Backgrounder on independent funding mechanism

Under the current model, it is the Government of the day, and not Parliament, which establishes the proposed funding of the Office of the Information Commissioner.
- Submit funding requests through a minister responsible for one or more departments over which we have an oversight role or investigative role.
- Creates a real or apparent conflict of interest in the conduct of our investigations or audits. This has very real implications for our operations, the fulfillment of our mandates, and potentially, our credibility as independent agents of Parliament.
In its report on the State of Canada’s Access to Information System tabled in June of 2023, the ETHI Committee recommended “that the Government of Canada establish an independent funding mechanism for the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada and other Agents of Parliament who do not have access to such mechanism” (Recommendation 38).
Some of our fellow Agents (the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the Parliamentary Budget Officer) already operate under such an independent funding model. By incorporating the highest standards of stewardship of public funds and by including the necessary safeguards, they have amply demonstrated that they can ensure value for money.

Guiding principles for a new funding model for Agents of Parliament:

Independent of government: Reduce or eliminate real or perceived conflicts of interest inherent in a structure where those who assess the government’s performance are dependent on government for funding.
Accountable to Canadians: Ensure sound management of public funds and robust, transparent accountability.
Promote funding needs to support the mandate: Financial resources allocated to Agents of Parliament enable optimal service delivery to meet the needs of Canadians.

Considerations

All the models mentioned below provide options for reinforcing the independence of Agents of Parliament. They are models that already exist or have been used successfully in the past.
The model used in New Zealand is the one that would offer the greatest potential for improving the guiding principles and allowing Canada to become a world leader in this area. Its adoption, however, would require significant changes within the government.
An acceptable approach would be to establish different mechanisms depending on the mandates and needs of the Agents of Parliament.
A flexible model (similar to Elections Canada) would enable them to secure additional investigators when the volume is too high, and then reduce it to ultimately provide a quality service to Canadians, who need to receive information in a timely manner.

Potential models

Model 1: Chief Electoral Officer of Canada Model

Elections Canada has a two-stream (split) funding mechanism.

The agency is funded by an annual appropriation that covers the salaries of its indeterminate positions and is not affected by the electoral cycle.
A statutory authority enables Elections Canada to draw funds directly from the Consolidated Revenue Fund for all other expenses.
The statutory authority ensures that Elections Canada has access to the funds required for elections that may occur at any time and reflects Elections Canada’s independence from the government. Under Canada's parliamentary system, general elections are scheduled to take place on fixed dates, but can still be called in advance, particularly during a minority government. By-elections, which take place whenever seats in the House of Commons become vacant, are also unpredictable, as Elections Canada has no control over their frequency or timing.

Model 2: PBO or CIEC Model

The Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) and the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner (CIEC) have funding models independent of government. The PBO and the CIEC were created under the Parliament of Canada Act, so are not included in the Schedule to the Financial Administration Act, and have different budgetary processes from the other Agents of Parliament.

Office of the Parliamentary Budget Officer

The PBO budget is reviewed by the Speakers of the House of Commons and the Senate, and then sent to the Treasury Board. Budgets are therefore not subject to review by the Treasury Board Secretariat or approval by the Treasury Board.

Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner

The CIEC budget is examined by the Speaker of the House, who forwards it to the Treasury Board, which includes it unchanged in the government budget. The CIEC is required to defend its budget before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics (ETHI). Budgets are therefore not subject to review by the Treasury Board Secretariat or approval by the Treasury Board.

Model 3: New Zealand Model

New Zealand has an Officers of Parliament Select Committee. This committee is chaired by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and, by convention, all political parties that have won a seat in the legislature are represented on the committee.

Under section 365 of the House of Representatives Regulations, this standing committee is mandated to examine and recommend to the House a level of funding for each Officer of Parliament. It also has the mandate to recommend to the House the appointment of individuals to positions as Officers of Parliament.
Any new proposal for the creation of an Officer of Parliament will be examined by this standing committee. The Parliamentary Committee thus serves as the central forum for managing the relationship between Officers of Parliament and Parliament. It also supplies a mechanism for overseeing and budgeting these functions, without the need for legislation.

Model 4: British Columbia’s Model

British Columbia has established a Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services, which reviews the annual reports, three-year service plans and budget estimates of B.C.’s nine (9) statutory offices.

The Committee meets in the fall to review budget proposals and in the spring to receive financial and operational updates. Requests for additional funding are reviewed as required throughout the year.
Funding requests are reviewed by the Committee, and after receiving an update from the Minister of Finance on the province's spending plans, the Committee makes its funding recommendations to the government.