Crown Corporations - Issue No. 2 - Tuesday, September 11, 2001

2001 Legislative Session: 2nd Session, 37th Parliament
SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON CROWN CORPORATIONS
MINUTES AND HANSARD

Present: Ken Stewart, MLA (Chair); Dave Hayer, MLA; Ida Chong, MLA; Arnie Hamilton, MLA; Randy Hawes, MLA; Pat Bell, MLA; Daniel Jarvis, MLA; John Wilson, MLA; John Nuraney, MLA

Unavoidably Absent: Bill Bennett, MLA (Deputy Chair); Joy MacPhail, MLA

1. The Chair called the Committee to order at 10:04 a.m.

2. The Committee observed a moment of silence in remembrance of the tragic loss of life in the United States today.

3. The following witnesses appeared before the Committee and answered questions:

4. The Committee discussed the development of a systematic methodology to review the performance and activities of Crown Corporations following the completion of the Core Review Process. The Committee also reviewed its upcoming meeting schedule.

5. The Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair at 11:29 a.m.

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE
ON CROWN CORPORATIONS



CONTENTS

		Page

Briefing by Crown Agencies Secretariat		13
	Overview of Crown Agencies Secretariat	13
	Overview of Crown Corporations	14
	Sharon Halkett, Acting Chief Executive Officer
	Darlene Harris-Williams, Acting Director, Governance and Accountability

Terms of Reference and Meeting Schedule		19

Chair:	* Ken Stewart (Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows L)
Deputy Chair:	Bill Bennett (East Kootenay L)
Members:	* Pat Bell (Prince George North L) * Ida Chong (Oak Bay–Gordon Head L) * Arnie Hamilton (Esquimalt-Metchosin L) * Randy Hawes (Maple Ridge–Mission L) * Dave Hayer (Surrey-Tynehead L) * Daniel Jarvis (North Vancouver–Seymour L) * John Nuraney (Burnaby-Willingdon L) * John Wilson (Cariboo North L) Joy MacPhail (Vancouver-Hastings NDP) * denotes member present


Witnesses:	Sharon Halkett (Acting Chief Executive Officer, Crown Agencies Secretariat) Darlene Harris-Williams (Crown Agencies Secretariat)

K. Stewart (Chair): Good morning, everyone. We'd like to get started now. Obviously, it's been a bit of an extraordinary day today, and there are a few members that won't be able to make it today due to plane cancellations out of Vancouver. Before we get into the workings of the meeting, Dave Hayer has made a request, so I'll just turn it over to him.

D. Hayer: Mr. Chairman and fellow members, I'd like to request that we hold a 30-second silence and prayer for the hundreds and maybe thousands of innocent people killed this morning in the United States by the act of terrorism.

K. Stewart (Chair): I'm certain that would be acceptable to the committee. Proceed.

Thank you. I'd also like to request of my colleagues and have them encourage their friends and also their constituents — they have a shortage of blood right now in the States — to try to donate some blood and have that directed toward the States, where they need it.

K. Stewart (Chair): It truly is a bit of an extraordinary day today with the events in the United States. Unfortunately, that's continuing on, but we'll be continuing on here too.

K. Stewart (Chair): We'll move into our first agenda item. Before we get started, just a couple of questions that were asked and brought up at the last meeting. If you look at your agenda, we're going to start with a briefing from the Crown agencies secretariat. Sharon Halkett will be doing that for us, and hopefully, that will answer some of the questions that came up with regard to the last meeting.

After she has concluded, we'll have questions. Then I'll do a bit of an update as to some of the information and direction on where I believe we should be moving with this committee, based on the information I've gotten in interviews over the last two weeks. It's becoming clearer on a plan for this committee, and hopefully, with Sharon's presentation, that will bring us a bit up to speed. If we can just continue at this time with Sharon Halkett.

S. Halkett: Darlene is just providing a couple of handouts for your review. The first is actually the overview I'm going to go over with you at a very high level. The second piece of information is more specific documentation that you can review at your leisure. If you have any questions in terms of any of it, please do not hesitate to call me or Darlene at the secretariat.

In terms of the overview, which I'm going to focus on, the first page — the second overhead — basically talks about the outline of what I'm going to talk about today. Fundamentally, I'm going to talk about two areas.

Firstly, because of the existence of the Crown agencies secretariat, I thought that it would be opportune to give you a very brief overview on what the secretariat is about and what its priorities are for this fiscal year. I think it's important that you have that background so that you can see the potential linkages to the mandate of this committee.

Secondly, the rest of my presentation will be a very high level overview of the Crown corporations of the province, as a starting point, and we can certainly get into more detail in the coming months with respect to specific Crown interests.

Moving along to page 2, the Crown agencies secretariat — the first bullet there, as you can see — was originally the Crown corporations secretariat, and the role has now been expanded. The secretariat originally was somewhat of a think tank, and it dealt primarily with the formal Crown corporations of the province.

The new agency secretariat has a role in terms of oversight and other functions, which I'll get into in a minute, to a total of over 700 agencies, boards, commissions and Crown corporations. We're still trying to sort out, over the coming months, those agencies we'll have actual oversight for and the balance of which will be managed through the ministries of the province.

The new secretariat is under the Premier's office, and the intent is for the secretariat to play a strategic and a performance-enhancement role for Crown corporations and those agencies, boards and commissions that eventually come under the oversight of the secretariat.

Having said that, the secretariat is not focusing on micro-issues. It is focusing on macro-issues, and it will be involved in providing advice on strategic direction to Crown agencies, developing various frameworks and guidelines, some of which are relevant to this committee. Really, we'll be focusing on facilitating the sharing of best and good practices with respect to performance enhancement, strategic planning and performance measurement.

The secretariat is fairly busy at the moment. The primary focus is, as outlined on slide No. 4, on the mandate, the core review and the restructuring of Crown agencies in the province. We're going to be involved in that activity in terms of the mandate reviews of all these agencies as well as the alternative service delivery and organizational modelling until the end of January. Then, between January and the end of the fiscal year, we'll be taking the results of those analyses of core review and working with the agencies to build implementation strategies that will then be incorporated into the Crown agency service plans for next year and beyond.

We're also involved in governance frameworks. We're actually reviewing Crown corporation and agency governance frameworks. Our intent is to build

some new, revised frameworks between now and the end of October. We're also working with many Crown corporations in achieving the commitments in New Era and working with the Crowns in terms of impact analyses, etc., around things like changes in legislation and other commitments the government has made.

In addition to that, under the Budget Transparency and Accountability Amendment Act, 2001, there have been some legislative changes in this area that have impacts on service plans and performance measurement. We have struck some cross-Crown committees in both service plans and annual reports to provide new guidelines on these important documents. We're also the gateway to the Crown corporations in terms of the fiscal forecasting of all the Crown corporations of the province and are actively involved in the budget process for the coming years and the setting of long-term financial targets that will apply to all the Crown corporations.

Lastly, we are taking a look at the performance measurement systems of all of the Crown corporations, and we'll be coming up with a set of new guidelines that will be applied throughout the Crowns. So in terms of our actual fiscal year-end accomplishments and where we want to be at the end of the year, as is outlined on page 3 and in overheads 5 and 6, we're currently working on a new strategic framework for the Crowns which will define the difference — a contemporary approach to the various Crown agencies in the province. It will also identify the criteria for their creation and dissolution in the province as well as how all of these agencies fit into the overall system of government. To support that, we are building these new governance frameworks for Crown corporations and Crown agencies.

As I've already mentioned, the service plans and the guidelines will be built shortly, and the measurement systems will be updated. Between now and January 31 we will have completed phase 1 and phase 2 of the core review.

On page 4 you can see — I hope I'm on page 4; let me just check here. I've got two different sets of slides here. Page 4 at the top, on the seventh overhead there, basically lays out the main initiatives between now and the end of the year and actually into the next fiscal. Most of them, as you can see, will be completed by February in terms of core review guidelines, governance frameworks and annual reports. The annual reports actually need to be tabled in the summer for this previous fiscal year, so we will also be working with Crown corporations and reviewing their annual reports subsequent to the end of the fiscal.

That's basically the secretariat. I guess my main message here is that between now and the end of January, the secretariat is going to be very busy with the core review and putting in place the foundations for good governance and reporting. That will impact this committee down the road as you review service plans and performance measurements, etc.

The second part of what I wanted to deal with today is a very high level overview on the Crown corporations themselves. That starts on page 4 at the bottom in slide 8. If you looked at the Crown corporations as a whole, basically, for the most part, they're designated in two principal categories. They're either self-supported — you will hear the term "commercial Crown corporations" — or they're tax supported. Commercial Crown corporations generate revenues from the sales of services. They pay their own operating expenses, including their debt-servicing charges. Tax-supported Crown corporations, on the other hand, generally depend on provincial government subsidies or designated revenue sources.

If you can see on page 5, major Crowns would include who you would expect: B.C. Hydro, B.C. Rail, ICBC and B.C. Lottery Corporation. On the tax-supported side there are several; many of them are fairly small. The larger Crowns include B.C. Ferry Corporation and B.C. Buildings Corporation. For the rest of the presentation here, I thought I would just give you some high-level facts around some of the major Crown corporations, both commercial and tax-supported, by way of introduction, and we can go from there.

B.C. Hydro is basically the third-largest electrical utility in Canada. You can see the customers there, in excess of 1.5 million. In terms of the energy that it generates, it's outlined there. It has a fairly large infrastructure component, including 30 installations, three thermal generating plants and diesel generating stations. Its net income last year was about $446 million. Its FTE count at the moment is about 5,700. And its main subsidiary, which I'm sure many of you have followed in the news, is Powerex, in terms of energy exports.

ICBC is another commercial Crown. Its lines of business, as I'm sure many of you are familiar with, include auto insurance claims, road safety, auto crime prevention, licensing and compliance. Its net income last year — it is a calendar-based as opposed to fiscal-based Crown — was $139 million. It has a large FTE component of over 6,000 employees. The policies issued are in excess of $2.6 million. The claims are about half of that, at $1 million plus. The total claims, as you can see there, in terms of outstanding liabilities, as I understand it, is $1.74 billion.

B.C. Rail is actually the B.C. Rail Group of Companies. It comprises the third-largest freight and passenger regional railway in Canada. Eighty percent of its revenues are generated from the transport of forestry and agricultural products. In 2000 it had a net loss of about $7 million. It, too, has a large FTE component of just under 2,000 employees. Its main subsidiary is BCR Marine. As well, it has stevedoring services and owns a truck hauling company. It is a very diversified company at the moment.

The B.C. Lottery Corporation currently oversees and manages lotteries, casinos and electronic bingo. Its lottery network is outlined there, in terms of its retail locations; I think there are about 2,600 of them. There are also about 1,200 social gaming retailers. It has 16 community casinos and two destination casinos, with in excess of a couple of thousand slot machines there, as well as electronic bingo sites throughout the prov-

ince. I think there are ten of them. Its net income last year — again, this is a fiscal Crown corporation — was $562 million. Its FTE component is much smaller than the rest at only 614.

In terms of major tax-supported Crowns, we've just outlined a couple of them at a high level for you. B.C. Ferries — you're all familiar with its ferry fleet. Basically, there are approximately 40 vessels — I hope this is the right number — which support 36 routes in the province. There are 47 terminals owned, again, by the corporation, and seven other land sites. The transport of passengers is large, having transported over 21,000 passengers and over 7,800 vehicles in 2000. It has a large FTE component, at slightly greater than 3,300. It is also one of the major hirers of youth during the summer, as is the PNE. Its net income is about $11 million. Revenues per passenger are outlined at $16.66, and expenses are about $20.

The other tax-supported Crown — a little nearer and dearer to my heart, as I am on secondment from there — is B.C. Buildings Corporation. It's located in eight districts throughout the province. It manages over 3,500 buildings, or 2.4 million square meters. It is the largest commercial holder of real estate in the province of British Columbia. It owns about 60 percent of that 3,500. Its net income last year was $51 million. Its FTEs are about 858 here. It's largely a management corporation. It contracts out 80 percent of its services throughout the province and actually provides some shared services to some other public sector agencies currently.

Over the years, one of its main goals has been to reduce the building occupancy charges as a portion of the ministries' overall operating budgets. It monitors those performance indicators on a regular basis. It has a very small vacancy rate, significantly below the private sector throughout the province, and has been a major contributor to energy-saving throughout the province.

The next section deals with the relationships of Crown corporations and agencies to the government's major reporting entity, which includes public accounts and the relationship to the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. You will at some stage, as you review these Crowns, be dealing with both the public accounts and the impacts from the BTAA. I thought it was important for you to understand the definitions and the framework that are used around Crown corporations and agencies for purposes of reporting. As it is outlined there in item 16, for purposes of government reporting, Crown corporations and agencies are included that are owned and controlled by government and established to be accountable to government for the administration of their financial affairs and resources. The reason I point this out is that in terms of the public accounts, etc., the reporting is only focused on 57 Crown corporations and agencies that are considered separate legal entities. The remainder — and I come back to my earlier comment about the 700-plus agency, boards and commissions of the province — are all reported and covered through the budgets of the individual ministries.

Within the general reporting entity, 34 of the Crown corporations are included. Of these, ten are now inactive. There are fundamentally 24 that are going to continue to be reported on in the future. In addition to the more formal Crown corporations that I've talked about as being tax supported or commercial, there are three other Crown corporations that are not in the GRE but that the government has significant influence over, which you should be aware of. One is the WCB, the other is the Pension Corporation, and the last one is the Investment Management Corporation. It's important for you to recognize that even within the entity, there are certain exclusions for reporting purposes.

In terms of the Crown corporations that are part of the reporting entity, we've just laid out for you in item 18 a list of both the self-supported and the taxpayer-supported Crown entities that are reported on. That's for your information.

On the next slide, we've just given you a list of those entities, the Crown entities, that are inactive and/or are winding up. Some of them are winding up as a result of core review. In terms of Forest Renewal, it is being looked at as part of core review, as is the B.C. Transportation Financing Authority. The rest of these are in various modes of windup from previous directions.

I should also point out that transactions between government and Crowns in the GRE are reflected in the consolidated revenue fund. You'll see here references to that, and that's the linkage. The combined financial results of the government and Crowns are reported in the government's summary financial statements, for your information. So that should become clearer. Do you want to mention that, Darlene?

D. Harris-Williams: We've taken some extracts from the public accounts which reflect information on Crown corporations and circulated it as a handout with the presentation.

S. Halkett: Basically, there are just a couple of more things I'd like to say. On the next overhead here, we've just shown you the magnitude of the revenues and expenses of the Crown corporations. As you can see, the revenues are fairly substantial to the province, at $15.2 billion. The expenses are around $14 billion; net income is $1.1 billion. FTEs — over 21,000 employees work for the Crown agencies of the province, the Crown corporations primarily. Assets are in the neighbourhood of $24 billion, and purchases are at $2 billion.

Then we've outlined for you the net income, in some pie charts that show you the relative contribution of Crown corporations in the province. As you can see, in terms of net income, the largest contributor is the Lottery Corporation, followed by B.C. Hydro and then followed by ICBC. The rest of the Crowns are lumped into about 3 percent, with B.C. Rail actually being in a negative position for 2000-01.

Again, on the next page, in terms of combined revenues, in terms of the total of $15.2 billion, you again see a slightly different evaluation based on percentage totals. You can see there that Hydro is providing 51 percent of the total, followed by ICBC. The others are playing a much greater role, which are all lumped together, and then the Lottery Corporation….

The last slide on the next page, slide 24, basically, I just thought I'd provide for you…. It's kind of an interesting…. It just takes a look at, over time, where the commercial Crowns are going vis-à-vis their net income in relation to the taxpayer-supported Crowns. As you can see, in '98-99 there were significant issues with some of the tax-supported Crowns. So that's just for your information.

Moving along at a higher level now, recognizing the time, in terms of performance plans and annual reports, I just wanted to kind of close the loop on 2000-01, so you're aware of where we're going with this. For those Crown corporations that were inactive or winding up, there were basically only non-compliant statements prepared. There weren't any performance plans per se.

The performance plans for 2001-02 for the remainder of all the existing Crown corporations and agencies were tabled in the Legislature. All of these performance plans are on the secretariat website as well as on the corporate websites. We had issued guidelines for performance plans for the Crowns that had been reflected in 2000-01. For the coming year we are building those guidelines, as I said earlier. The auditor general is currently in the process of doing a review on last year's performance plans.

In terms of annual plans, again, guidelines were issued by the secretariat. We are going to rebuild those guidelines in light of adjustments to the BTA Act, etc. The annual reports continue to be tabled in the House and be placed on the websites, as are the performance plans. The annual reports are also being reviewed. A select group of Crowns' annual reports are also being reviewed by the auditor general. Again, we have a cross-Crown committee going to be set up to look at the annual reports as well as the performance plans. The latter is now underway.

So I guess the bottom line is that we've got a lot of activity going on. We're very much engaged in the core review process at the moment and will be engaged, to a large extent, between now and the end of January. The staff are pretty well engaged in that activity full time. As well, on the governance framework, we're building that, as I said, and we're working on the service plans, because the service plans will be issued in February, and we need to have our Crown corporations consistent with the BTA Act and the guidelines.

K. Stewart (Chair): Thank you very much for your presentation. I'd like to now open it up to members for any questions that they would have with regards to the presentation you just received. If we can just start a list. We'll go with Ida first.

I. Chong: Thank you for the presentation. I just wondered if you could provide this committee with either a summary or perhaps the criteria upon which those Crown corporations or agencies have separate external auditors versus those Crown corporations or agencies which are audited by the auditor general's office. Is that fairly straightforward information that we can receive?

S. Halkett: Two things on that. Those Crowns that have legislation do basically identify the requirements for auditors, so there isn't a problem with us providing that information. We could. I don't have it today.

I. Chong: But in general, of the 700-plus agencies and Crowns, I would not suspect that each and every one of them is required to be audited. Some without statutory authority can proceed without a financial audit, as I understand it. I'm just wondering. I don't need that information now, but perhaps it could be provided to the committee at a future time as we start our deliberations, just to get an understanding of those that have the auditor general's oversight, those that have external auditors' oversight and those that have no oversight in terms of auditing performance.

S. Halkett: One of the things we are doing is trying to build this new government's framework. I just want to be clear on your question. Are you interested in knowing that for the Crown corporations, the tax-supported and the commercial Crowns?

S. Halkett: We're trying to get a handle on all of the agencies, boards and commissions in the province. Really, we haven't got a handle on that at the moment.

I. Chong: That was my basis. I just think it would help our committee as we proceed in the future.

K. Stewart (Chair): Just leading off from that, if I may interject, as we get up to the Chairman's update, there are some process issues I'd like to talk about with the committee that will be part of that — how we're going to do our evaluation and the type of information we need to do that. Hopefully, later in the meeting, as we continue through our agenda, we'll have some opportunity to discuss that.

P. Bell: A couple of questions, Sharon. First, with regards to B.C. Ferries, I note the revenue per passenger is $16.66; the expense per passenger is $20.62 and the net income is $11 million. I would presume that the differential there is a result of the tax or the subsidy from general revenue.

The second question is on WCB. I gather it's not part of the Budget Transparency and Accountability Act. Why was that established? Was there a reason at some point in time?

D. Harris-Williams: The process is that the office of the comptroller general has some criteria that they use. In consultation with the office of the auditor general, they will determine which Crown corporations meet the criteria and therefore should be covered by the BTAA and be part of the government reporting entity.

The Workers Compensation Board didn't meet the criteria. I think there are two sets that are used. One is whether they are owned and controlled by the government by virtue of representation on the boards of directors and their source of funding. I think that at the time when that was looked at, it was determined that they didn't meet those criteria.

The office of the comptroller general is currently going to be reviewing again all the agencies, boards and commissions that are not part of the GRE, to make a determination of what additions should be made. I think part of that process will require another look at the organizations and at the Workers Compensation Board. But as you would appreciate, I think there are 700-some-odd ABCs to go through, so it will take some time.

P. Bell: So those criteria are established through legislation. Is that right?

D. Harris-Williams: No. I think the criteria are basically accounting standards that are determined in consultation with the office of the auditor general.

P. Bell: Okay. I guess the final question I have is: given the core review program, with a view to trying to eliminate duplication that may occur with this committee, what role do you see, Sharon? What direction should we go, with a view to eliminating any duplication that may occur?

S. Halkett: Mr. Chair, would you like me to deal with this now, or do you want to have that discussion later?

K. Stewart (Chair): I believe I'll just interject and say that this is part of the update that we'll be talking about. I would just like to say that since our last meeting, I've met with a number of different people involved with the other processes, and my intention today was to first allow Sharon to make her presentation. We could ask questions with regard to that, knowing that if you look on the agenda….

I probably should have gone over the agenda first, mind you, but given the earlier events and the start to the meeting I neglected to do that. But if you look down the agenda, in the update and then further to the meeting schedules and some of the items that we're going to be dealing with, I believe the core review and some of the other activities that are going on now will become more evident as to how we should deal with them and allow them to take their course, so we're not duplicating work. That's out of some of the questions that came up from the last meeting, which will be answered at that time. So if you could beg our indulgence as we continue with this, and then we will get back to that. Thank you.

D. Hayer: My question is regarding…. If you look at page 12, which talks about the Crown corporation historical trends, No. 23, the taxpayer-supported part, for the year '99-2000, they were in a loss. And in the year 2000-01 they were just a little bit over break-even. Do you have any idea where we will be heading this year or in the next few years? Also, do you have some ideas why there were big losses in those years? When you take a look at other years before that, they always sort of balanced or there was always a positive side.

S. Halkett: I'm going to let Darlene answer this, as she put this trend together, and then I'll come back to the second part of your question.

D. Harris-Williams: I think basically, in a couple of the prior years, there were some losses and re-evaluation of assets done for some of the major corporations — B.C. Ferries, B.C. Rail, in particular. Over the next two or three years, I think the Ministry of Finance is currently trying to come up with a forecast, and I don't think we have any details at this time as to where it is going to be.

S. Halkett: I just want to add to that. That is the exercise that we're into now in terms of the consolidated financials of the province: where do we want Crown corporations to sit in the next few years? So we are working through how we can put in place a process with the Crowns to articulate future downstream financial results and outcomes so that we can basically roll up all the Crowns, and we know where they will sit in relation to the government's overall fiscal picture.

So that's what we're sorting out. Ask me that question in a couple of months once we've done a bit more work, and I'll be able to give you a more definitive answer.

J. Nuraney: You made a remark earlier on that you have not got a handle on all the 700 agencies and Crown corporations.

J. Nuraney: I would like to find out what happened. How come, when the secretariat is responsi-

ble…? I presume it's your mandate to make sure that these corporations are operating within the guidelines and are operating in a businesslike manner. How come we somehow got lost in the process and lost control?

S. Halkett: Oh, okay. My point was that historically the Crown corporations secretariat itself did not have accountability for all the agencies, boards and commissions in the province, but only those that came under the reporting entity. It just changed last year. The secretariat used to just have primarily accountability for the Crown corporations. It then went to the broader entity base — to the 56 entities — and that was last year. And now the mandate has been expanded with the new government to include the agencies, boards and commissions — the rest of them.

In terms of the information being lost or clarity around the balance, that responsibility has primarily rested with the ministries. It's been rolled up with all of the ministry information. So now we're taking a look at it and saying: "Well, how can we best manage, from an oversight perspective, all of the agency, boards and commissions and corporations in an integrated way?"

My sense at the moment is that, for the most part, most of the agencies, boards and commissions will continue to be managed through the ministries. The role that the secretariat will play is ensuring that we have appropriate governance frameworks and performance and measurement plans, etc., in place so that we have a better handle on being able to evaluate their performance and where they're positioned in the government. We're just really in the early stages or sorting out an appropriate oversight role. It wasn't lost in the process; it was just a different accountability before this secretariat's role was adjusted.

R. Hawes: My question is…. Maybe you can't answer it; I'm not sure. It actually comes from the other document, the consolidated revenue fund. On page 73, adjusted net income of Crown corporations…. Just so I understand what I'm reading here…. It's got policy adjustments and equity adjustments. I wonder if you can explain that. What would be an example of a policy adjustment?

D. Harris-Williams: I would not be able to provide a lot of detail here. What we did was look at the public accounts that were issued and attempt to pull for your information the sections that had references to Crown corporations. There are some definitions attached, which should assist you.

D. Harris-Williams: Yeah. That particular one isn't there. We can assist you in getting that information. I know that for the equity adjustments, part of it was looking at a re-evaluation of assets, looking at changes in the value there. The policy adjustments…. I don't think we have that information here.

R. Hawes: Some of them are fairly sizeable, and I would be very curious to see what those are.

I. Chong: I just thought, perhaps to shed some light…. Usually in policy adjustment changes…. One more recently was the pension accounting policy change. That could have affected some of the Crowns; it may not have. That's just an example of accounting policy change that may have an impact on the bottom line as to what their net income is or their net loss is. It may not make a material effect in terms of cash flow, but it will in reporting. Just for your benefit, that might have been it. If Sharon and Darlene find it otherwise, I'm sure they'll enlighten us.

D. Harris-Williams: TransLink is not part of the government reporting entity.

J. Nuraney: So the capital expenditure is accounted for in this accounting here? The operational…now is TransLink. Is that the distinction?

R. Hawes: I do notice that…. It's still under BCTFA, I think. The transfers of the collections that we make in gas taxes…. Whatever transfers are being made back to TransLink are reported here under "consolidated."

K. Stewart (Chair): Just to clarify that particular point, currently there is B.C. Transit operating outside of the GVTA, though. That's still a significant portion of that.

K. Stewart (Chair): Any further questions for Sharon at this point in time? I'd just like to thank you very much for your presentation. You're certainly welcome to stay and listen to the rest of the meeting.

I'd just like now to move on, if I may, to a bit of an update. As you probably became aware as Sharon was going through her presentation, there has definitely been a historical relationship between her organization and the Crown corporations. One of the things that has become a bit evident as I've been going through the process, meeting with various people in the last couple of weeks to get a handle on our mandate and some of the other activities that are going out that will affect us parallel to what we're doing here, is that the secretariat took over the role that the previous committee for Crown corporations used to carry, in the sense that there was a committee for oversight of Crown corporations in the 1980s for a few years. After that, the secretariat was formed.

I think it's important to understand the formation of that secretariat and some of the activities surrounding that. If I could just look back to Sharon for one more moment and ask if you would like to give some comment on the role that the secretariat took over from the committee before, if you have any historical knowledge with regards to that.

S. Halkett: Basically, when the previous committee was no longer in effect, any of the oversight creative thinking around the Crown corporations then was provided by the old Crown corporations secretariat. So it filled a void in terms of the shareholders' priorities and linkages to central agencies.

K. Stewart (Chair): One of the things that came up at the last meeting, which was quite a concern expressed by many of the members, was the duplication of our work with regards to some of the other committees — the core review, the public accounts.

One of the outside issues that was a concern to myself, which was expressed by some of the other members, was our tenure, as the committee was struck at the last session to go to the next session. The intention has been clarified to me as the Chair that the committee will be continuing on. So we don't have just a four-month period, as some of the other committees do, to report back with regards to all the Crown corporations and what they're doing.

That gave us a better plan for our time, in looking at the duplication that we could possibly get ourselves involved with over the next month, by going right into looking at the Crown corporations that are definitely under heavy scrutiny right now. They're under review; we have new boards on. It made more sense, given the extended tenure that we have, to look at a systematic way of interviewing and looking at these organizations as they come up, after they've had the process of the current scrutiny and reorganizations that are going on.

That certainly helped with a bit of a focus for this committee with regards to our basic mandate, which, as we all know, is fairly broad: to oversee the Crown corporations. I see this committee defining its role as it moves along over the next months, and actually years, and as some of the other changes take place within organizations such as the Crown corporations secretariat, etc., there will be adjustments back to this committee with longer-term responsibilities. That's the general information that I've gathered in talking to a number of different groups.

That leads us to what the short-term objectives and then the longer-term objectives of this committee should be. Given the fact that most of the Crown corporations are in this major transition — the major corporations, especially — it's my opinion that we should allow that work to go on before we start bringing those groups under heavy scrutiny. This reflects what I heard from the committee at our first meeting. I just wonder if there are any further comments to that before I move on.

K. Stewart (Chair): Okay. That's encouraging to know that we had the same concerns and that we're moving in the same direction. That leads us to where we're going to go in the short term. In the short term, I look between now and the end of the year. One of the more important things for us, I believe, is to be informed of what's gone on in the past and some of the historical information of how these organizations were generated, what the purposes behind it were and some of the other experiences that other agencies such as the auditor general have had in overseeing and doing their work with audits and into some of the agencies.

The intention I'm going to put out for discussion is that we have a meeting in October where we can be brought up to speed on some of the other processes that have taken place with regards to Crown corporations and some of the methodology they use dealing with Crowns. At the same time the Crown corporations will have the opportunity to be dealing with the core review and some of the other public accounts that are mandatory to do at this point in time. As mentioned in the presentation that Sharon put forward to us, there was a group of agencies that were inactive or winding up. These are either organizations that have been decided upon and would be winding up — and that has been publicly announced — or are agencies that have basically been put on hold for review.

I don't believe it makes a lot of sense for us to spend a lot of time, as Randy indicated last time, in dealing with boards or agencies that may not be here in six months or may have a totally different configuration by the time we're really prepared to deal with

them after the core review. I don't think we should waste a lot of time in dealing with those either.

So the intention would be that we meet in October and deal with that information to update us and educate us. I look at it as almost a Crown corporations 202 course for us to look at some of the other methodologies that have been practised with other organizations. There have also been some reports that have come from the auditor general and other agencies, which have pinpointed areas of concern with regards to governance and other aspects of Crown corporations that we may want to look at in our process of interviewing the corporations down the road.

At this time, as we move on with that, I would also like to introduce a person that will be working with our committee: Josie Schofield. Josie, would you just like to take a minute to tell us about yourself and how you view your role with this particular committee.

J. Schofield: I've been assigned to be the committee's research analyst, which basically means that I'm here as an information resource for the committee members. If you have requests for information, hopefully I will process them quickly. For example, I hope all members did receive a copy of the list that I put together. I also have a role in terms of drafting committee reports for the committee to consider. I'm here, really, as a resource to do research analysis and writing.

Being proactive, I have actually arranged for the committee members to receive a copy of the office of the auditor general's report on Crown governance, and that's going to arrive this afternoon.

So Josie will be working with our committee, providing us with some of the background information we need.

Again, one of the long-term goals is that we end up with a process where we can make the Crown corporations accountable not only to us but to the public — and somewhat more visible in what they do. Many other members have expressed to me that they don't really understand what certain Crown corporations do and how and why they operate. Out of the core process, I think a lot of these questions will be answered, but there will be a need to follow up on that and to look at: are they being effective in doing what they're mandated to do? That oversight process, I believe, will become one of the long-term objectives of this committee: very simply, to ensure that the Crown corporations are meeting the needs of the people of British Columbia.

R. Hawes: I'm not expecting an answer today, but maybe you could, as you talk with whoever you're talking to before our next meeting…. The core review process is not a public process.

R. Hawes: And this is a very public process. Somehow the information that comes out of that core review process, if it's going to be used here, needs to move into the public venue. Maybe you could discuss with whoever how that information will flow.

K. Stewart (Chair): That's one topic that has been discussed. There's a lot of the core process that is public now. You can go to the Web page, and the mandate is all there. As that information is released to the public and is available for public release, we will be able to utilize it in this meeting structure. Again, we are aware that the core process is an ongoing process. We're certainly not here to second-guess what the core process will determine, and we certainly aren't here to be releasing information that isn't ready to be released. I don't believe that's our role.

We are certainly aware of the fact that the activities and the outcome of the core process will greatly affect those organizations that we have to deal with. That is one of the reasons that I'm suggesting to this committee that we wait until that process is well underway and those changes have been made, so we're not dealing with an organization in transition. We're actually going to be dealing with an organization that has some idea as to where it's going to be going, what its mandate is and what effect that core process has already had upon it. So again, we're not dealing with an organization that's in full transition, but we know where it's at, what its mandate is. Does that help clarify that for you?

R. Hawes: To an extent. I would still be interested to know, at some stage, if there's a Crown corporation that's evolved into something slightly different or whatever, the approach that was taken and the reasons that happened — you know, knowing some specifics about what processes took place in the core review with those specific Crown corporations, if there were changes made. I think that would help us have an understanding of where they're supposed to be going.

K. Stewart (Chair): Part of the rationale of having the secretariat here today was with the relationship that organization has with those Crowns and specifically with regards to the core review. I'm sure they will be very sensitive to the type of information that's being released — that it's relevant to what's being released to the public — because this is a public forum, as we're all aware.

S. Halkett: Yes. I think it comes back to the earlier comment about the linkages between the core review and the accountabilities of this committee. At some stage the revised mandates, as I understand it, will become clear and will require some release at the public level. When that occurs, I think it will be appropriate to discuss the adjustments in the mandates and also how those adjustments then will link up to future service and performance planning activities of these

As I said earlier, the mandate reviews of Crown corporations will be finished at high level by the end of November, assuming there's no slippage in the agenda. The actual impacts of those mandate reviews, in terms of service delivery and core businesses, won't be completed until the end of January. At this stage I'm not sure when the information will be released, but it won't be released for some time. When it is, I think there is an issue of linkage of what has been decided upon and what that then translates into for the future state of these Crowns. The role here would be one of ensuring that the future service delivery plans are in fact in line with those revisions.

K. Stewart (Chair): Just talking about the importance of the core review, one of the agencies that will be under core review will be the Crown agencies secretariat. So there may be some results of that particular organization which will have an effect on the operation of this committee.

Again, the intention of this committee is to be around for a while so that we have the opportunity to get this committee educated, in the sense of what's happened in the past with regard to those inquiries and the type of methodologies that are used for that. It also gives us an opportunity, which I am suggesting we do in our October meeting, to strike a subcommittee to do a template for the interviews, so we get that methodology down. That will come at the end of the information session so that we're more knowledgeable about the topic.

The other ongoing process I would like to suggest to the committee is that there is a lot of information that's available to us electronically either on the Web or through Josie's research, etc., which I think will be very beneficial for us leading up to our design of that methodology for the inquiries.

Following that, suggesting the October meeting, I would look to a meeting in November, where the subcommittee that has been struck in the October meeting can report back with a draft of the methodology we could use. That subcommittee will report to us any impacts of the core update that could also be related to this committee, if they were available at that time. Again, we have to be sensitive in that whole process, but it is key to what we're doing.

The other suggestion I would have for the committee is to work with the secretariat, which is doing the core reviews for the Crown corporations, as to which of the Crown corporations are ready to come before us. What Crown corporations have got their mandate, have been through the core review and are in a position where they're in the planning process and where it's solid enough that they're prepared to come before us?

Sharon and I talked about that earlier. Again, Sharon, would you like to comment further on that?

S. Halkett: Yes. I think the main issue here is the timing in terms of when the government feels comfortable with public disclosure of those mandates. Once that's sorted out, then I think there is an opportunity to have some dialogue with the Crowns in terms of their revised mandates, if that's the case, or a continuation of their current mandates. It really depends on when the government does make a decision around greater public disclosure.

J. Nuraney: I'm just seeking some clarification. If you look at the mandate of this committee, I think it is simply to review the annual reporting and performance plans. I don't think it is within our mandate to recommend the viability of Crown corporations. In reviewing the performance plans, once again we have to be careful that they are meeting the original mandate for which they were created. I wonder if to deviate from any of this is part of our mandate.

K. Stewart (Chair): I wouldn't be so limiting in my comments, and again, I'll leave it up to the committee to further discuss this. I'm sure that as we move through our development as a committee, as we go through this process, we'll have a better idea as to the types of information we want to report back to the Legislature. That is the mandate of this committee: to report back to the Legislature.

Because the core review is so big within those organizations, it doesn't necessarily mean that when they report to us, they have to divulge the core review. They have a mandate, and they've had this process going on within their organization. And when they come before us, we have a process of inquiry.

As a result of that inquiry, I believe we should be as open with our comments as possible on what this committee feels is important with its report back to the Legislature. If we see some issues that we want to report back to the Legislature, I think it's fully appropriate for us to do that.

The one belief that I have — and, again, I'm certainly looking to the committee for your thoughts on it — is that we're not here to have organizations come before us and then for us to tell them what to do. We're a reporting committee, so our findings will be reported to the Legislature, who can deal with them in the way they view most appropriate. It's not up to us to tell people what to do when they come here, but to listen to what they have to say and listen to their response to our questions.

D. Hayer: I'd just like to find out, without duplication, if we can do some sort of comparison with how the Crown corporations operate in British Columbia versus Alberta, Ontario and other parts of Canada and then see how they're doing, so we get some sort of comparison to other parts. If the core review has done it, maybe we can get some information. If they haven't done it, maybe we can get that researched so that we have it available before we call some of these people.

K. Stewart (Chair): Again, it was our intention to bring some of that information in our Crown corps 202 session in October. So if you send any requests that you have with specific information through to the Chair, I'll ensure that Josie gets it through the Clerk's department.

I. Chong: I just wanted to comment. I guess what I'm sensing from committee members, and myself included, is that we're all grappling with our specific roles in this committee, acknowledging that it's the first time in decades that this committee has ever been convened as a select standing committee. We're mindful of reporting out to the Legislature and at the same time trying not to duplicate work done in other committees. I know Public Accounts will have a linkage to this committee. However, with Public Accounts it's more about the accountability. It is more about the audits that have been done and more about recommendations the auditor general has made. Then the committee would question various Crown corps as to why they will or will not follow through.

Having said that, though, I'm curious whether you, Mr. Chair, have had any discussion to determine, when we have a Crown corporation come before us with their service plan and their financial statement, whether or not, if we were to ask those questions at the beginning of our deliberations, we would be entitled to ask them to report back to the committee in, say, six months. Or would we say: "Go away. We don't need to see you for two years"? Is that also going to be part of the information subcommittee session that we will have?

K. Stewart (Chair): Certainly, it's my expectation that if we see a particular Crown corporation and have further questions, we would more than likely have them back again. I can't see leaving questions unanswered. Obviously, time is a bit of an issue with this whole process, because there are a lot of corporations and there's a limited amount of time. I think that is why it's really crucial that when that committee is drafting their methodology, they build that right into it. What is the suggestion as far as follow-up? With any type of inquiry process there is always a need to follow up if the response that you get isn't complete or if there have been changes.

Certainly, I view that those recommendations will be part of that committee when they're looking at the process of bringing people forward and an opportunity to review them in the future. Again, it is certainly my hope that this committee will go beyond the term of not only this session and this particular election. We call it this sitting of the Legislature, the term that we're legislated for at this point in time. Hopefully, it will continue beyond that, and this committee can show itself to be of value to the Legislative Assembly and will be given a mandate to continue.

A lot of that's based on the value of the work that we do. That's why I believe it's really important that we do some of our homework up front so that we make the interviews as effective as we can and make the information coming out of them as relevant as we can to the Legislature.

I. Chong: Supplemental to that, I just wanted to be clear, though, that in having a Crown corporation report to us, having us ask questions and then having them return subsequently three or six months later, we are not trying to provide — or maybe we are trying to provide — an oversight of the operations of the corporation. Clearly, those would have a board that I wouldn't want to be seen as interfering with. I would want to know that in having a Crown corporation return to this committee, it would be with a specific purpose such as to question, perhaps, the service plan that seems to be going outside of its targets, but not necessarily having them return here with a view of saying: "Well, we don't like what you're doing. This is what you need to be doing." I respect the fact that these Crown corporations have a board as well. I'm hoping that there will be a proper delineation of those responsibilities for us as committee members, so we specifically know our roles when we're here in this committee.

K. Stewart (Chair): I appreciate those comments, and I also appreciate the experience you've had on other committees, which is helpful to us because many of us are relatively new to this legislative committee process.

A couple of quick comments, though, just before I go over to John. One of the things that also came up when I was looking at this process — and I had some discussions with others with regard to this — is the role of the ministers in the Crowns that come under their responsibility. There's a governance issue here which I don't think is that clear. I believe that when we meet in October, and we have the auditor general and a few others come in and talk about these governance processes that…. There have been some problems with them in defining that. Just before I go to John, do you have a quick comment on that, Sharon? I know we discussed it earlier.

S. Halkett: As part of the governance frameworks that we're building, we are going to clearly articulate the role of the minister vis-à-vis the board Chair and the senior management of Crown corporations. There is a Crown corporation governance framework in place that was approved by cabinet in June of 2000. We are using that as a foundation point, but this is an issue that we're going to be clarifying. And just on the core review at the moment, just to clarify accountabilities there, basically the ministers accountable for the major Crown corporations are not leading the core reviews of their major Crown corporations at this moment. The task force itself is assuming the ministerial accountability. The ministers are primarily accountable for the

ongoing implementation of the current business plans that are in place. But you're quite right that we're going to be incorporating that into our revisions to the governance framework.

J. Nuraney: I still have difficulty in defining our role. I see a difference between review and inquiry. I think our mandate is simply to review and then, if we do have any recommendations, to take them to the Legislature. I don't think it is our role to question the performance plans of different Crown corporations and ask for an inquiry or to ask them to get back to us because we are not happy with certain things. I think our mandate is simply to review what they are giving us. And if there is anything that we find is not in conformity with their mandate, it's for us to report to the Legislature. But I stand to be corrected, because I'm still seeking that clarification as to our role in what we are doing with these Crown corporations.

K. Stewart (Chair): I certainly believe you're very clear on one part — that our role is to report to the Legislature. That, I believe, is very clear. The scope of our reporting is something that, hopefully, we'll define in our meetings in October and through the committee that will be reporting in November. So I hope they look at those types of questions. My understanding is pretty clear — and I hope this is meeting with your thoughts on this also — that we are to have the Crown corporations come before this committee, and we will be making inquiries of that corporation, and our findings will be reported to the Legislature. Exactly what the scope of that process will be on our part, I'm not sure of at this time. Hopefully we'll further define it as we move along. Secondly, I'm pretty clear so far, unless I learn otherwise, that we're not to be telling Crown corporations what to be doing. We are just reviewing what they're doing and reporting back. Again, it may be that the ministers will have a more important role in that than they do now. That's something that certainly needs to be decided as we move through that governance area.

For the meeting today we had a time line scheduled that gave us quite a length of time, if we needed it. I believe we have a lot of work to do before we start seeing Crown corporations before us. It is quite apparent that the Crown corporations are not really in a position to be coming before us at this early juncture, given all the other activities that are going on there. If we can just take a quick moment, referring to our agenda, and look at what we've done so far and then lead into any other business.

I'd like some comments on what we have done today. We've had our briefing, and I certainly appreciated the presentation. I trust the members got their early questions answered. I know there are going to be many more questions that come out of this. Obviously, one of the outcomes is just to see the relationship that this secretariat has had with Crown corporations. That it has been the main overseer to this point in time, I think, would be a fair statement. A lot of the activities that they have done in the past will be important to this committee. I appreciate your presentation today, Sharon.

Also, I've tried to update the committee the best I can on what I've found out in the short term. I'd like to spend a little more time with the Deputy Chair. Again, he was unfortunately caught up in that tragic situation today, which has affected all the air travel in British Columbia. Again, that is just a terrible occurrence, and I'm sure it's going to overshadow anything else that happens in the world or with our committee today. That's just a terrible happening in the United States.

Moving back to our agenda, during the update we look at where we can go in the short term. I believe that the biggest thing we can do is gain as much information about processes that have happened in the past, learning from what's gone on with other organizations and especially the auditor general, and make that the focus of our October meeting.

Moving on to our November meeting. With some of the activities coming out of our October meeting with regards to the subcommittee looking at the interview process and some of the methodology, and answering some of the questions that John has raised for us, which I think are very crucial questions…. We'll be trying to find answers for those. I would like to ask the members to give them some thought, and what types of activities specifically you would like to see from that subcommittee with regards to the inquiry methodology, and bring that to the October meeting.

R. Hawes: I'll just make one comment, if I might. There's lots of staff that attend these meetings. I'd like to feel comfortable that what we're going to talk about is really relevant and that it is advancing us. I wouldn't want us to have meetings for the sake of having meetings. I'm not entirely convinced that the meeting in October, given that we don't really know when we're going to start the process that we're going to be engaged in, because it sort of still depends on the core review committee…. I'm a little reluctant to see a meeting in October. I would have thought we could have set it off until we'd had a little clearer date as to when the core review is going to allow us to proceed.

K. Stewart (Chair): With regards to the October meeting, again, the meeting will not be based upon external activities. The October meeting will simply be based on information for us. It's a learning process for us.

I'll certainly put it out to the committee to see how relevant they think it is. But given the background and some of the information that we've been managing to put together, there is a lot of work that's been done that we should be aware of. The more knowledge we have of work that's been done will do twofold. First, we'll be better informed and able to continue with our work in a more productive method. Second, we won't be falling into the traps that some of the other interviewing proc-

esses had with other committees. They will be able to tell us what worked for them and what didn't work, so we can have the benefit of their experience.

R. Hawes: If I could just expand a little bit, then. It seems to me that the key one right now is the core review. I'd be very interested in the process employed in that core review as they look at these Crown corporations. To me, that is far more relevant than any of the others. I'm not sure what processes…. When you say we're going to learn about what the auditor general did or that sort of thing…. That's available to us right now on the website.

I'm just very concerned that pulling us all together for a meeting is a very expensive proposition. It takes us all away, potentially, from our constituencies where we have important work to do. Frankly, the fewer meetings we can have before we're ready to proceed with these Crown corporations, I think, the better. That was just my point.

K. Stewart (Chair): I know that Josie and Pat have comments they'd like to make, and I'd just like to make one comment. I don't think we should ever have meetings if they're irrelevant. Second to that, though, with regard to scheduling meetings, is that we haven't set a date for it. I think one of the activities we should all look at is trying to do as much as we can when we come to Victoria so that we're not just coming over. If we can come over for two or three meetings, it's certainly better than coming over for one. If we can look at tying in this next meeting with other activities in Victoria, I think that would be appropriate.

J. Schofield: I just have some information about what the office of the auditor general has done in the past with regard to Crown corporations, which I thought might be helpful. I shared it with you yesterday, Mr. Chair. But just so the members would have a sense that the topic has actually been studied quite closely by the auditor general, who is a statutory officer of the assembly, in '96 they did a study of the then ten major Crown corporations. It was the Crown Corporations Governance Study, and that's the report that I've ordered. In '97 they did a separate report on B.C. Transit, in '99 a separate report on Forest Renewal and also in '99 a separate report on B.C. Housing and the Provincial Rental Housing Corporation. I hope I've got the title of that right.

So they've looked at the topic generally, and then they have zeroed in. Sharon was indicating that they are also involved with reviewing performance plans of select Crown corporations. So I think it's worth considering whether to have a briefing from them before you actually meet the Crowns.

P. Bell: Randy, in answer to your comments, I think there's probably a real learning curve for all of us here prior to us actually sitting and questioning some of these Crown corporations — understanding the governance models, the accounting procedures, the general roles and procedures.

As you know, I sit on Core Review as well. Now that I have a clearer understanding of where we're going, I really don't see a conflict between the two committees at all. I think we're going to be looking at performance factors at a totally different level than the core review looks at. Where core review outlines the mandate for the various Crown corps, we're going to look at the execution and the ability of those Crown corps to achieve their goals.

So I think we're really at a totally different level. I don't think there's a conflict there. I do think the core review needs to progress, but there's a number of the Crown corps that are progressing quite quickly through core review. I think that prior to the end of the year, we'd be in a position to probably look at some of those.

Prior to doing that, though, I think we need…. Certainly I feel I need to gain some knowledge of those Crown corps so that I can take a critical look at that individual corporation and evaluate it effectively. I need to understand the governance models and the management structure and the mandates of those Crown corps. So I think there's a real learning curve that we need to go through.

I would suggest that — whether it be October, November or whenever we want to do it — prior to actually engaging some of the Crown corporations, we need to have some education on how those Crown corps work. I think that's probably something we need to do.

K. Stewart (Chair): I certainly support what Pat's saying. One of the other aspects which has been suggested — I'm sure we'll get into it more in the next meeting — is basically preparing for the individual Crowns when they come in. There's a lot of information out there. If we can get a template down that we're going to utilize when they come in, we can go ahead and do some of the research and have the subcommittee look at issues that are relevant to that particular Crown so that we are, again, more prepared when they come in.

D. Hayer: I do agree with Pat. At the same time, I think we should not really be wasting time. When we come here, we should make sure we have some other meetings we are attending and use our time more efficiently and effectively. At the same time, I'd like to request that the Chair…. If you can find out the minutes of the meetings this committee held in the past — I think it was the 1980s…. If you can possibly find those minutes, I would personally like to look at them — what they discussed, how it went. I would really appreciate that.

The other issue today, too, is that I understand a number of people have another meeting at 1 o'clock today, so it works out quite well for many of you coming over today. Hopefully, in the future we can ensure

that when we have a meeting, we can tie it in with other activities here in Victoria so that we do make sure that our travel is used most effectively.

With regard to Randy's comment, we'll ensure that it's relevant. We'll get you as much information as we can before the meetings so that they are effective. The more prepared we are for the Crown corporations when they come before us, the better job we will do and the more productive our outcomes will be.

So we will get a date that's convenient to the members, and we'll try and tie it in with another activity in Victoria for our October meeting. Thank you. Meeting adjourned.

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS (Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON CROWN CORPORATIONS

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
(Hansard)

SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE
ON CROWN CORPORATIONS