeah. Present company excepted.

Mr. Toews: I certainly was not making any references to the members opposite.

In respect of what the Civil Service or this particular SOA does best, one of the things, for example, that I could give as a specific example, is the workforce adjustment services that it offers to the federal government. Now that the federal government has begun to wake up to the reality of the 1990s--and present Liberals excluded, of course, the member for St. Boniface (Mr. Gaudry) has been well awake for many years before the 1990s. He should be commended for his efforts in trying to get the federal government onto the right track.

But, similarly, the provincial government special operating agency has been contracting for services to the federal government in the area of workforce adjustment, basically, because of its own experience here in Manitoba. This is something I think that should not go unnoticed, of how well the civil service, for example, has been able to deal with downsizing in what I would consider a very humane and sensitive way.

One always hears about the number of positions eliminated or the number of layoffs announced. One talks about numbers of 350 in the newspaper and when in fact the numbers of 350 do not actually include all occupied positions. That would include unoccupied and occupied positions. Earlier this year, I had occasion to announce the fact that the government was looking at laying off 193, or eliminating 193 positions. At that time we anticipated that the actual number of people that would be laid off would be less than 100. Through the very good work of the Civil Service Commission, they were able to minimize that from 40 and perhaps now down to as low as 17. So, clearly, this is an organization that has expertise that it can market in terms of doing a very necessary task in a very humane and sensitive way. Again that arises out of their own experience.

The federal government in terms of federal-provincial co-operation, not wishing to duplicate services, rather than having the federal government set up its entire unit, we then provide that service as a very dramatic and important example of co-operative federalism. This would include not just the downsizing but refocusing the employees who are left, and dealing with them, because that in fact can be very traumatic, not just for the employees who no longer find themselves with a position in the same place or even with the same employer, but in fact it is very difficult on those individuals who remain, and they have to become refocused and get to the task of providing very important government services.

I think for the member's information, I have another guide here which outlines--again, I do not want to be accused of giving too much information. This is a guide to seminars and services prepared by the Organization and Staff Development. This deals with consulting and training and, again, dealing with the expertise that this branch has developed. Indeed, the Civil Service Commissioner, Mr. Paul Hart, who is here today, has a welcoming address in this document, which is a very substantive document.

An Honourable Member: Put it on record.

Mr. Toews: I will. I am going to put this on record, because I think it is very important to not only have his comments on record--

An Honourable Member: Ten minutes.

Mr. Toews: No, it would be less than 10 minutes.[interjection] I know the member is concerned, but it is two paragraphs. I think it is directly relevant to the question that she is asking. Not only will I read it onto the record but ensure that she gets a copy of this document, because I do not want to withhold information from her that is relevant to her task.

So, Mr. Paul Hart states: The 1995-96 OSD guide to seminars and services continues the tradition of offering timely and effective training and consulting to help public sector managers and employees deal with the important issues in their workplace. In addition, the guide's programs are delivered by the best available personnel from both agency staff and the private sector.

I think that is a point that I have to deal with because it is raised by the member.

He says: I draw your attention to the many new and revised seminars and services that are offered. Their inclusion is the result of listening to you and your views on what you need to succeed in these demanding times. As always, the Civil Service Commission remains committed to working with you to improve both organization and individual effectiveness.

What the Organization and Staff Development SOA does is in fact broker on many occasions. Where it does not have the personnel directly to provide the services, it in fact goes to the private industry and gets people in the private industry to in fact deliver the course. I do not know if in here is a list of the types of people who are in a position to deliver these, but the Civil Service Commission or the SOA in fact contracts with these private sector people to provide the actual hands-on training. So it acts as a broker to facilitate this development of skills through its courses. So I would commend this to the member for reading.

Ms. Barrett: Thank you. I will certainly take this guide and peruse it carefully.

I would like to ask the minister--I am reverting to the annual report, if I may, to the OSD. I am looking particularly at the Statement of Earnings and Retained Earnings. There is no numbered page, but it is about page 10, I suppose. I have a couple of questions on some of the expenditures. It is the OSD’s annual report--sorry, I was not clear. I will try and give the numbers that I am concerned about and maybe that will help.

* (1620)

Under Professional Fees, it was budgeted for 102, I guess, thousand dollars, and the actual was $162.7. The other one that I think might correlate with that is the employees’ salaries, which were budgeted at $364.6 and were actually $273.2. Now, is this reduction in these salaries of OSD people, who, I assume, are civil servants, and the increase in the professional fees, which, I assume, are to external individuals and organizations, as a result of the paragraph on page five of the annual report which states: As expected, the success of OSD as an SOA has directly benefited private consultants. This accounts for both the reported reduction in salary and benefit costs and the increase in professional fees.

So I would assume that that means the OSD as an SOA has made a commitment to paying external professional fees rather than internal civil service salaries. So I would like to ask the minister that, and if he could table for me at a later date the list of private consultants that make up this $162,700 of professional fees.

Mr. Toews: This is consistent with the department’s or the SOA’s philosophy that it stick to what it does best. Rather than hiring staff to move into areas where it may not be qualified to provide the services, what it has been able to do very effectively is to broker agreements, and it finds out what the demand is at any particular time. As the marketplace adjusts, it can then broker with these individual people. If one, for example, hires civil servants or staff full time, it is a very touchy thing that if you hire them for certain services and then those services are no longer relevant or required by the user out there, you are stuck with a problem in terms of how then you retrain or redeploy this individual. So, by focusing on what it does best, that is, by many cases brokering for the services, it in fact has been able to provide a very effective service to people out there who need it while maintaining costs low for the government by minimizing its administrative costs.

For example, I am familiar with other SOAs in government where the opposite thing has occurred, and it comes a bit out of my background in the Attorney General's department where they now have a Civil Legal Services SOA, and again the legal services that that department delivers have been brought in-house rather than having those brokered out, because the people in that specific SOA know how to do government legal work better than many private individuals. I know, Mr. Chair, that might be hard to believe for someone who is a practising lawyer in the private sector, but in fact the Civil Legal Services branch has been very effective in maintaining costs at a low level.

Similarly here, what the philosophy has been is to do what they do best, and if market conditions change they can broker agreements with new individuals to provide those services, and that flexibility has enabled this department to provide services that are needed by very qualified individuals. If the Civil Service Commission or the special operating agency can deliver those services directly, if it is convenient in a cost and administrative way, then it will do so, but in many cases we found that it is better to approach it with this type of flexibility.

So, in short to the member's question, yes, we have been able to reduce administrative costs very dramatically and provide a better service to the clients. That, of course, has necessitated an increase in some professional fees, but that increase has been well justified by the return, as indicated in the figures.

Ms. Barrett: I understand what the minister is saying. The figures, not only for the annual report but also back to the Estimates book for the projected financial statements through 1998-99 show the same thing happening, that Salaries will decrease substantially--substantially--and Professional Fees will increase.

So what the minister is saying in effect, if I am not wrong, is that the Salaries line is for civil servants. The Professional Fees line is for contract, outside civil service individuals or organizations, and if that is accurate, then that says a great deal to me about the fact that the OSD is going to have retained earnings at the end of the year of almost $87,000.

It seems to me that an argument could be made that much of that comes on the backs of reduction in civil servants and an increase in payment to private, professional, outside contract individuals.

What I am asking is, I know the minister and I will disagree on the philosophy of this, but I want actually just a clarification that that is actually what is happening, and again, a request for the minister to give me a list of those external contractors or individuals that make up the Professional Fees category of this, so we can see who is being paid outside of the civil service to do what civil servants used to do.

Mr. Toews: Firstly, in respect of the issue of the decrease in terms of the civil servants positions and the increase, a corresponding increase, in the professional fees, what we have to look at, I think, as a special operating agency, is what service is required and how that service can be delivered in a cost-efficient way and in an effective way. In fact, that is what we are looking at. Let us not look at who is delivering the particular service. Let us make sure that the service delivered is the best service possible. So that has been, in fact, the concentration, looking at the best service possible. I believe that the statistics indicate, in fact, that that service delivery has been very efficient and very effective. The fact that one might be able to hire civil servants to do a particular job and then the market changes and those skills are no longer present in fact is not doing anyone a favour.

(Mr. Chairperson in the Chair)

The way we are doing it is doing it on a very cost-efficient basis by in fact brokering for the services as the need arises. One cannot anticipate in the future what type of services will suddenly become in demand. For example, if a particular public sector employer suddenly needs a large increase in employees, well, yes, the Civil Service could well hire all types of civil servants to deliver that program. On the other hand, especially if it is a temporary kind of situation, it would be foolhardy to hire permanent civil servants for a program that would be of short duration where that program could be delivered without the government incurring the administrative cost. The important thing is that the government is there through this SOA to deliver those services.

In respect of the contractors who the SOA deals with in brokering those services, I believe that that information is available, and I will bring that forward for the member.

* (1630)

Ms. Barrett: Just one question, the last question on this area is, what happens to the retained earnings at the end of the year, which are 86.7? Do they go back into the SOA or general operating account, or what happens to them?

Mr. Toews: Yes, the member is correct. A portion of that goes to the special operating agency so that it can invest in technology and that type of thing to enable it to market its services much the way that any enterprise does. The portion that does not go back to the SOA goes to general revenue, I assume, to retire the debt or for other government purposes.

Ms. Barrett: Is there a particular formula that determines what percentage of the retained earnings stay with the SOA and what are rebated to the government?

Mr. Toews: My recollection is that that is in the legislation itself that authorizes the setting up of SOAs. I direct the member, Mr. Chair, to that legislation. If there are any questions that she may have after reading that legislation, I would be prepared to at least give her the information that I have. I do not have that information here available, but I think the request is a reasonable one as to how that amount is apportioned.

Mr. Chairperson: Will the item pass? The item is accordingly passed.

Resolution 17.1: RESOLVED that there be granted to Her Majesty a sum not exceeding $4,164,100 for Civil Service Commission for the fiscal year ending the 31st day of March, 1997.

This concludes the department of Civil Service. We will now move on to the Department of Natural Resources.

Is it the will of the committee to take a recess until we get the minister here?

Some Honourable Members: No.

Mr. Chairperson: No, okay, we will wait for the minister.