This page has been archived.
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
Supplementary Information (Tables)
Program Activity | Actual 2007–08 |
Actual 2008–09 |
2009–10 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main Estimates |
Planned Revenue |
Total Authorities |
Actual | |||
The Canadian Marketplace is Efficient and Competitive | ||||||
Marketplace Frameworks and Regulations | ||||||
Bankruptcy and Insolvency Administration | 31.9 | 32.8 | 33.6 | 33.6 | 33.9 | 33.9 |
Corporations Regulation | 8.6 | 9.2 | 8.6 | 8.6 | 8.6 | 8.2 |
Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) Revolving Fund | 149.0 | 145.6 | 151.7 | 151.7 | 151.7 | 142.7 |
Program Activity Total | 189.5 | 187.6 | 193.9 | 193.9 | 194.2 | 184.8 |
Competition Law Enforcement and Advocacy | ||||||
Competition Law and Policy | 10.5 | 10.6 | 10.5 | 10.5 | 10.5 | 10.3 |
Program Activity Total | 10.5 | 10.6 | 10.5 | 10.5 | 10.5 | 10.3 |
Strategic Outcome Total | 200.0 | 198.0 | 204.5 | 204.4 | 204.6 | 195.1 |
Science and Technology, Knowledge, and Innovation are Effective Drivers of a Strong Canadian Economy | ||||||
Communications Research Centre Canada | ||||||
Communications Research | 10.8 | 10.8 | 8.7 | 8.7 | 10.6 | 10.6 |
Program Activity Total | 10.8 | 10.8 | 8.7 | 8.7 | 10.6 | 10.6 |
Strategic Outcome Total | 10.8 | 10.8 | 8.7 | 8.7 | 10.6 | 10.6 |
Total Respendable Revenue | 210.8 | 208.9 | 213.1 | 213.1 | 215.1 | 205.7 |
*Minor differences are due to rounding.
Program Activity | Actual 2007–08 |
Actual 2008–09 |
2009–10 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main Estimates |
Planned Revenue |
Total Authorities |
Actual | |||
The Canadian Marketplace is Efficient and Competitive | ||||||
Marketplace Frameworks and Regulations | ||||||
Bankruptcy and Insolvency Supervision | 4.9 | 5.7 | - | 4.9 | - | 8.8 |
Corporations Regulation (including Newly Updated Automated Name Search) | 7.1 | 2.6 | - | 3.6 | - | 3.6 |
Trade Measurement Regulation | 1.0 | 1.1 | - | 0.9 | - | 1.0 |
Prior Year Refunds, Interest and Other** | 19.3 | 16.1 | - | 0.0 | - | 0.0 |
Program Activity Total | 32.4 | 25.5 | - | 9.4 | - | 13.4 |
Marketplace Frameworks and Regulations for Spectrum, Telecommunications and the Online Economy | ||||||
Radio Licences | 205.6 | 4,481.3 | - | 220.0 | - | 245.5 |
Radio and Terminal Equipment Approval | - | 0.7 | - | 0.6 | ||
Program Activity Total | 205.6 | 4,481.3 | - | 220.7 | - | 246.1 |
Consumer Affairs Program | - | - | ||||
Prior Year Refunds, Interest and Other** | 0.1 | 0.1 | - | 0.0 | - | 0.0 |
Program Activity Total | 0.1 | 0.1 | - | 0.0 | - | 0.0 |
Competition Law Enforcement and Advocacy | - | - | ||||
Fines | 14.7 | 14.3 | - | 10.4 | - | 13.1 |
Consumer Labelling and Advertising Regulation | 0.1 | 0.1 | - | 0.1 | - | 0.1 |
Prior Year Refunds, Interest and Other** | 4.9 | 0.0 | - | 2.6 | - | 0.0 |
Public Policy Services — Prior Year Refunds, Interest, and Others** | 0.0 | 0.1 | - | 0.0 | - | 0.0 |
Program Activity Total | 19.7 | 14.4 | - | 13.1 | - | 13.2 |
Strategic Outcome Total | 257.7 | 4,521.4 | 0.0 | 243.2 | 0.0 | 272.7 |
Science and Technology, Knowledge, and Innovation are Effective Drivers of a Strong Canadian Economy | ||||||
Communications Research Centre Canada | ||||||
Communications Research | 2.0 | 2.7 | - | 1.5 | - | 1.5 |
Program Activity Total | 2.0 | 2.7 | - | 1.5 | - | 1.5 |
Industrial Technologies Office — Special Operating Agency | - | - | ||||
Receipts from Repayable Contributions | 140.3 | 93.7 | - | 113.9 | - | 115.5 |
Prior Year Refunds, Interest and Other** | 12.2 | 18.4 | - | - | 9.0 | |
Program Activity Total | 152.5 | 112.1 | - | 113.9 | - | 124.5 |
Knowledge Advantage in Targeted Canadian Industries | - | - | ||||
Receipts from Repayable Contributions | 5.7 | 0.0 | - | 0.0 | - | 0.0 |
Prior Year Refunds, Interest and Other** | 0.3 | 0.0 | - | - | 0.0 | |
Program Activity Total | 6.0 | 0.0 | - | 0.0 | - | 0.0 |
Strategic Outcome Total | 160.5 | 114.7 | - | 115.4 | - | 126.0 |
Competitive Businesses are Drivers of Sustainable Wealth Creation | ||||||
Global Reach and Agility in Targeted Canadian Industries | 0.7 | 0.5 | - | 0.0 | - | |
Program Activity Total | 0.7 | 0.5 | - | 0.0 | - | |
Entrepreneurial Economy | - | - | ||||
Small Business Loans Act / Canada Small Business Financing Act Fees | 56.6 | 51.0 | - | 56.5 | - | 54.5 |
Receipts from Repayable Contributions | 7.8 | 3.9 | - | 2.2 | - | 0.0 |
Return on Investment | 21.7 | 16.6 | - | 18.0 | - | 16.8 |
Prior Year Refunds, Interest and Other** | 2.7 | 4.3 | - | - | 5.3 | |
Program Activity Total | 88.8 | 75.8 | - | 76.7 | - | 76.6 |
Global Reach and Agility in Targeted Canadian Industries | - | - | ||||
Receipts from Repayable Contributions | 47.8 | 46.2 | - | 66.3 | - | 55.4 |
Prior Year Refunds, Interest and Other** | 13.7 | 8.8 | - | - | 8.6 | |
Program Activity Total | 61.5 | 55.0 | - | 66.3 | - | 64.0 |
Community, Economic, and Regional Development | - | - | ||||
Receipts from Repayable Contributions | 0.0 | 0.0 | - | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.1 |
Prior Year Refunds, Interest and Other** | 0.0 | 0.1 | - | 0.0 | - | 1.0 |
Program Activity Total | 0.0 | 0.1 | - | 0.0 | - | 3.1 |
Strategic Outcome Total | 151.0 | 131.3 | 0.0 | 143.0 | 0.0 | 143.7 |
Internal Services | ||||||
Prior Year Refunds, Interest and Other** | 0.0 | 0.0 | - | 0.0 | - | 1.7 |
Total Non-Respendable Revenue | 569.2 | 4,767.5 | - | 501.6 | - | 544.1 |
Total Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue | 780.0 | 4,976.3 | 213.1 | 714.7 | 215.1 | 749.8 |
* Minor differences are due to rounding.
** Certain non-respendable revenue cannot be planned for, given the nature of the revenue.
Note: Where the corresponding fee introduction or most recent modification occurred prior to March 31, 2004:
User Fee: Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the ATIA
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: ATIA
Date Last Modified: 1992
Performance Standards: Response provided within 30 days following receipt of request; the response time may be extended pursuant to section 9 of the ATIA. Notice of extension to be sent within 30 days after receipt of request.
The Access to Information Act provides fuller details.
Performance Results: Statutory deadlines met 80% of the time.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
4 | 2 | 2,161 | 2010–11 | 3 | 1,958 |
2011–12 | 3 | 1,958 | |||
2012–13 | 3 | 1,958 |
Other Information:
The Act states that all formal requests submitted must be accompanied by a $5.00 application fee that is to be payable to the Receiver General for Canada. All fees prescribed and received pursuant to the Act are returned to the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
All fees collected and waived under the Act are detailed in the Department’s annual report to Parliament on the ATIA.
User Fee: Canada Small Business Financing Act (CSBFA) — Loan and lease component (registration and administration fees)
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: CSBFA
Date Last Modified: Fees were established for the CSBFA in April 1999, and for the Capital Leasing Pilot Project in April 2002.
Performance Standards: The following standards were set:
Performance Results: The following results were obtained:
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
52,225 | 54,453 | 5,065 | 2010–11 | 49,275 | 5,065 |
2011–12 | 50,910 | 5,065 | |||
2012–13 | 52,500 | 5,065 |
User Fee:Small Business Loans Act (SBLA) — Loans component (administration fees)
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: SBLA
Date Last Modified: A 1.25% administration fee was established in 1995.
Performance Standards: The following standard was set:
Performance Results: The following results were obtained:
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
50 | 30 | Included with CSBFA — Loans component (registration and administration fees) | 2010–11 | 20 | 0 |
2011–12 | 0 | 0 | |||
2012–13 | 0 | 0 |
User Fee: Canada Small Business Financing Program
Total
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
52,275 | 54,483 | 5,065 | 2010–11 | 49,295 | 5,065 |
2011–12 | 50,910 | 5,065 | |||
2012–13 | 52,500 | 5,065 |
Other Information:
The “Actual Revenue” amounts represent the registration and administration fees of the loans and leases made.
“Full Cost” figures represent the operating cost of the Small Business Financing Directorate to administer the CSBF Program. Full Cost does not include expenses associated with claim payments made to financial institutions as a result of defaulted loans or leases. These expenses are covered in financial tables for “Details on Other Programs.”
“Estimated Full Cost” amounts for the planning years are uncertain at this point, given that Industry Canada is under a program review.
User Fee: Combined Merger Notification and Advance Ruling Certificate requests
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Department of Industry Act; Competition Bureau Fee and Service Standards Policy.
Date Last Modified: April 1, 2003
Performance Standards 1: Non-complex, 14 days
Performance Results 1: 93.64%
Performance Standards 2: Complex, 10 weeks
Performance Results 2: 88.8%
Performance Standards 3:Very complex, 5 months
Performance Results 3: 83.33%
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
1,650 | 1,500 | 15,375 | 2010–11 | 1,650 | 15,161 |
2011–12 | 1,650 | 15,161 | |||
2012–13 | 2,588 | 15,161 |
User Fee: Merger Notification
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Department of Industry Act; Competition Bureau Fee and Service Standards Policy
Date Last Modified: April 1, 2003
Performance Standards 1: See table above.
Performance Results 1: See table above.
Performance Standards 2: See table above.
Performance Results 2: See table above.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
400 | 550 | 4,894 | 2010–11 | 400 | 3,249 |
2011–12 | 400 | 3,249 | |||
2012–13 | 1,294 | 6,807 |
User Fee: Advance Ruling Certificate requests
Fee Type: Other products and services
Fee-Setting Authority: Department of Industry Act; Competition Bureau Fee and Service Standards Policy
Date Last Modified: April 1, 2003
Performance Standards: See table above.
Performance Results: See table above.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
8,000 | 8,100 | 2,252 | 2010–11 | 8,000 | 2,089 |
2011–12 | 8,000 | 2,089 | |||
2012–13 | 9,059 | 2,243 |
User Fee: Written opinions: The Commissioner may provide binding opinions on proposed business conduct.
Fee Type: Other products and services
Fee-Setting Authority: Department of Industry Act; Competition Bureau Fee and Service Standards Policy
Date Last Modified: April 1, 2003
Performance Standards 1: Service standards vary, ranging from 2 weeks to 10 weeks for different sections of the Competition Act (CA).
Performance Results 1: 53.8%
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
25 | 20 | 269 | 2010–11 | 25 | 234 |
2011–12 | 25 | 242 | |||
2012–13 | 73 | 396 |
User Fee: CA number: Provide a CA number for fabric tags
Fee Type: Other products and services
Fee-Setting Authority: Department of Industry Act
Date Last Modified: 1986
Performance Standards 1: Not applicable
Performance Results 1: Not applicable
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
90 | 92 | 209 | 2010–11 | 90 | 216 |
2011–12 | 90 | 224 | |||
2012–13 | 111 | 224 |
User Fee: Competition Bureau
Total
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
10,165 | 10,262 | 22,999 | 2010–11 | 10,165 | 20,948 |
2011–12 | 10,165 | 20,964 | |||
2012–13 | 13,125 | 24,831 |
Other Information: N/A
User Fee: Corporations Canada has several product offerings, including file articles of incorporation, letters patent, file articles of continuance, file statements of revocation of intent to dissolve, file annual returns and name searches.
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: CBCA, Canada Corporations Act, Canada Cooperatives Act
Date Last Modified: No activity in 2009–10
Most recent consultations were undertaken in 2000–01, when Corporations Canada introduced a reduction in the incorporation fee and annual return fee.
Performance Standards 1: Internet:
CBCA incorporation applications received by 1 p.m. EST via e-commerce are processed by 5 p.m. EST.
Performance Results 1: 94.4% of CBCA incorporations received via e-commerce issued within standard.
Performance Standards 2: Visitors:
Clients who come to headquarters between 8:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. will receive one-hour, over-the-counter service.
Performance Results 2: 98.6% of requests (CBCA) for incorporations and restated articles issued within standard.
Performance Standards 3: Batches:
Batches of 5 or more articles are processed within the same day if received before 8 a.m.
Performance Results 3: 98.1% of requests issued within standard.
Performance Standards 4: CCA Part II incorporation applications are processed within 20 business days.
Performance Results 4: 89.0% of CCA Part II incorporations received by mail are issued within standard.
Performance Standards 5: CBCA annual returns are processed and available on the Corporations Canada website within 5 business days.
Performance Results 5: 99.6% of annual returns received by mail are available on the Corporations Canada website within standard.
Performance Standards 6: CCA-II annual summaries are processed and available on the Corporations Canada website within 20 business days.
Performance Results 6: 90.3% of annual summaries received by mail are available on the Corporations Canada website within standard.
Performance Standards 7: Amendments to articles of incorporation under the CBCA incorporation applications received by 1 p.m. EST via e-commerce are processed by 5 p.m. EST.
Performance Results 7: 95.3% of amendments to articles of incorporation under the CBCA incorporation received via e-commerce are issued within standard.
Performance Standards 8: Service standards are available on the Corporations Canada website.
Performance Results 8: N/A
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
10,800 | 11,121 | 12,950 | 2010–11 | 11,200 | 13,782 |
2011–12 | 11,300 | 13,782 | |||
2012–13 | 11,400 | 13,782 |
User Fee: Registration Fee
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and Rules
Date Last Modified: 2001
Performance Standards: Registration of new estates: 90% within 2 days
Performance Results: 99.97%
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
14,181 | 13,550 | 16,824 | 2010–11 | 14,091 | 17,830 |
2011–12 | 13,622 | 18,009 | |||
2012–13 | 13,618 | 17,934 |
User Fee: Superintendent Levy
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and Rules
Date Last Modified: 2001
Performance Standards: Letters of comment: Issued 90% of the time within 21 business days of receipt of the Statement of Affairs.
Performance Results: 88.78%
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
23,746 | 24,891 | 30,905 | 2010–11 | 26,649 | 33,720 |
2011–12 | 29,190 | 38,590 | |||
2012–13 | 30,526 | 40,202 |
User Fee: Name Search Fee*
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and Rules
Date Last Modified: 2001
Performance Standards: Faxes answered within 24 hours.
Performance Results: 100%
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
3,043 | 2,809 | 3,488 | 2010–11 | 2,800 | 3,543 |
2011–12 | 3,000 | 3,966 | |||
2012–13 | 3,000 | 3,951 |
User Fee: Trustee Licence Fee
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and Rules
Date Last Modified: 2001
Performance Standards: No standard.
Annual fee is paid by trustee in order to retain his/her licence. (The licence is annulled if the fee is not paid.) There is no performance standard on the action to renew or not renew the licence. The licence is renewed in OSB’s records when OSB receives the annual fee.
Performance Results: N/A
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
1,000 | 1,036 | 1,286 | 2010–11 | 1,045 | 1,322 |
2011–12 | 1,065 | 1,408 | |||
2012–13 | 1,085 | 1,429 |
User Fee: Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy
Total
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
41,970 | 42,286 | 52,502 | 2010–11 | 44,585 | 56,415 |
2011–12 | 46,877 | 61,973 | |||
2012–13 | 48,229 | 63,516 |
Other Information: N/A
* Includes other revenues of $68,812 in 2009–10 Actuals
User Fee: Measuring Device Approval and Measurement Standard Certification
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Weights and Measures Act, section 10(1)(q)
Date Last Modified: 1993
Performance Standards: Notice of Approval issued between 30 and 120 calendar days depending on complexity of submission. Categories of approval submissions and associated performance targets are available on the Measurement Canada website.
Certificate of Calibration is issued in 60 calendar days.
Performance Results: Measuring Device Approval — Performance standard met, on average, 77% of the time.
Measurement Standard Certification — Performance standard met 95% of the time.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
200 | 280 | 1,103 | 2010–11 | 200 | 788 |
2011–12 | 200 | 788 | |||
2012–13 | 200 | 788 |
User Fee: Measuring Device Inspection
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Weights and Measures Act, section 10(1)(q)
Date Last Modified: 1993
Performance Standards: Inspection performed within 10 calendar days of request.
Performance Results: Performance standard met 83% of the time.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
200 | 169 | 665 | 2010–11 | 200 | 788 |
2011–12 | 250 | 984 | |||
2012–13 | 250 | 984 |
User Fee: Electricity and Natural Gas Meter Approval and Measuring Apparatus Certification
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Electricity and Gas Inspection Act, section 28(1)(e)
Date Last Modified: 1995
Performance Standards: Notice of Approval issued between 30 and 120 calendar days depending on complexity of submission. Categories of approval submissions and associated performance targets are available on the Measurement Canada website.
Certificate of Calibration is issued in 60 calendar days.
Performance Results: Meter Approval — Performance Standard met 80% of the time.
Measuring Apparatus Certification — Performance Standard met 100% of the time.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
200 | 223 | 878 | 2010–11 | 200 | 788 |
2011–12 | 180 | 709 | |||
2012–13 | 180 | 709 |
User Fee: Electricity and Natural Gas Meter Inspection
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Electricity and Gas Inspection Act, section 28(1)(e)
Date Last Modified: 1995
Performance Standards: Inspection performed within 10 calendar days of request.
Performance Results: Performance standard met, on average, 83% of the time.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
85 | 112 | 441 | 2010–11 | 85 | 335 |
2011–12 | 60 | 236 | |||
2012–13 | 60 | 236 |
User Fee: Electricity and Gas Accreditation (Initial and Renewal)
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Electricity and Gas Inspection Act, section 28(1)(e)
Date Last Modified: 1995
Performance Standards: Accreditation is granted within 1 month of an audit that demonstrates the applicant has met all requirements.
Performance Results: Performance standard met 100% of time.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
115 | 57 | 224 | 2010–11 | 115 | 453 |
2011–12 | 110 | 433 | |||
2012–13 | 110 | 433 |
User Fee: Measurement Canada
Total
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
800 | 841 | 3,312 | 2010–11 | 800 | 3,150 |
2011–12 | 800 | 3,150 | |||
2012–13 | 800 | 3,150 |
Other Information: N/A
User Fee: Fixed and Broadcast Satellite Licences
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: Industry Canada will be conducting a public consultation in the first quarter of 2011 to establish new spectrum fees.
Performance Standards: Not applicable
Performance Results: Not applicable
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not applicable | Not applicable | Not applicable | 2010–11 | SITT is moving away from a radio apparatus licence regime to a spectrum licence regime with applicable fees. Therefore, there are no forecasts available at this point. | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
Other Information: In preparation for the public consultation planned for Q1 2011, a study has been commissioned to assess the market value of the satellite spectrum. The report for this study is due on July 29, 2010.
User Fee: PCS / Cellular Fees
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: The first phase of the consultation process has been delayed and is expected to be initiated in 2010–11.
Performance Standards: The first phase of the consultation process has been delayed and is expected to be initiated in 2010–11.
Performance Results: The first phase of the consultation process has been delayed and is expected to be initiated in 2010–11.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
The first phase of the consultation process has been delayed and is expected to be initiated in 2010–11. | 2010–11 | The first phase of the consultation process has been delayed and is expected to be initiated in 2010-11. | |||
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
Other Information: Amended fees will apply to long-term licences coming up for renewal as well as existing licences with annual fees. For additional fee-related information go to Spectrum Management and Telecommunications — Licence Fees.
User Fee: Spectrum Licence Fees for Narrowband Multipoint Communication Systems (N-MCS)
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: The process for the fee amendment is being stopped and will now be included in the broader fee review that is being undertaken following one of the recommendations made in the Office of the Auditor General’s report of May 2008 that IC review its spectrum fees.
Performance Standards: The process for the fee amendment is being stopped and will now be included in the broader fee review that is being undertaken following one of the recommendations made in the Office of the Auditor General’s report of May 2008 that IC review its spectrum fees.
Performance Results: The process for the fee amendment is being stopped and will now be included in the broader fee review that is being undertaken following one of the recommendations made in the Office of the Auditor General’s report of May 2008 that IC review its spectrum fees.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
The process for the fee amendment is being stopped and will now be included in the broader fee review that is being undertaken following one of the recommendations made in the Office of the Auditor General’s report of May 2008 that IC review its spectrum fees. | 2010–11 | The process for the fee amendment is being stopped and will now be included in the broader fee review that is being undertaken following one of the recommendations made in the Office of the Auditor General’s report of May 2008 that IC review its spectrum fees. | |||
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
Other Information: Narrowband Multipoint Communication Systems (N-MCS), which are not otherwise licence exempt, will receive spectrum licences regardless of their intended frequency band of operation. This new regime will replace licensing approaches currently used for N-MCS systems.
For additional fee-related information go to Spectrum Management and Telecommunications — Licence Fees.
User Fee: Spectrum Licence Fees for Wireless Broadband Services (WBS) in the Band 3650–3700 MHz
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11.
Performance Standards: The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11.
Performance Results: The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11. | 2010–11 | The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11. | |||
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
Other Information: N/A
User Fee: Spectrum Licence Renewal Fees for 2400, 2800 and 3800 GHz Wireless Broadband Communications
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11.
Performance Standards: The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11.
Performance Results: The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11. | 2010–11 | The consultation process is completed but the formal User Fees Act process has not yet begun. It is anticipated to begin in 2010–11. | |||
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
Other Information: N/A
User Fee: Fixed Parameter Radio Stations
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: Radio Authorization fees: 2000
Performance Standards:
Performance Results:
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available for this fee Estimated Full Cost is not available for this fee |
|
Not available for this fee. | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: Mobile Radio Stations
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: Radio Authorization fees: 2000
Performance Standards: Processing time of 7 weeks (35 business days) per transaction when international coordination is not required and 13 weeks (65 business days) when international coordination is required.
Performance Results:
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available |
|
Not available | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: Microwave Stations
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: Radio Authorization fees: 2000
Performance Standards:
Performance Results:
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available |
|
Not available | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: Earth (Stations)
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: Radio Authorization fees: 2000
Performance Standards: Processing time of 7 weeks (35 business days) per transaction.
Performance Results: Service standard was met at 99.8% of the time. Licences issued: 1,312
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available | 96.5 | Not available | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: Space (Stations)
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: Radio Authorization fees: 2000
Performance Standards: Not subject to performance standard
Performance Results: Not applicable
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available | 1, 677.1 | Not available | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: Renewals:
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: Radio Authorization fees: 2000
Performance Standards: Not subject to performance standard
Performance Results: Not applicable
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available |
|
Not available | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: RADIOCOM
Total
Fee Type: Refer to tables above for specific user fees.
Fee-Setting Authority: Refer to tables above for specific user fees.
Date Last Modified: Refer to tables above for specific user fees.
Performance Standards: Refer to tables above for specific user fees.
Performance Results: Refer to tables above for specific user fees.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
222,000 | 233,796 | 108,933 | 2010–11 | 230,000 | 98,733 |
2011–12 | 230,000 | 98,733 | |||
2012–13 | 230,000 | 98,733 |
Other Information: N/A
User Fee: Radio and Terminal Equipment Approval – Registration Fee
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: September 10, 2007
Performance Standards: Processing time per transaction: 2 business days
Performance Results: 100%
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available | 248 | Not available | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: Radio and Terminal Equipment Approval – Listing Fee
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: September 10, 2007
Performance Standards: Processing time per transaction: 2 business days
Performance Results: 100%
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available | 252 | Not available | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: Radio and Terminal Equipment Approval – Assessment Fee
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: September 10, 2007
Performance Standards: Processing time per transaction: 14 business days
Performance Results: 98%
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available | 72 | Not available | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: Radio and Terminal Equipment Approval – Technical Expertise Fee
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Radiocommunication Act, section 6(1)
Department of Industry Act, sections 18, 19, 20
Financial Administration Act, section 19.1
Date Last Modified: September 10, 2007
Performance Standards: Processing time per transaction: Case-by-case basis
Performance Results: N/A
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
Not available | 19 | Not available | 2010–11 | Not available | |
2011–12 | |||||
2012–13 |
User Fee: Radio and Terminal Equipment Approval
Total
Fee Type: Please refer to tables above for specific user fees.
Fee-Setting Authority: Please refer to tables above for specific user fees.
Date Last Modified: Please refer to tables above for specific user fees.
Performance Standards: Please refer to tables above for specific user fees.
Performance Results: These results are reported on individually.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
650 | 591 | 1,245 | 2010–11 | 600 | 1,245 |
2011–12 | 600 | 1,245 | |||
2012–13 | 600 | 1,245 |
User Fee: RADIOCOM and Radio and Terminal Equipment Approval
Total
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
222,650 | 234,387 | 110,179 | 2010–11 | 230,600 | 99,978 |
2011–12 | 230,600 | 99,978 | |||
2012–13 | 230,600 | 99,978 |
Other Information: N/A
User Fee: Canadian Intellectual Property Office
Fee Type: Regulatory
Fee-Setting Authority: Financial Administration Act, Patent Act, Trade-marks Act, Copyright Act, Industrial Design Act, Integrated Circuit Topography Act, Department of Industry Act
Date Last Modified: June 2, 2007
Performance Standards:
Performance Results: See CPO Client Service Standards.
2009–10 | Planning Years | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost |
151,708 | 149,448 | 142,272 | 2010–11 | 142,704 | 148,255 |
2011–12 | 142,165 | 151,889 | |||
2012–13 | 146,779 | 155,723 |
Other Information: N/A
2009–10 | Planning Years | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated Full Cost | |
Sub-Total (excluding CIPO) | 338,664 | 351,304 | 209,168 | 2010–11 | 346,648 | 201,298 |
2011–12 | 350,655 | 206,871 | ||||
2012–13 | 356,657 | 212,281 | ||||
Sub-Total (including CIPO) | 151,708 | 149,448 | 142,272 | 2010–11 | 142,704 | 148,255 |
2011–12 | 142,165 | 151,889 | ||||
2012–13 | 146,779 | 155,723 | ||||
Total | 490,372 | 500,752 | 351,440 | 2010–11 | 489,352 | 349,553 |
2011–12 | 492,820 | 358,760 | ||||
2012–13 | 503,436 | 368,004 |
External Fee | Service Standard | Performance Result | Stakeholder Consultation |
---|---|---|---|
Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the ATIA. |
Response provided within 30 days following receipt of request; the response time may be extended pursuant to section 9 of the ATIA. Notice of extension to be sent within 30 days after receipt of request. ATIA provides fuller details. |
Statutory deadlines met 80% of the time. | This service standard is established under the ATIA and the Access to Information Regulations. Consultations with stakeholders were undertaken for amendments done in 1986 and 1992. |
CSBFA Loans component (registration and administration fees) |
The following standards were set:
|
The following results were obtained:
|
Discussions with participating lenders indicate general satisfaction with performance results. Annual meetings with key lenders will continue to include discussions on stakeholder satisfaction with service standards and results. |
Capital lease component (administration fees) | |||
SBLA Loans component (administration fees) |
The following standard was set:
|
The following results were obtained:
|
Discussions with participating lenders indicate general satisfaction with performance results. Annual meetings with key lenders will continue to include discussions on stakeholder satisfaction with service standards and results. |
CIPO grants or registers ownership for 5 types of intellectual property: patents, trademarks, copyright, industrial designs and integrated circuit topographies | See CIPO Client Standards for 2009–2010. | ||
Corporations Canada has several product offerings, including file articles of incorporation, letters patent, file statements of revocation of intent to dissolve, file annual returns and name searches. |
Incorporations under the CBCA: Internet:
|
94.4% of CBCA incorporation received via e-commerce issued within standard. |
Once a year, Corporations Canada organizes information sessions in various cities across Canada. Corporations Canada also has a visit program with key clients in order to get continuous feedback for potential improvements of our products and services. |
Visitors:
|
98.6% of requests (CBCA incorporation and restated articles) issued within standard. | ||
Batches:
|
98.1% of requests (CBCA incorporation and restated articles) issued within standard. | ||
Incorporations under the CCA Part II: CCA Part II incorporation applications are processed within 20 business days. |
89.0% of CCA Part II incorporation applications received by mail are issued within standard. | ||
Annual returns under CBCA: CBCA annual returns are processed and available on the Corporations Canada website within 5 business days. |
99.6% of annual returns received by mail are available on the Corporations Canada website within standard. | ||
Annual summaries under CCA: CCA-II annual summaries are processed and available on the Corporations Canada website within 20 business days. |
90.3% of annual summaries received by mail are available on the Corporations Canada website within standard. | ||
Amendments under the CBCA incorporation: Applications received by 1 p.m. EST via e-commerce should be processed by 5 p.m. EST. |
95.3% of amendments under the CBCA incorporation received via e-commerce issued within standard. | ||
Other services such as revival, certificate, copies | Service standards are available on the Corporations Canada website. | ||
Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy — Registration Fee | Registration of new estates: 90% of the time within 2 days | 99.97% | 2001 |
Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy — Superintendent Levy | Letters of comment: Issued 90% of the time within 21 business days of receipt of the Statement of Affairs | 88.78% | 2001 |
Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy — Name Search Fee | Faxes answered within 24 hours | 100% | 2001 |
Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy — Trustee Licence Fee | No standard. Annual fee is paid by trustee in order to retain his/her licence. The licence is annulled if the fee is not paid. | N/A | 2001 |
Measuring Device Approval and Measurement Standard Certification |
Notice of Approval issued between 30 and 120 calendar days depending on complexity of submission. Categories of approval submissions and associated performance targets published on the Measurement Canada website. Certificate of Calibration is issued in 60 calendar days. |
Measuring Device Approval: Performance standard met, on average, 77% of the time. Measurement Standard Certification: Performance standard met, on average, 95% of the time. |
Clients are provided with the opportunity to express their views through an online service feedback form and during stakeholder meetings. Feedback is analyzed for trends and changes in processes instituted to improve service performance. Approval service standards were amended in 2008–09 to address varying complexities of approval submissions. |
Measuring Device Inspection | Inspection performed within 10 calendar days of request | Performance standard met, on average, 83% of the time. | Clients are provided with the opportunity to express their views through an online service feedback form and during stakeholder meetings. Feedback is analyzed for trends and changes in processes instituted to improve service performance. |
Electricity and Natural Gas Meter Approval and Measuring Apparatus Certification |
Notice of Approval issued between 30 and 120 calendar days depending on complexity of submission. Categories of approval submissions and associated performance targets published on the Measurement Canada website. Certificate of Calibration is issued in 60 calendar days. |
Meter Approval: Performance standard met, on average, 80% of the time. Measuring Apparatus Certification: Performance standard met 100% of the time. |
Clients are provided with the opportunity to express their views through an online service feedback form and during stakeholder meetings. Feedback is analyzed for trends and changes in processes instituted to improve service performance. Approval service standards were amended in 2008–09 to address varying complexities of approval submissions. |
Electricity and Natural Gas Meter Inspection | Inspection performed within 10 calendar days of request. | Performance standard met, on average, 83% of the time. | Clients are provided with the opportunity to express their views through an online service feedback form and during stakeholder meetings. Feedback is analyzed for trends and changes in processes instituted to improve service performance. |
Electricity and Gas Accreditation (Initial and Renewal) | Accreditation is granted 1 month of an audit that demonstrates the applicant has met all requirements. | Performance standard met 100% of the time. | Clients are provided with the opportunity to express their views through an online service feedback form and as part of regular performance audits. |
Fixed Parameter Radio Stations | Processing time of 3 weeks (15 business days) per transaction | Service standard met 98.4% of time. | Stakeholder consultation takes place when any new fee is introduced or amended as per the requirements of the User Fees Act. |
Mobile Radio Stations | Processing time of 7 weeks per transaction (35 business days) when international coordination is not required and 13 weeks (75 business days) when international coordination is required. | Service standard met 96.7% of time. | |
Microwave Stations | Processing time of 4 weeks (20 business days) per transaction when international coordination is not required and 10 weeks (50 business days) when international coordination is required. | Service standard met 92.5% of time. | |
Earth Stations | Processing time of 7 weeks (35 business days) per transaction. | Service standard met 99.8% of time. | |
Other Information: The Access to Information Act permits the waiving of fees when deemed to be in the public interest and if under $25. A total of $1,680 in fees were collected during the reporting period. In accordance with government policy, it is the Department’s practice to waive fees where the total owing per request amounts to less than $25. Fees waived during 2009–10 represented $3,051. There continues to be a significant increase in the number of times fees are waived due to the ongoing use of an electronic disclosure service. In order to reduce costs and increase efficiency, released documents are provided on CD-ROM, which means no reproduction fees are charged to the applicant. Following the recommendations made in the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) annual report released in May 2008 (Chapter 1, Management of Fees in Selected Departments and Agencies), IC has agreed to take the necessary steps to address the concerns raised with regard to improving the way it currently reports on its radio and spectrum licence fees. As of 2008–09, the User Fees table of the DPR provides revenues associated with new and amended licences only and are linked to the appropriate services standards. All other revenues from auctions ($588,836,358 amortized) and the renewal of radio and spectrum licences ($224,114,960) will be reported in the non-respendable section of the DPR in addition to the revenues reflected the User Fees table. |
The following is a list by strategic outcome of Industry Canada’s transfer payment programs with transfers in excess of $5 million.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Switzerland
Voted Payments
Start Date: April 1, 2007
End Date: December 31, 2011
Description: Canada is a signatory to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) treaty agreement negotiated every 4 years at a plenipotentiary conference, in accordance with its treaty obligations of the ITU Constitution and Convention. Canada’s membership, contribution and standing in the ITU, and its involvement in related events, allow us to achieve results internationally across a broad range of issues affecting radiocommunications, standardization and telecommunications development. Canada’s contribution to the ITU is commensurate with its international standing and its commitment to the United Nations and its specialized agencies.
Program Activity: Marketplace Frameworks and Regulations for Spectrum, Telecommunications and the Online Economy
Results Achieved:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Grants | 5.9 | 5.8 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 0.0 |
Total Transfer Payments | 5.9 | 5.8 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 6.8 | 0.0 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned: None.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation by the Audit and Evaluation Branch, entitled Final Evaluation of Industry Canada's Involvement in the International Telecommunication Union, was completed in 2009.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Bombardier CSeries Program
Voted Payments
Start Date: September 2008
End Date: October 2015
Description: In July 2008, the government announced its intention to contribute $350 million to Bombardier Aerospace for research and development of aircraft technologies related to the CSeries, a new 110–130-seat family of commercial aircraft. The research and development projects will support the Canadian aerospace industry's goal of developing new technologies for the next generation of more fuel-efficient and safe commercial aircraft. The contribution is being provided by Industry Canada and is conditionally repayable.
Program Activity: Knowledge Advantage in Targeted Canadian Industries
Results Achieved:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | - | 39.7 | 52.9 | 59.4 | 36.9 | 16.0 |
Total Transfer Payments | - | 39.7 | 52.9 | 59.4 | 36.9 | 16.0 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): For 2009–10, the main factor contributing to the variance was the slowdown in the global economy which negatively impacted Bombardier and the financial resources available to the company to spend on research and development.
Audit Completed or Planned: Results-Based Management and Accountability Framework–Risk-Based Audit Framework to be implemented in 2010–11 which will determine the timing and scope of an audit.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: None
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Automotive Innovation Fund
Voted Payments
Start Date: May 29, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2013
Description: The Automotive Innovation Fund supports strategic, large-scale research and development projects to develop innovative, greener and more fuel-efficient vehicles.
Program Activity: Knowledge Advantage in Targeted Canadian Industries
Results Achieved:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | - | 9.0 | 68.8 | 68.8 | 16.5 | 52.3 |
Total Transfer Payments | - | 9.0 | 68.8 | 68.8 | 16.5 | 52.3 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The AIF was launched in spring 2008 within the context of a stable and sound economic period, when the Canadian automotive industry sales and production volumes were assumed to gradually increase over time and across the sector. However, the dramatic decline in North American vehicle sales has resulted in industry research and development proceeding at a slower pace over a longer time period.
Audit Completed or Planned: An audit by AEB is planned in 2010–11.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: A summative evaluation is planned for 2012–13.
Note that AIF has been moved into Knowledge Advantage in Targeted Canadian Industries under all fiscal years.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Industrial Technologies Office — Strategic Aerospace and Defence Initiative
Voted Payments
Start Date: April 2, 2007
End Date: March 31, 2012
Description: This program provides repayable contributions to the aerospace and defence (A&D) sector to support strategic industrial research and pre-competitive development projects. The program helps to encourage the development of innovative products and services; enhance the competitiveness of Canadian A&D firms; and foster collaboration between research institutes, universities, colleges, and the private sector.
Program Activity: Industrial Technologies Office — Special Operating Agency
Results Achieved:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 10.5 | 35.8 | 51.1 | 176.7 | 62.0 | (10.9) |
Total Transfer Payments | 10.5 | 35.8 | 51.1 | 176.7 | 62.0 | (10.9) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): There was a reduction in R&D investment made in 2009–10 as a result of the global economic crisis that affected the A&D sector.
Audit Completed or Planned: An AEB Audit of SADI governance is in progress and will be completed in 2010–11.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: Summative Evaluation — end of term (by December 31, 2011)
Note that the DPR total authorities for Technology Partnerships Canada (TPC), the Strategic Aerospace and Defence Initiative (SADI) and the Southern Ontario Development Program (SODP) differ from the Public Accounts as a result of an adjustment of $60 million between TPC and SADI, and $5 million between TPC and SODP. These were made to reflect the actual allocation of authorities among the respective programs.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Industrial Technologies Office — Program for Strategic Industrial Projects
Voted Payments
Start Date: October 3, 2005
End Date: March 31, 2011
Description: This program provides the mechanism to fund larger strategic projects within the automotive sector, in whole or in part from the fiscal framework. Strategic investments in industrial research, pre-competitive development and technology adaptation and adoption within the automotive sector will help to increase economic growth within Canada and improve sustainable industrial developments.
Program Activity: Industrial Technologies Office — Special Operating Agency
Results Achieved: Increased private sector investment in research and development activities in the automotive industry. The PSIP did not contract any new projects in 2009–10; however, disbursements were made to eligible claims.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 99.0 | 39.9 | 9.8 | 11.4 | 11.4 | (1.6) |
Total Transfer Payments | 99.0 | 39.9 | 9.8 | 11.4 | 11.4 | (1.6) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The small variance is due to an internal reallocation required for increased program disbursement.
Audit Completed or Planned: Cost audits have been conducted on all 3 PSIP projects, and an audit of PSIP is planned for 2012–13 as part of the Industry Canada Multi-Year, Risk-Based Internal Audit Plan 2010–11 to 2012–13.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation by the Audit and Evaluation Branch entitled Evaluation of the Program for Strategic Industrial Projects (PSIP) – Final Report was completed in 2009–10.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Industrial Technologies Office — Technology Partnerships Canada
Voted Payments
Start Date: March 11, 1996
End Date: December 31, 2006
Description: This program provides funding to support strategic research and development, and demonstration projects in the aerospace and defence, environment, and enabling technologies sectors to produce economic, social and environmental benefits for Canadians. The terms and conditions of the program expired on December 31, 2006; however, the program continues to manage existing contribution agreements for previously contracted projects.
Program Activity: Industrial Technologies Office — Special Operating Agency
Results Achieved: Increased private sector investment in research and development activities in the aerospace, defence, environmental and enabling technology industries. The TPC program closed to new investments on December 31, 2006. Existing contribution agreements are expected to be monitored and managed until 2034–35. Disbursements are made to eligible claims.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 256.6 | 198.8 | 165.5 | 141.1 | 130.9 | 34.6 |
Total Transfer Payments | 256.6 | 198.8 | 165.5 | 141.1 | 130.9 | 34.6 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): There was a reduction in R&D investment in 2009–10 as a result of the global economic crisis.
Audit Completed or Planned: Audit planned in 2012–13, as part of the IC Multi-Year, Risk-Based Internal Audit Plan 2010–11 to 2012–13.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: Summative (by December 31, 2011)
Note that the DPR total authorities for Technology Partnerships Canada (TPC), the Strategic Aerospace and Defence Initiative (SADI) and the Southern Ontario Development Program (SODP) differ from the Public Accounts as a result of an adjustment of $60 million between TPC and SADI, and $5 million between TPC and SODP. These were made to reflect the actual allocation of authorities among the respective programs.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Knowledge Infrastructure Program
Voted and Statutory Payments
Start Date: February 24, 2009
End Date: March 31, 2011
Description: The Knowledge Infrastructure Program (KIP) is a Canada’s Economic Action Plan (EAP) initiative aimed at stimulating economies in local communities by accelerating repairs, maintenance, and undertaking new construction at post-secondary institutions. This initiative was implemented through contribution agreements with the provinces and territories, and in some cases directly with institutions. External funding from the provinces/territories and/or recipient institutions was leveraged to complete these projects.
Program Activity: Canada’s Research and Innovation Capacity
Results Achieved: Provided economic stimulus in local economies across Canada through infrastructure investments at post-secondary institutions
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | - | - | - | 487.9 | 487.9 | (487.9) |
Other Type of Transfer Payments – Statutory Payments (S) | - | - | - | 500.0 | 500.0 | (500.0) |
Total Transfer Payments | - | - | - | 987.9 | 987.9 | (987.9) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): Initially, spending was planned to be $985.5 million, but midway into the fiscal year, it was determined that the administrative efficiency of the program allowed for the transfer of $2.4 million from the operating budget to Grants and Contributions to allow for additional funding to support stimulus projects.
Audit Completed or Planned: As part of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) audit of the EAP, KIP underwent the initial phase of an audit in 2009–10. The OAG will continue its audit in 2010–11 and report in the fall of 2010.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation of the KIP is scheduled for 2011–12.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Institute for Quantum Computing
Voted Payments
Start Date: April 2, 2009
End Date: March 31, 2014
Description: The Institute for Quantum Computing (IQC) was founded with the vision to be a world leader in quantum information science, and to create new technology and applications that will benefit society and become the new engine of economic development in the 21st century. The Institute is being funded through a grant of up to $50 million that supports the construction of a new building for the IQC, a world-class research institute devoted to foundational issues in quantum information sciences and technology, operated by the University of Waterloo. The funding will also support the operation of the IQC, including the purchase of necessary small equipment, the recruitment and retention of highly qualified personnel and support staff, and scientific outreach activities.
Program Activity: Canada’s Research and Innovation Capacity
Results Achieved: In 2009–10, funding for the IQC primarily went to support the construction of a new building for the Institute. Construction of the building is ongoing and on schedule for completion by early 2011, thereby providing a world-class facility for students to learn and to apply new knowledge.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Grants | - | - | - | 16.5 | 16.5 | (16.5) |
Total Transfer Payments | - | - | - | 16.5 | 16.5 | (16.5) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): This was announced in the 2009 Federal Budget; it had not initially been planned for 2009–10.
Audit Completed or Planned: The evaluation planned for March 31, 2014, will provide a compliance review.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: A 5-year evaluation of the IQC is scheduled to be completed by March 31, 2014.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI)
Voted Payments
Start Date: April 25, 1997
End Date: December 31, 2017
Description: CFI is an independent corporation created by the Government of Canada to fund research infrastructure. CFI’s mandate is to strengthen the capacity of Canadian universities, colleges, research hospitals and not-for-profit research institutions to carry out world-class research and technology development that benefits Canadians.
Program Activity: Canada’s Research and Innovation Capacity
Results Achieved: Since 1997, CFI has supported approximately 6,800 projects at 130 research institutions in 65 municipalities across Canada.
In 2009–10, CFI delivered on its mandate within the context of the federal science and technology (S&T) strategy, by:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Grants | 26.7 | 77.7 | 128.6 | 128.6 | 128.6 | 0 |
Total Transfer Payments | 26.7 | 77.7 | 128.6 | 128.6 | 128.6 | 0 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned: CFI completed the following audit activities in 2009–10:
Audited financial statements are available in the CFI 2008–09 Annual Report, which was tabled in Parliament by the Minister of Industry on October 7, 2009.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: CFI completed the following evaluation activities in 2009–10:
URL to Recipient's Site: www.innovation.ca
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR)
Voted Payments
Start Date: April 1, 2007
End Date: March 31, 2012
Description: CIFAR is a not-for-profit corporation that supports networks of some of the best Canadian and international researchers in conducting long-term research on scientific, social and economic issues of vital importance to Canada.
Program Activity: Canada’s Research and Innovation Capacity
Results Achieved: In 2009–10, CIFAR supported research carried out by 266 researchers across its existing 12 research programs.
CIFAR also:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Grants | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | - |
Total Transfer Payments | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | - |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned:
Evaluation Completed or Planned: CIFAR carried out a program evaluation in 2010, and findings were generally positive.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.cifar.ca
Note: In RPP 2009–10, CIFAR was mistakenly placed under Up-Front Multi-Year Funding Tables.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: CANARIE Network*
Statutory Payments
Start Date: March 2007
End Date: March 31, 2012
Description: The Canadian Network for the Advancement of Research, Industry and Education Inc. (CANARIE) operates and develops Canada’s advanced, high-speed backbone network that facilitates the development and use of next-generation technologies. In partnership with advanced research networks in every province, the CANARIE network connects research facilities, educational institutions, hospitals and other science facilities to each other and to their international peers. It is an essential tool for researchers and educators engaged in collaborative work.
Program Activity: Canada’s Research and Innovation Capacity
Results Achieved:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Other Type of Transfer Payment – Statutory Payments (S) | 15.0 | 28.0 | 29.0 | 28.0 | 28.0 | 1.0 |
Total Transfer Payments | 15.0 | 28.0 | 29.0 | 28.0 | 28.0 | 1.0 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned: None
Evaluation Completed or Planned: None
URL to Recipient's Site: www.canarie.ca
* In RPP 2009–10, CANARIE Network was mistakenly placed under Up-Front Multi-Year Funding Tables.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Genome Canada
Statutory Payments
Start Date: March 2000
End Date: March 2015
Description: Genome Canada is an independent corporation that supports 6 regional genome centres across Canada. Genome Canada, the primary funding and information resource concerned with genomics and proteomics in Canada, has enabled Canada to become a world leader in key areas such as agriculture, environment, fisheries, forestry, health and new technology development, as well as ethical, environmental, economic, legal and social issues related to genomics (GE3LS).
Program Activity: Canada’s Research and Innovation Capacity
Results Achieved: In 2009–10 Genome Canada:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Other Type of Transfer Payment – Statutory Payments (S) | 6.7 | 29.5 | 88.8 | 82.9 | 82.9 | 5.9 |
Total Transfer Payments | 6.7 | 29.5 | 88.8 | 82.9 | 82.9 | 5.9 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The $88.8 million in planned spending for 2009–10 was a notional amount estimated at the beginning of the funding agreement amendments (in 2007 and 2008). Consistent with the funding agreement, payments to the organization are made at the beginning of the fiscal year. At the beginning of 2009–10, a payment of $82.9 million was provided to the organization based on its planned spending for the year, and the disbursement of this funding was confirmed at the end of the fiscal year.
Audit Completed or Planned: A performance audit and overall evaluation was completed in May 2009, the findings of which were positive.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: Genome Canada completed the following evaluation activities in 2009–10:
URL to Recipient's Site: www.genomecanada.ca
Note: In RPP 2009–10, Genome Canada was mistakenly placed under Up-Front Multi-Year Funding Tables.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Perimeter Institute
Statutory Payments
Start Date: 2007
End Date: March 2012
Description: The Perimeter Institute (PI) for Theoretical Physics is an independent, non-profit, resident-based research institute devoted to foundational issues in theoretical physics at the highest levels of international excellence. PI pursues scientific research and educational outreach activities, where international scientists cluster to push the limits of understanding of physical laws and develops new ideas about the very essence of space, time, matter and information. PI provides a multi-disciplinary environment to foster research in areas of cosmology, particle physics, quantum foundations, quantum gravity, quantum information, superstring theory and related areas.
Program Activity: Canada’s Research and Innovation Capacity
Results Achieved: In 2009–10, PI accomplished the following:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Other Type of Transfer Payment – Statutory Payments (S) | 10.5 | 13.5 | 10.0 | 15.0 | 15.0 | (5.0) |
Total Transfer Payments | 10.5 | 13.5 | 10.0 | 15.0 | 15.0 | (5.0) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The $10 million in planned spending for 2009–10 was a notional amount estimated at the beginning of the funding agreement (in 2007). Consistent with the funding agreement, payments to the organization are made at the beginning of the fiscal year. Thus, in at the beginning of 2009–10, a payment of $15 million was provided to the organization based on its planned spending for the year, and the disbursement of this funding was confirmed at the end of the fiscal year.
Audit Completed or Planned:
Evaluation Completed or Planned:
A program evaluation will be completed by July 31, 2011.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.perimeterinstitute.ca
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Structured Financing Facility
Voted Payments
Start Date: September 20, 2001
End Date: March 31, 2011
Description: This program provides financing support to qualifying domestic and foreign shipowners to build or refit vessels in Canada, in order to stimulate economic activities in the Canadian shipbuilding and industrial marine industry and to help position the industry to meet government procurement requirements.
Program Activity: Global Reach and Agility in Targeted Canadian Industries
Results Achieved: The building and refit projects incentivized by this program helped to develop and maintain necessary critical infrastructure and position the industry for future procurement efforts.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 5.0 | 15.1 | 18.1 | 19.1 | 6.0 | 12.2 |
Total Transfer Payments | 5.0 | 15.1 | 18.1 | 19.1 | 6.0 | 12.2 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The economic downturn and tight credit markets beginning in 2008 resulted in decreased demand for shipping services and significantly impacted the order books of shipyards both domestically and internationally.
Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit of the SFF program during 2009–10. An audit will be conducted during 2010–11.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation is planned for 2010–11.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Canadian Apparel and Textile Industries Program
Voted Payments
Start Date: January 1, 2003
End Date: March 31, 2010
Description: The objective of the Canadian Apparel and Textile Industries Program (CATIP) is to assist the Canadian apparel and textile industries with initiatives that will help to maximize productivity, identify high-value niche markets, improve e-commerce capabilities, enhance global marketing and branding strategies, and facilitate access to capital. The program has a firm component (private sector applicants) and a national initiatives component (non-profit industry associations that represent either the apparel or textile sectors on a national scale). Since 2004, the program has also had a component, the Canadian Textiles Program (CANtex), targeted at textile producers. CANtex supports projects to improve production efficiency or to re-orient at least a portion of current textile production from lesser value-added products to higher value-added textile products targeted at growth niche markets.
Program Activity: Global Reach and Agility in Targeted Canadian Industries
Results Achieved: Overall, through all CATIP components, the program has funded 930 projects throughout the apparel and textile industries since its inception in 2003, representing more than $175 million of the total project costs of 450 organizations. These results include 40 new CANtex projects and 20 new National Initiative (NI) projects authorized by Industry Canada in 2009–10.
The NI component has continued to assist apparel and textile associations with projects designed to introduce best practices in manufacturing and value-chain development, exploit leading-edge technologies, and develop and implement global marketing strategies.
The CATIP has succeeded in assisting the apparel and textile industries, despite challenging business conditions, as they continue to transform themselves to be more competitive.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 5.7 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 3.5 | 3.4 | (1.2) |
Total Transfer Payments | 5.7 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 3.5 | 3.4 | (1.2) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance between the planned and actual spending reflected the ongoing demand for program funding despite the limited available funds in the final year of the program. Demand was accommodated through increased authorities with very little variance between total authorities and actual year-end spending.
Audit Completed or Planned: While recipient audits had been planned for 2009–10, they were not deemed necessary since there were no significant findings in the last 3 years of the program and there were no “new to the program” recipients.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: A final evaluation of the program was completed in 2009–10. In summary, the program was appropriate and well-aligned with government priorities. CATIP was successful in meeting the majority of the identified objectives, resulting in smaller, yet possibly stronger and more productive sectors.
Note: Figures do not include $2.3 million to be transferred from Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions which is included in the 2009–10 Annual Reference Level Update (ARLU).
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Marquee Tourism Events Program
Voted Payments
Start Date: April 1, 2009
End Date: March 31, 2011
Description: The Marquee Tourism Events Program (MTEP) is a 2-year EAP initiative that is intended to assist marquee tourism events to deliver world-class programs and experiences in support of tourism and the visitor economy. The MTEP makes non-repayable contributions in support of tourism events that take place in Canada.
Program Activity: Global Reach and Agility in Targeted Canadian Industries
Results Achieved: The objective of the MTEP is to help existing marquee tourism events deliver world-class programs and experiences, thereby sustaining or increasing:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 47.6 | 46.3 | (46.3) | |||
Total Transfer Payments | 47.6 | 46.3 | (46.3) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned: Office of the Auditor General: Audit of the Economic Action Plan.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation is planned for 2010–11.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Canadian Youth Business Foundation
Voted Payments
Start Date: April 1, 2002
End Date: March 31, 2012
Description: The Canadian Youth Business Foundation (CYBF) is a non-profit organization that provides support to young Canadian entrepreneurs who would not typically receive financial assistance from traditional lending institutions. It provides loans, mentorship support and online resources to entrepreneurs between the ages of 18 and 34.
Program Activity: Entrepreneurial Economy
Results Achieved: Using the $10 million announced in EAP, the CYBF provided 494 loans to young entrepreneurs.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | - | - | - | 10.0 | 10.0 | (10.0) |
Total Transfer Payments | - | - | - | 10.0 | 10.0 | (10.0) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned: None
Evaluation Completed or Planned:
An evaluation of the $10 million provided in 2005 recommended measures to improve the CYBF tracking of internal documents and also suggested that the CYBF undertake a regular review of its loan loss provision rate (to ensure that it remains appropriate) and of the methodology used to calculate it.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.cybf.ca
Note: In RPP 2009–10, CYBF was mistakenly placed under Up-Front Multi-Year Tables.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: FedNor^ — Community Futures Program
Voted Payments
Start Date: 1986
End Date: October 2, 2010
Description: The Community Futures (CF) Program supports community economic development and builds the capacity of non-metropolitan communities to realize their full sustainable potential. Funding is made available through transfer payments that provide contributions to designated CF organizations in support of repayable business financing through local investment funds, strategic community planning and socio-economic development, business services, and community-based projects and special initiatives.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: Through the Community Futures Program in Northern Ontario, 1,001 businesses were created, expanded, maintained or strengthened. In addition, $1.7 were leveraged for every Community Futures dollar invested by Industry Canada.
As a result of funds invested in Southern Ontario 3,788 businesses were created, expanded and maintained. In addition, $1.96 were leveraged from other sources for every dollar invested by Industry Canada and FedDev Ontario in Southern Ontario.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 20.8 | 21.5 | 21.8 | 21.7 | 21.6* | 0.2 |
Total Transfer Payments | 20.8 | 21.5 | 21.8 | 21.7 | 21.6* | 0.2 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned: An audit of the CF Program was conducted in 2009–10 and indicated that, with the exception of a few files which were not material, the program generally complies with appropriate acts, regulations and policies.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: Evaluation timing to be determined.
^ The name of this transfer payment program according to the Industry Canada 2009–10 Program Activity Architecture should be “Community Futures Program.” which covers all of Ontario.
* Actual Spending represents Industry Canada and FedDev Ontario.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: FedNor — Northern Ontario Development Program
Voted Payments
Start Date: April 1, 2006
End Date: June 30, 2011
Description: The Northern Ontario Development Program promotes economic development and diversification in Northern Ontario. It builds upon the assets and strengths of communities to maximize the sustainable potential of Northern Ontario to succeed in the knowledge-based economy. Funding through transfer payments provides contributions to not-for-profit organizations and small and medium-sized enterprises in 6 areas: information and communications technology, innovation, community economic development, business financing support, trade and tourism, and human capital.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: In 2009–10, 606 Northern Ontario businesses and organizations were created, expanded or maintained. In addition, $3.2 were leveraged from other sources for every NODP dollar invested.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 37.2 | 40.8 | 37.8 | 38.6 | 38.6 | (0.8) |
Total Transfer Payments | 37.2 | 40.8 | 37.8 | 38.6 | 38.6 | (0.8) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned: None
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation is planned in 2010–11.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Computers for Schools
Voted payments
Start Date: October 1993
End Date: March 31, 2013
Description: Computers and the Internet have emerged as critical tools for information processing and sharing. The work and life of Canadians is increasingly undertaken in the context of a global, knowledge-based economy, which demands a high level of skill in the area of information and communications technologies (ICTs).
In order to develop proficiency in ICT skills, access to its tools, especially computers, has become essential for Canadians. Youth in particular require access to computers in K–12 school settings, where the demand for computers often exceeds the available supply. By delivering refurbished computers, Computers for Schools helps fill the gap in demand and helps ensure that more Canadians may better avail themselves of the tools necessary to live and work successfully in the knowledge economy.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: In 2009–10, the Computers for Schools program refurbished and delivered approximately 61,914 computers to schools and not-for-profit learning organizations throughout the country. A total of 330 youth were employed through the Computers for Schools program for 2009–10, providing them with hands-on technical job experience.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 7.4 | 7.3 | 3.4 | 7.2 | 7.2 | (3.8) |
Total Transfer Payments | 7.4 | 7.3 | 3.4 | 7.2 | 7.2 | (3.8) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance between the planned and actual spending is due to the fact that the Computers for Schools Youth component was not accounted for in the planned spending for 2009–10.
Audit Completed or Planned:
Evaluation Completed or Planned: None
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Community Access Program (CAP)
Voted Payments
Start Date: October 1994
End Date: March 31, 2010
Description: The Community Access Program (CAP) was established under the Government's Connecting Canadians initiative to provide affordable access to the Internet and the services and tools it provides. The program's goal was to have all Canadians and communities participate fully in the knowledge-based economy.
CAP sites are located in schools, libraries, community centres and friendship centres, and they operate through partnerships with provincial/territorial governments and non-profit organizations. CAP also has a complementary youth component, the CAP Youth Initiative, which is funded through Human Resources and Social Development Canada’s (HRSDC) Youth Employment Strategy (YES). For more information regarding YES, please see the Horizontal Initiatives table in HRSDC's Report on Plans and Priorities.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: In 2009–10, the CAP provided affordable public access to the Internet and related information and communications technologies through approximately 3,639 CAP sites across Canada.
Through the CAP Youth Initiative, a total of 1,402 youth were also employed through work placements in CAP sites, which provided them with work experience in the areas of information and communications technology (ICT).
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 23.6 | 23.4 | - | 24.0 | 23.7 | (23.7) |
Total Transfer Payments | 23.6 | 23.4 | - | 24.0 | 23.7 | (23.7) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): Initially, the program did not have any planned spending due to the fact that it was scheduled to expire March 31, 2009. It was subsequently renewed for 1 year until March 31, 2010, which accounts for the variance of $23.7 million.
Audit Completed or Planned: None
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An Evaluation of CAP was completed in 2009–10.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Broadband Canada: Connecting Rural Canadians
Voted Payments
Start Date: April 1, 2009
End Date: March 31, 2013
Description: Budget 2009 provided $225 million for the development and implementation of a strategy to extend broadband Internet coverage. By far the largest component of this strategy is the Broadband Canada: Connecting Rural Canadians program. Broadband Internet access is viewed as essential infrastructure for participating in today's economy, as it enables citizens, businesses and institutions to access information, services and opportunities that could otherwise be out of reach. The Broadband Canada program’s goal is to encourage the expansion and availability of broadband connectivity to as many currently unserved and underserved households in Canada as possible. The program aims to provide essential infrastructure to Canadians in rural and remote areas, allowing them to participate in the digital economy.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: Due to the high response to the program, and significant overlap in planned coverage, the application assessment phase took longer than anticipated. The Broadband Canada program has now completed its assessment of applications and will select successful candidates in 2010.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | - | - | 79.4 | - | ||
Total Transfer Payments | - | - | 79.4 | - |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned: Audit of the Broadband Canada: Connecting Rural Canadians is planned in 2010–11.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: None
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Community Adjustment Fund
Statutory Payments
Start Date: June 19, 2009
End Date: March 31, 2013
Description: The Community Adjustment Fund (CAF) is an economic stimulus initiative to create employment opportunities and support adjustment measures in communities impacted by the economic downturn. Budget 2009 identified $1 billion nationally over 2 years for the Community Adjustment Fund. In Ontario, the Community Adjustment Fund will provide $348.9 million over 2 years to support adjustment measures in communities affected by the global economic downturn.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: In 2009–10, $70.2 million was committed to Northern Ontario organizations and communities, including $41 million in funds leveraged from the recipient organizations and communities, to respond to the economic downturn. As a result, 1,074 person-months of employment were created by CAF investments in Northern Ontario.
In Southern Ontario, funding commitments were made with 516 projects for a total commitment of $146.2 million. A total of $106.9 million was expended by the end of 2009–10. Some projects have been extended into the first quarter of 2010–11 to allow for the completion of project activities.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments – Statutory Payments (S) | 116.0 | 116.0 | (116.0) | |||
Total Transfer Payments | 116.0 | 116.0 | (116.0) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance between the planned and the actual spending is due to the fact that this was a new Budget 2009 initiative that was not accounted for in the planned spending for 2009–10.
Audit Completed or Planned: No audits relative to this funding have been conducted to date.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation is planned for CAF in Northern Ontario in 2010–11.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Eastern Ontario Development Program
Voted Payments
Start Date: October 12, 2004
End Date: March 31, 2009
Description: This program promotes socio-economic development in Eastern Ontario that leads to business and job opportunities, sustainable self-reliant communities, and a competitive and diversified regional economy. Delivered through Community Futures Development Corporations in Eastern Ontario, the program makes funding available through transfer payments to provide contributions in 5 priority areas: business and community development, access to capital, skills development, retention and attraction of youth, and technological enhancement.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: Communities and businesses in rural Eastern Ontario are sustainable and competitive.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 9.4 | 9.6 | 9.6 | 9.6 | 9.6 | 0.0 |
Total Transfer Payments | 9.4 | 9.6 | 9.6 | 9.6 | 9.6 | 0.0 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Audit Completed or Planned: No audits relative to this funding have been conducted to date.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation is planned in 2010–11.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Building Canada Fund: The Ontario Potable Water Program
Voted Payments
Start Date: December 13, 2007
End Date: March 31, 2011
Description: The Ontario Potable Water Program (OPWP) provides financial assistance in the form of grants to Ontario municipalities that incurred additional costs in the development of their Canada–Ontario Infrastructure Program (COIP) drinking water projects to meet Ontario drinking water regulations. FedDev Ontario has taken over the delivery of this program from Industry Canada since its inception in August 2009.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: 25 grant agreements were signed. $12 million in grants were distributed. The delayed completion of COIP projects affected the ability to meet the target in the first year of the program, resulting in $22.5 million being reallocated to 2010–11.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Grants | 2.2 | 10.4 | 34.5 | 31.0 | 12.0 | 22.5 |
Total Transfer Payments | 2.2 | 10.4 | 34.5 | 31.0 | 12.0 | 22.5 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): $22.5 million has been reallocated to 2010–11 due to COIP delay. The eligibility for grants under this program is dependent on final costs resulting from the completion of water projects under the COIP.
Audit Completed or Planned: No audits relative to this funding have been conducted to date.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: Evaluation planned for 2010–11.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Brantford Greenwich–Mohawk Remediation Project
Voted Payments
Start Date: May 8, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2013
Description: The project is a brownfield remediation. The site is located between Mohawk and Greenwich Streets with a total area of 50 acres. Once remediated, the land will be redeveloped ensuring remediation to provincial standards. FedDev Ontario has taken over the delivery of this program from Industry Canada since its inception in August 2009.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: Brantford tendered for remediation and development of the site. Negotiations between the city and the developer were still in progress as of March 31, 2010. The developer has been completing its initial site investigations to confirm the extent of remediation required.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Grants | - | 0.4 | 8.1 | 8.1 | - | 8.1 |
Total Transfer Payments | - | 0.4 | 8.1 | 8.1 | - | 8.1 |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance arises from the fact that negotiations between the city and the developer were still in progress as of March 31, 2010. $8.1 million has been reallocated to 2010–11.
Audit Completed or Planned: No audits relative to this funding have been conducted to date.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation is planned for 2011–12.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Canada–Ontario Infrastructure Program (COIP)
Voted Payments
Start Date: October 25, 2000
End Date: March 31, 2011
Description: The Canada–Ontario Infrastructure Program (COIP) provides funding assistance to local governments and public- or private-sector corporate bodies for the construction, renewal, expansion or materials enhancement of infrastructure that will contribute to improving the quality of life for Ontarians through investments that enhance the quality of the environment, support long-term economic growth, enhance community infrastructure, and build 21st-century infrastructure through using new approaches and the best technologies. FedDev Ontario delivers the program on behalf of Infrastructure Canada, and in partnership with the Province of Ontario. FedDev Ontario has taken over the delivery of this program from Industry Canada since its inception in August 2009.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: To promote regional economic development in specific small and rural Ontario municipalities.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 33,0 | 11.8 | - | 11.7 | 6.2 | (6.2) |
Total Transfer Payments | 33,0 | 11.8 | - | 11.7 | 6.2 | (6.2) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): This is a sunset program. 2009–10 spending reflected funds re-profiled in 2008–09.
Audit Completed or Planned: Final project audit completed 2009–10.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: Evaluation completed in 2009–10.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Recreational Infrastructure Canada Program
Voted Payments
Start Date: May 2009
End Date: March 31, 2011
Description: RInC, launched in May 2009, is a 2-year economic stimulus program designed to provide a timely, targeted stimulus to communities through investments that will create jobs and spur construction activity related to existing recreational infrastructure. It is also expected to encourage higher levels of participation in physical activity and community building. The national allocation for RInC is $500 million and Ontario’s portion over 2 years is $195 million in total. In Ontario, FedDev Ontario is delivering the program in parallel with the Province of Ontario’s Ontario REC program. FedDev Ontario has taken over the delivery of this program from Industry Canada since its inception in August 2009.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: 765 projects governed by 362 signed contribution agreements worth $188.9 million are being administered. $30 million has been disbursed by March 31, 2010.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 0.0 | 96.5 | 30.0 | (30.0) | ||
Total Transfer Payments | 0.0 | 96.5 | 30.0 | (30.0) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): $66.5 million was re-profiled for 2010–11. The remaining difference is attributable to the initial withdrawal of 6 projects.
Audit Completed or Planned: No audits relative to this funding have been conducted to date.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: No evaluation is required. A summary report is planned for 2011–12.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Southern Ontario Development Program
Voted Payments
Start Date: August 13, 2009
End Date: March 31, 2014
Description: The Southern Ontario Development Program supports the economic development and diversification of Southern Ontario communities. The program provides funding through contribution agreements to not-for-profit organizations and small and medium-sized enterprises in 6 priority areas: community economic development, information and communications technology, innovation, trade and tourism, human capital, and business financing support.
Program Activity: Community, Economic and Regional Development
Results Achieved: In total, 96 project submissions were authorized and will proceed to receive multi-year contributions totalling $130.6 million. These projects have directly assisted 661 businesses and community organizations to date. Additional businesses and organizations will be supported in 2010–11.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Contributions | 104.9 | 43.5 | (43.5) | |||
Total Transfer Payments | 104.9 | 43.5 | (43.5) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance between the planned and actual spending is due to the fact that this was a new Budget 2009 initiative that was not accounted for in the planned spending for 2009–10.
Audit Completed or Planned: No audits relative to this funding have been conducted to date.
Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation is planned in 2014–15.
Note that the DPR total authorities for Technology Partnerships Canada (TPC), the Strategic Aerospace and Defence Initiative (SADI) and the Southern Ontario Development Program (SODP) differ from the Public Accounts as a result of an adjustment of $60 million between TPC and SADI, and $5 million between TPC and SODP. These were made to reflect the actual allocation of authorities among the respective programs.
Name of Transfer Payment Program: Canada Small Business Financing Program*
Statutory Payments
Start Date: 1961
End Date: Ongoing
Description: The Canada Small Business Financing Program (CSBF) is a key federal financing program for small business. It helps small and medium-sized business get access to adequate financing. It also helps fill a gap in the range of financing instruments available to these small businesses, which otherwise have difficulty qualifying for financing that meets their needs.
Program Activity: Entrepreneurial Economy
Results Achieved:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total Other Types of Transfer Payments (Statutory Payments) | CSBFA 100.3 |
CSBFA 110.3 |
CSBFA 83.9 |
CSBFA 116.5 |
CSBFA 116.5 |
CSBFA (32.6) |
SBLA 1.4 |
SBLA 0.6 |
SBLA 1.7 |
SBLA 0.2 |
SBLA 0.2 |
SBLA 1.5 |
|
Total Transfer Payments | 101.7 | 110.9 | 85.6 | 116.7 | 116.7 | (31.1) |
Comment(s) on Variance(s): Variances for the CSBF Program were due to higher-than-anticipated claims being received in 2009–10.
The main factors contributing to the variances were:
Audit Completed or Planned: None
Evaluation Completed or Planned: In accordance with the Canada Small Business Financing Act, a Comprehensive Review of the provisions and operations of the Act must be tabled in Parliament within 15 sitting days after March 31, 2010, for the period from April 1, 2004, to March 31, 2009. The review helps the Department monitor and assess the operational and financial performance of the program. As part of the review process, an independent third-party evaluation of the CSBF Program was conducted by KPMG for the most recent 5-year lending period (2004–09).
The evaluation study confirms that although the program is relevant and cost-effective, it has impediments such as low awareness among SMEs, a heavy administrative burden and limited program breadth. As a result, in 2009–10 Industry Canada worked to increase awareness of the CSBF Program and worked with financial institutions to reduce the administrative burden. The evaluation also found that the benefits to the Canadian economy outweigh the costs incurred to provide this program.
The government is working to increase awareness of the CSBF Program among SMEs through various means. This includes the implementation of a strategy to proactively increase awareness of the program among SMEs through intermediaries such as small business member groups, trade associations and chambers of commerce.
CSBF Program officials are working with participating financial institutions to develop electronic data and fund transfer processes for the program in order to decrease some of the administrative and paper burden.
Industry Canada is responsible for administering funding agreements with the following foundations.
Science and Technology, Knowledge, and Innovation are Effective Drivers of a Strong Canadian Economy
Name of Recipient: Brain Research Centre
Start Date: February 28, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2012
Total Funding ($ millions): 15.0
Description: The Brain Research Centre (BRC) is a unique research facility that operates as a hub-and-spoke facility, with teams of neuroscientists (over 190 investigators) located at the University of British Columbia campus and other locations in Vancouver and beyond. The largest of its kind in Canada, the Centre’s structure and multidisciplinary approach maximizes the potential to bridge the gap between basic science and its clinical applications, while contributing to significant discoveries and the development of effective new therapies.
BRC’s main research goals are to:
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient:
In 2009–10, BRC:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
15.0 |
- | - | - | - | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: The compliance audit to be completed in 2010–11 will provide the project review.
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit of the Brain Research Centre is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2010.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.brain.ubc.ca/
Name of Recipient: Canada School for Energy and the Environment (formerly known as The Canada School of Sustainable Energy)
Start Date: March 7, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2014
Total Funding ($ millions): 15.0
Description: Canada School of Energy and Environment (CSEE) is a unique virtual institute, building on capacity within the University of Calgary, the University of Alberta, and the University of Lethbridge, and located in the heart of Canada’s energy sector. CSEE’s goal is to address the challenge of resource sustainability, while protecting environmental quality and addressing climate change, and to consolidate the best researchers, academics and technologists into a single coordinated centre to become the global leader in integrated research, policy and technology for the natural resources and energy sectors. It brings together the best thinking in academia, industry, and government for the economic, social, and environmental benefit of all Canadians. By doing so, it offers global solutions to common challenges.
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient: In 2009–10, the CSEE launched the first two rounds of its proof-of-principle competitions, with 7 and 9 projects selected respectively. Results of the third round are expected in 2010.
CSEE also hosted its inaugural conference, The Search for a Canada–U.S. Climate Accord: The Road to Copenhagen, which was attended by policy-makers, industry leaders and government officials. The conference was designed to produce concrete ideas and solutions to guide domestic and international development on climate change and to deal with the scientific issues related to climate change.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
15.0 |
- | - | - | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit to be completed in 2013–14 will provide the project review.
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit of the Canada School of Energy and Environment is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2013.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.canadaschoolofenergy.com/
Name of Recipient: Council of Canadian Academies
Start Date: July 2005
End Date: 2015
Total Funding ($ millions): 30.0
Description: The Council of Canadian Academies (CCA) is an arm’s-length, not-for-profit organization that was established to assess the state of scientific knowledge underpinning key public policy issues. Its founding members are the Royal Society of Canada, the Canadian Academy of Engineering and the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences.
The Government of Canada provided a $30-million, one-time conditional grant in July 2005 from Budget 2005, which entitles the government to up to 5 assessments per year. All CCA assessments are undertaken by independent panels of qualified experts from Canada and abroad. Each assessment takes 12 months to 2 years to complete.
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient: The CCA published 3 assessments in 2009–10. In April 2009, it completed Innovation and Business Strategy: Why Canada Falls Short, sponsored by Industry Canada. In May 2009, it completed The Sustainable Management of Groundwater in Canada, sponsored by Natural Resources Canada, and Better Business for Better Research, sponsored by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Each of the assessments has been used by its sponsor to inform policy development.
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
- | - | - | - | - | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: As per its funding agreement commitments, a 5-year external evaluation was performed by an independent expert panel and published by the CCA. It provided long-term, strategic recommendations for the organization. The External Evaluation Panel's review found that the CCA is delivering on the objectives set out in its founding documents and incorporated into the funding agreement and has added value in informing public debate and decision making.
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit conducted as of March 31, 2007, identified areas where amendments to the funding agreement were recommended to better reflect the original intent. The funding agreement was subsequently amended to clarify spending limits, ensure that limits on investment holdings reflected current Department of Finance Canada guidelines, and to ensure that the process for establishing assessment panels and associated budgets and timelines spelled out in the agreement better reflected actual requirements and practices.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.scienceadvice.ca
Name of Recipient: Heart and Stroke Foundation Centre for Stroke Recovery
Start Date: March 7, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2012
Total Funding ($ millions): 15.0
Description: The Heart and Stroke Foundation Centre for Stroke Recovery (HSFCSR), affiliated with the University of Toronto and the University of Ottawa, is developing a program of integrated, translational research that includes molecular biology, laboratory models and clinical studies that help pave the way for designing and testing post-stroke interventions and therapies more quickly.
The Centre’s primary research objective is to establish a program of excellence in brain recovery research that will be globally competitive and will have a realistic likelihood of leading to effective functional improvements after a stroke.
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient: In 2009–10, the HSFCSR achieved the following:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
15.0 |
- | - | - | - | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: The compliance audit to be completed in 2010–11 will provide the project review.
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit of the HSFCSR is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2010.
URL to Recipient's Site: heartandstroke-centrestrokerecovery.ca/
Name of Recipient: Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (St. Michael’s Hospital)
Start Date: March 13, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2011
Total Funding ($ millions): 15.0
Description: Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute (LKSKI) of St. Michael’s Hospital will bring together research, education and clinical care with a commitment to knowledge translation in order to bridge the gap between research knowledge and health care practice. The Institute will initially focus on inner city health, heart and lung disease, diabetes, nutrition, brain injury and multi-organ failure, building on existing research teams of scientists, research coordinators, programmers and technicians.
The Institute’s main objectives are to generate knowledge about the:
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient: In 2009–10:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
15.0 |
- | - | - | - | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: The compliance audit to be completed in 2010–11 will provide the project review.
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit of the LKSKI is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2010.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.stmichaelshospital.com/knowledgeinstitute/
Name of Recipient: Life Sciences Research Institute (Dalhousie University)
Start Date: February 19, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2011
Total Funding ($ millions): 15.0
Description: The Life Sciences Research Institute (LSRI) is a partnership of Capital Health, Dalhousie University and the IWK Health Centre. LSRI will provide open concept research and incubator space for the Halifax region’s growing life sciences and biotechnology sector and has potential to create employment, attract investment, foster innovation and improve the quality of health care and life for people in the region.
The Institute’s objectives are to:
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient: In 2009–10, the LSRI achieved the following:
Actual |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
15.0 |
- | - | - | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit to be completed in 2010–11 will provide the project review.
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit of the LSRI is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2010.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.lsri.ca/
Name of Recipient: Montreal Neurological Institute
Start Date: March 3, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2010
Total Funding ($ millions): 15.0
Description: The Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) is a teaching and research institute of McGill University in which multidisciplinary teams of researchers work to generate fundamental information about the nervous system and apply that knowledge to understanding and treating patients with neurological diseases. Over 80 faculty members contribute their world-class research and clinical strengths in multidisciplinary teams of investigators, trained in fields such as neurology, neurosurgery, cellular and molecular biochemistry, engineering and psychology.
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient: In 2009–10, MNI:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
15.0 |
- | - | - | - | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: The compliance audit completed in 2009–10 provided the project review.
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit was conducted on the Institute in 2009–10, which found that the MNI was in compliance with the requirements of its funding agreement with Industry Canada. It included recommendations to provide greater clarity and more information in its annual reports.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.mni.mcgill.ca/
Name of Recipient: Precarn Incorporated
Start Date: April 1, 2005
End Date: March 31, 2010
Total Funding ($ millions): 20.0
Description: Precarn is Canada’s national organization for the development and commercialization of intelligent systems and robotics. In the Precarn model for commercializing research and development, a private sector technology developer enters into a formal collaborative agreement with Precarn. This agreement incorporates a commercialization plan and a marketing strategy for the technology under development.
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
- | - | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: A summative evaluation for the 5-year funding period was completed March 31, 2010. Most of the 7 program objectives were met, including those related to commercialization, technology adoption, and highly qualified persons. Exceptions were the objectives of maintaining national communities of interest and increased understanding of trends. These objectives were considered less successful by participants, largely owing to resource constraints on Precarn.
In a recent evaluation, most project participants indicated that they experienced an increase (completed projects) or anticipate an increase (ongoing projects) in sales as a result of their Precarn project — approximately 70% of developers in the survey obtained new revenue sources, roughly 65% hired new employees, 55% filed for patents, and 55% attracted new investment.
The economic impact of technology developers supported by Precarn was analyzed using a quantitative model. The Precarn program project expenditures of $15.0 million, plus company expenditures of $39.7 million, resulted in $54.7 million of total project expenditures. This is expected to result in $400.2 million in future sales for Precarn-funded companies (in addition to first customer), and $1.26 billion in future sales for other Canadian companies that have benefited from Precarn-funded technology (diffusion).
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: Audited financial statements for 2009–10 will be submitted with the Annual Report, due by July 31, 2010.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.precarn.ca
Name of Recipient: Trudeau Foundation
Start Date: March 31, 2002
End Date: Ongoing
Total Funding ($ millions): 125.0
Description: The Trudeau Foundation supports research and the dissemination of research findings in the humanities and human sciences, such as Canadian studies, history, international relations, journalism, law, peace and conflict studies, philosophy, political economy, political science, sociology, and urban and community studies.
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient: In 2009–10, the Trudeau Foundation:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
- | - | - | - | - | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: An evaluation was completed in 2008–09 with the next one scheduled for 2013–14. The 2008–09 evaluation indicated that the program was meeting its objectives.
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: No audit has been conducted as per the funding agreement.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.trudeaufoundation.ca
Name of Recipient: The National Optics Institute
Start Date: February 19, 2008
End Date: March 31, 2011
Total Funding ($ millions): 15.0
Description: The National Optics Institute (INO), located in Quebec, is a world-class centre of expertise in optics and photonics, and works with businesses to help them find solutions and technology platforms to meet their needs. INO provides research and development support for clients, prototype production, technology transfer, and promotes innovative projects. In the last 5 years, INO has generated earnings of $141 million, has created 20 new optics and photonics spinoffs, and has made 28 technology transfers to industry.
Program Activity: Government Science and Technology Policy Agenda in Partnership with Key Stakeholders
Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient: In 2009–10, INO:
Actual Spending 2007–08 |
Actual Spending 2008–09 |
Planned Spending 2009–10 |
Total Authorities 2009–10 |
Actual Spending 2009–10 |
Variance(s) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
15.0 |
- | - | - | - | - |
Comments on Variance(s):
Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient: The compliance audit to be completed in 2010–11 will provide the project review.
Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient: A compliance audit of INO is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 2010.
URL to Recipient's Site: www.ino.ca/en-ca/
Industry Canada is involved in a number of horizontal initiatives, working in partnership with other federal departments, other levels of government, non-governmental organizations and private sector organizations. Industry Canada’s involvement in these initiatives contributes to the Department’s achievement of its strategic outcomes.
Industry Canada is the lead for the following significant horizontal initiatives:
Name of Horizontal Initiative: BizPaL
Lead Department(s): Industry Canada
Lead Department Program Activity: Entrepreneurial Economy
Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: January 31, 2005
End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: March 31, 2011
Total Federal Funding Allocation ($ millions): 15.5
Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement): BizPaL is a unique collaboration of federal, provincial/territorial and municipal governments working together in a new service delivery model to improve access to information on permits and licences needed from all orders of government to start or operate a business.
Integrated into local government websites or portals, BizPaL provides a single point of contact for entrepreneurs, enabling them to quickly learn which permits and licences they will need from municipal, provincial/territorial and federal governments.
Federal funding supports secretariat services, expansion and development of the service and the federal role. None of the participants (provinces/territories/municipalities) receive federal funds for the BizPaL initiative. They provide in-kind support in their respective jurisdictions. Provincial and territorial participants also contribute funds to a specified purpose account to support basic operating costs in accordance with a cost-sharing formula based on population size.
Shared Outcome(s):
Governance Structure(s): BizPaL represents a shared governance model that involves participants from the federal, provincial/territorial, and municipal levels of government. Industry Canada manages the expansion and evolution of the BizPaL service and develops relationships among participating jurisdictions.
Although governance is shared through various participant committees, Industry Canada is accountable for the federal resources contributed to the BizPaL Initiative. The Department is also responsible for enlisting the participation of federal government departments to BizPaL and provides a centralized support function to the partnership.*
Federal Partners | Federal Partner Program Activity | Names of Programs for Federal Partners | Total Allocation (from start to end date) | Planned Spending for 2009–10 |
Actual Spending for 2009–10 |
Variance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Industry Canada (lead) | Small Business and Marketplace Services and Regional Operations Sector — Economic Development | BizPaL | 15.5 | 3.0 | 2.2 | 0.8 |
Natural Resources Canada | Management and Oversight (Internal Services) | BizPaL | Not applicable | Not applicable | ||
Total | 15.5 | 3.0 | 2.2 | 0.8 |
Expected Results for 2009–10: Accelerated expansion of the service to all interested provincial and territorial governments and local government participants within those provinces and territories
Results Achieved in 2009–10: To date, 11 provinces and territories are participating in BizPaL, with more than 300 municipalities offering the service. Industry Canada will continue its efforts to recruit the remaining 2 provinces and territories.
Comments on Variances:
Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners (if applicable): N/A
Contact information:
Executive Director
Service Delivery and Partnerships
Small Business and Marketplace Services Sector
Industry Canada
613-954-3576
Note: This table will be posted on both the secretariat's TBS main DPR website and the Horizontal Initiatives Database website.
Name of Horizontal Initiative: Canada Business Network (Amalgamation of Canada Business Service Centres (CBSC) and Business Gateway (BG))
Description: In January 2009, the EAP announced $15 million per year for 2 years to improve services offered to small and medium-sized business owners through the Canada Business Network (CBN) program.
A-based funding was also secured, ensuring ongoing support for small businesses. The federal partners that deliver CBN are Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions, Industry Canada and Western Economic Diversification. The 4 managing departments will report on the strategic objectives and performance results of the CBN through their respective RPPs and DPRs.
1. Has the Department incorporated environmental performance considerations in its procurement decision-making processes? Yes.
For the purchase of executive vehicles, Contracts and Materiel Management influences the decision making and highly encourages the purchase of alternative-fuelled vehicles. Industry Canada currently has 4 executive vehicles, all of which are hybrid.
Industry Canada continues to use Computer Media Group for their cartridge recycling program. The supplier collects on average 3,500 cartridges per year. Each cartridge is sent back to the appropriate manufacturer to be cleaned and refilled as recycled toner, or recycled for its usable parts, or at the very least, is melted down to become recycled plastic.
IC is currently engaged in a procurement process for the department’s printer optimization initiative. IC’s target is to have a contract in place in 2010 and the full implantation by fiscal year-end. The procurement process took environmental factors into consideration. For example, ENERGY STAR (or equivalent) has been included as part of the evaluation.
2. Summary of initiatives to incorporate environmental-performance considerations in procurement decision-making processes
At IC, procurement activity is decentralized, presenting challenges in managing the kinds of products that are purchased. However, in order to have procurement delegation, staff members must follow a 2-day mandatory contracting course, which includes the Policy on Green Procurement.
Initiative: IC is currently engaged in a procurement project that incorporated environmental performance considerations in the decision making. The printer optimization initiative is intended to achieve a person-per-device ratio of 5:1 by 2010–11 and 8:1 by 2011–12. Replacing the inefficient and out-of-date devices making up the Department’s current 2:1 ratio with modern equipment will offer a broad range of financial and environmental benefits.
Initiative: IC created a tracking and reporting tool for green procurement activity in the Information Financial Management System (IFMS). A department-wide publication on the subject was issued March 2010. The new functionality was added to IFMS on April 1, 2010. Users will be able to click on the drop-down menu and select one of the following choices: Normal, Unknown and Green.
3. Results achieved
Since the printer optimization project is not completed and implementation has not taken place, results achieved are not currently available.
Training, awareness and full implementation of the use of the IFMS green procurement tracking tool has not been completed.
4. Contributions to facilitate government-wide implementation of green procurement
N/A
5. Has the Department established green procurement targets?
N/A
7. Summary of green procurement targets
N/A
8. Results achieved
N/A
On May 28, 2009, Competition Bureau officials appeared before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-food regarding its study, Competitiveness of Canadian Agriculture. The Chair of the Committee requested that the Bureau provide recommendations for the powers, tools and resources it needs to address the competitive issues raised by this Committee. These issues include captive supply, high-input costs, margin squeeze, access to retail grocery space, dominance in the retail and processing sectors and others. The Bureau provided a letter of response, dated June 8, 2009. In addition, the Committee members requested a copy of the Abuse of Dominance Provisions, sections 78 and 79 of the Competition Act, as applied to the Canadian Grocery Sector guidelines, which were sent to the Committee Clerk in both official languages for distribution to the members.
On November 18, 2009, Competition Bureau officials appeared before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology regarding its study on credit cards, debit cards and Interac. The Bureau officials committed to providing the Committee with a statistical breakdown of complaints received during the past year by enforcement line, as well as information on the impact of credit card company practices in foreign jurisdictions when they have entered into the debit market. The Competition Bureau responded with a letter dated December 7, 2009.
The Industry Canada Associate Deputy Minister appeared before the Public Accounts Comittee (PAC) in November 2009 to table the joint IC/TBS management action plan to address issues raised in the OAG Chapter Intellectual Property. The key items discussed were the adequacy of monitoring and meeting the objectives of the TBS policy on Title to Intellectual Property Arising Under Crown Procurement Contracts.
Intellectual property includes rights resulting from intellectual activity in the industrial, scientific, literary or artistic fields. This includes all intellectual creation legally protected through patents, copyright, industrial design, integrated circuit topography, and plant breeders’ rights, or subject to protection under the law as trade secrets and confidential information. The federal government generates intellectual property as a component of activities carried out under federal contracts to procure goods and services. Intellectual property is also generated by the federal government through its own science and research activities.
The audit also looked at the roles of Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat in monitoring the application of the federal policy governing intellectual property that arises under Crown procurement contracts.
The audit found that the federal government is not in a position to know whether the objective of the 8-year-old policy on Title to Intellectual Property Arising Under Crown Procurement Contracts is being met. It does not know how much intellectual property is generated externally in the course of contracted work. None of the entities audited adequately identify and report whether work performed under contract is likely to generate intellectual property. Based on the audit, Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat have not adequately fulfilled their obligations to monitor the application of the policy, with a focus on cases where exceptions were involved, and to evaluate the policy.
The management action plan in response to the recommendations of this audit was presented to the Departmental Audit Committee in 2009–10.
Recommendations and Industry Canada Responses:
2.25 Recommendation: Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat should work with federal entities to improve the monitoring of the application of the policy on Title to Intellectual Property Arising Under Crown Procurement Contracts, with a focus on cases where exceptions were invoked. They should work with federal entities to ensure that intellectual property data are accurately interpreted and that reporting systems correctly report ownership to support a future evaluation of the policy.
Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s response: Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat agree with the recommendation. Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat agree to work with federal entities to ensure that they are aware of the need for accurate and comprehensive data collection to allow for a future evaluation of the policy’s effectiveness. Pursuant to the Treasury Board of Canada policy on Title to Intellectual Property Arising Under Crown Procurement Contracts (Section 10), deputy heads are accountable for implementing the policy and ensuring that reporting responsibilities are met.
In 2007, Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat took action to ensure necessary modifications were made to the reporting systems for procurement contracts. A Contracting Policy Notice was subsequently sent to departments and agencies advising of these changes. In addition, activities were undertaken to help federal entities understand these modifications, including a revision of the Implementation Guide for the Policy, the preparation of frequently asked questions, and the development of an e-learning product on intellectual property. These actions will help ensure the collection of more accurate data, which will be examined on an annual basis, to support an evaluation of the policy as planned in 2011.
2.33 Recommendation: Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat should coordinate their ongoing and planned assessments of the existing intellectual property policies to provide better and more efficient support for common issues relating to the management of intellectual property.
Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s response: Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat agree with the recommendation. Industry Canada and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat will work together to ensure assessments of existing intellectual property policies are coordinated and comprehensively address common issues. Industry Canada will share with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat and other departments, through the Assistant Deputy Minister Committee on Science and Technology, assessments of federal intellectual property policies emanating from the work of the interdepartmental Knowledge Translation and Commercialization Working Group, which is co-chaired by Industry Canada and the National Research Council Canada. The working group was established following the release of the 2007 federal Science and Technology Strategy.
Responsibility for ensuring the health and safety of federal employees working in a federally administered office building is shared among many parties. Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) is responsible for ensuring that federally occupied buildings, their operating systems and equipment remain safe in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC), through its Labour Program, is responsible for administering and enforcing fire protection policy and standards in federally occupied buildings. In addition, individual departments are responsible for the health and safety of their employees working in these buildings.
The audit also assessed whether departments were planning for fire emergencies in compliance with key requirements of the Treasury Board Standard for Fire Safety Planning and Fire Emergency Organization (the Standard), including conducting required fire drills. In addition, the audit looked at the activities of Fire Protection Services (formerly called the Fire Commissioner of Canada), the division within HRSDC’s Labour Program responsible for administering and enforcing this standard. The audit also looked at the role of the Labour Program’s regional and district offices in reviewing fire safety plans for buildings occupied by the federal government.
The audit found that although departments are required to hold annual fire evacuation drills to train employees and test evacuation procedures, in 33% of the 54 buildings reviewed, the departments could not demonstrate that they were doing so. Furthermore, the departments occupying almost all of the high-rise buildings we reviewed are not carrying out the additional drills required. Departments do not comply with key requirements of the Standard for Fire Safety Planning and Fire Emergency Organization. For example, fire safety plans for the majority of buildings in the audit had not been submitted to HRSDC’s Labour Program — the federal government’s technical authority on fire safety — for review and acceptance.
HRSDC’s Labour Program does not fully administer and enforce the Standard for Fire Safety Planning and Fire Emergency Organization. There is no government-wide monitoring of participation in fire evacuation drills. In addition, the Labour Program does not have adequate management systems in place to ensure that it reviews fire safety plans for all government buildings to determine whether they are able to evacuate employees in an emergency. The Labour Program had reviewed the plans for only 19 of the 54 buildings included in the audit (35%) and only 10 of these plans met the requirements of the standard and were accepted.
Recommendations and Industry Canada Responses:
3.80 Recommendation: Departments should ensure that fire safety plans are prepared and administered in accordance with established federal legislation and Treasury Board policies and standards.
Industry Canada’s response: Agreed. The Department assumed responsibility as the major occupying department in the Heritage Building in February 2007. Since then, first priority was given to transforming a partially staffed Fire and Emergency Organization into a fully revamped and trained unit. The second priority was to improve the existing fire safety plan by reviewing it and making it compliant with the Treasury Board Standard. The fire safety plans for the C.D. Howe Building and Heritage Building were sent to Human Resources and Skills Development Canada in November 2008 for approval.
Once the review process is completed, it will be sent to the senior officer for approval.
3.88 Recommendation: Departments should ensure that all evacuation drills are held as required by federal legislation and Treasury Board policies and standards.
Industry Canada’s response: Agreed. Designated staff drills are conducted in the form of classroom training every 2 months in the C.D. Howe Building in accordance with the Treasury Board Standard. Supporting documentation is available.
Drills every 3 months for adjoining groups of floors have not been conducted in the C.D. Howe Building since October 2000, when Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) placed the C.D. Howe Building on interim emergency procedures due to the lack of a fully functional voice communication system in the building. The direction provided by HRSDC indicated that the evacuation procedures for fire alarms in the building had to be changed from a phased evacuation to a full evacuation. In order to conduct a phased evacuation, the building voice communication must be fully operational and audible on all floors. This allows instructional fire evacuation for adjoining floors. The C.D. Howe Building is currently undergoing a retrofit, during which the renewal of the voice communication system will be completed during fiscal year 2012–13.
As for the Heritage Building, designated staff drills and the drills every 3 months for adjoining groups of floors will be implemented in March 2009.
3.93 Recommendation: Departments should ensure that building fire emergency organizations are established and administered as required by federal legislation and Treasury Board policies and standards.
Industry Canada’s response: Agreed. The Department already establishes and administers building fire emergency organizations for the C.D. Howe Building and the Heritage Building.
Environmental assessment is a process used to predict and mitigate the adverse environmental effects of a project before it is carried out. Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, projects that must undergo environmental assessment include the construction, operation, modification, demolition or abandonment of a physical work, or other physical activities specified by regulation. The Act applies to projects for which a federal department or agency (referred to as a responsible authority) has decision-making authority, whether as project proponent, regulator, land manager or funding source.
The federal organization is then responsible for conducting an environmental assessment, from defining the scope of the project, consulting with the public where deemed appropriate, carrying out the environmental assessment, determining the significance of the environmental effects and ensuring their mitigation. There are effectively 3 types of environmental assessment — screenings, comprehensive studies and review panels. In total, some 6,000 federal environmental assessments are carried out annually by more than 100 federal organizations that must apply the Act.
The audit examined whether federal organizations are complying with the environmental assessment process established by the Act.
For the comprehensive studies and review panels examined, responsible authorities have complied with the Act. However, it is not clear that screenings — the most common type of assessment — are meeting all of the Act’s requirements. In half the files reviewed, the rationale or analysis was too weak to demonstrate how the environmental effects of projects had been considered, their significance assessed and decisions reached. The assessment of cumulative effects remains a challenge for all types of environmental assessment.
For projects where there is more than one authority responsible, disputes about project scope may cause serious delays in the environmental assessment process, with related consequences for project implementation. The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency has worked with parties in trying to resolve such disputes, with limited results. The Agency does not have the authority to impose a resolution.
No official response was required of Industry Canada.
Industry Canada was asked by the Office of the Auditor General to provide updates on the progress of implementing recommendations from past performance audits. The following update was provided:
The environmental petitions process provides Canadians with a formal means to bring their concerns about environmental issues to the attention of federal ministers and departments and to obtain a response to their concerns. On behalf of the Auditor General of Canada, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development manages the environmental petitions process and monitors responses of federal ministers. As required by the Act, the Commissioner reports annually on the quantity, nature, and status of petitions received and on the timeliness of departmental responses. The Annual Report on Petitions and Responses covers the period between July 1, 2008, and June 30, 2009.
The report indicated that 8 of 9 responses from Industry Canada were received an average of 50 days late. It also indicated that the CESD raised concerns about unanswered questions in Industry Canada’s response to Petitions 255 and 255-B.
Response
Petition 287 — Potential environmental and public health impact of a federally funded municipal sewage project in L’Isle-Verte, Quebec
Additional information provided
Petition 255B — Potential impact on human health of electromagnetic radiation emanating from telecommunication towers on Triangle Mountain, British Columbia
Note: These refer to other external audits conducted by the Public Service Commission of Canada or the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
The Audit and Evaluation Branch
Through its professional internal audit and evaluation services, and the support it provides to the Departmental Audit Committee and the Departmental Evaluation Committee, the Audit and Evaluation Branch reinforces good stewardship practices and sound decision making and provides assurance to the Deputy and Associate Deputy Ministers. The Branch also contributes to making Industry Canada a learning organization and further supports the continuous improvement of departmental operations.
Name of Internal Audit | Audit Type | Status | Completion Date |
---|---|---|---|
IT Governance | Financial Management Controls | Completed | May 2009 |
Physical Security | Financial Management Controls | Completed | July 2009 |
Competition Bureau | Financial Management Controls | Completed | May 2009 |
Fleet Management | Financial Management Controls | Completed | May 2009 |
Community Futures | Financial Management Controls | Completed | January 2010 |
Follow-Up Final Report on Information Technology Security Audit Report | Follow-up Audit | Completed | July 2009 |
Follow-up Final Report of Management of Communications Research Centre (CRC) Building Systems | Follow-up Audit | Completed | July 2009 |
Electronic Link to Internal Audit Plan: No link currently available |
Name of Evaluation | Program Activity | Evaluation Type | Status | Completion Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Final Evaluation of the Program for Strategic Industrial Projects | 2.4 – Industrial Technologies Office — Special Operating Agency | Final Evaluation | Completed | June 2009 |
Final Evaluation of Industry Canada's Involvement in the International Telecommunication Union | 1.2 – Marketplace Frameworks and Regulations for Spectrum, Telecommunications and the Online Economy | Final Evaluation | Completed | June 2009 |
Final Evaluation of the Canadian Apparel and Textile Industries Program | 3.2 – Global Reach and Agility in Targeted Canadian Industries | Final Evaluation | Completed | October 2009 |
Evaluation of the Canada Small Business Financing Program | 3.1 – Entrepreneurial Economy | Final Evaluation | Completed | October 2009 |
Final Evaluation of the Community Access Program | 3.3 – Community, Economic and Regional Development | Final Evaluation | Completed | October 2009 |
Final Evaluation of the Contributions Program for Non-Profit Consumer and Voluntary Organizations | 1.3 – Consumer Affairs Program | Final Evaluation | Completed | March 2010 |
Electronic Link to Evaluation Plan: No link currently available |