2012–13 Performance Report and 2014–15 Report on Plans and Priorities of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Opening Statement to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts

2012–13 Performance Report and 2014–15 Report on Plans and Priorities of the Office of the Auditor General of Canada

31 March 2014

Michael Ferguson, CPA, CA
FCA (New Brunswick)
Auditor General of Canada

Mr. Chair, we are pleased to be here and would like to thank you for this opportunity to discuss our 2012–13 Performance Report and our 2014–15 Report on Plans and Priorities. With me today is Lyn Sachs, Assistant Auditor General of Corporate Services and Chief Financial Officer.

We serve Parliament by supporting its oversight of government spending and performance with our financial audits, performance audits, special examinations of Crown corporations, and the work of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development.

All of our audits are conducted in accordance with Canadian Auditing Standards and Canadian Standards on Quality Control. We subject our System of Quality Control to internal practice reviews and monitoring, and to periodic external reviews, to provide assurance that you can rely on the quality of our work.

2012–13 Performance Report

During our 2012–13 fiscal year, the period covered by our most recent performance report, we used $88.2 million of the $93.8 million in parliamentary appropriations available to us, resulting in a lapse of $5.6 million. We had a budget of 615 full-time equivalent employees and employed the equivalent of 603 full-time employees—a decrease of 37 from the year before. These results reflect the progress we made on implementing the reductions planned in our Strategic and Operating Review proposal.

With these resources, all but four of our scheduled audits were completed. Two of the audits that were not completed were the special examination for the Canada Employment Insurance Financing Board, which was cancelled as the organization was wound up, and the special examination for the Canada Lands Company Limited, which was delayed to allow us to take into account significant organizational changes in the corporation.

Our 2012–13 Performance Report contains a number of indicators of the impact of our work and measures of our operational performance. The tables containing our targets and actual performance results are attached to this statement.

These tables show that our clients and the senior managers in the organizations we audit find that our audits add value. They also show that the Office participated in 27 committee hearings and briefings, compared with 29 the previous year, and that parliamentary committees reviewed 30 percent of our performance audits, compared with 48 percent the previous year. The report also shows that departments made satisfactory progress in addressing 72 percent of the 25 performance audit recommendations that we followed up on that year.

Of the seven qualifications noted in our financial audit reports that were not addressed, five were mainly for failing to file annual reports on time, while only two were related to auditing or accounting matters. There were no significant deficiencies identified in the three special examinations that we completed this year, and all previous deficiencies have been addressed.

Our measures of organizational performance remained positive, with our on-budget performance for all of our financial audits improving over the previous year. Eight of our performance audits exceeded their planned budget, in many cases because of expansion of the audit scope.

Our most recent employee survey, conducted in the last fiscal year, showed that employee engagement remained high, with 95 percent of employees feeling proud to work for the Office.

2014–15 Report on Plans and Priorities

Looking forward, we have articulated a new set of strategic objectives for the Office and identified four areas where we believe we can make improvements. In planning for 2014–15, we will be working to make progress in each of these areas.

First, we want to ensure that our audits are adding value for parliamentarians, territorial legislators, Crown corporation boards of directors, and audit committees. Second, we will be working to make our governance and decision-making practices and processes as efficient and economical as possible. Third, having completed the updating of our audit methodology last year, we will be looking at opportunities to implement our audit methodology as efficiently and economically as possible. Finally, we have begun talking with our staff about ensuring that we operate in an environment where our employees feel more empowered to do their work.

In 2014–15, we will complete our action plan to reduce operating costs, based on the Strategic and Operating Review proposal that we submitted to Parliament in October 2011. Our budget shows that we will reduce our staff levels and achieve our planned spending reduction of over $6.5 million one year in advance of our target.

While we have reduced the number of financial audits we undertake by 25 and will continue to look for efficiencies, we are confident that we can serve Parliament with this reduced funding. We expect to complete more than 95 financial audits, 27 performance audits, and 4 special examinations in the 2014–15 fiscal year. We are also conducting an audit of the Senate of Canada at the Senate’s request.

I would like to take this opportunity to welcome Julie Gelfand as the new Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. Julie joined the Office on March 24. She brings over 25 years of diverse experience in the field, including senior positions at Rio Tinto, Vice-President of Sustainable Development at the Mining Association of Canada, and President of Nature Canada.

In conclusion, Mr. Chair, my staff and I thank you for your ongoing interest in and support of our work. We look forward to providing you with valuable assurance, information, and advice in the coming year.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We would be pleased to answer your questions.

Indicator Table 1—Summary of our indicators of impact

Objectives and indicators 2011–12 Actual 2012–13 Actual 2012–13 Target 2014–15 Target
Our work adds value for the key users of our reports.
Percentage of audit committee chairs who find our financial audits add value 91% 91% 90% 90%
Percentage of parliamentary committee members who find our performance audits add value N/A1 96% 90% 90%
Percentage of board chairs who find our special examinations add value N/A2 N/A2 90% 90%
Our work adds value for the organizations we audit.
Percentage of Crown corporation and large-department senior managers who find our financial audits add value 85% 88% 80% 80%
Percentage of departmental senior managers who find our performance audits add value 79% 75% 70% 70%
Percentage of Crown corporation chief executive officers who find our special examinations add value N/A2 N/A2 80% 80%
Key users of our reports are engaged in the audit process.
Number of parliamentary hearings and briefings we participate in 29 27 Maintain or Increase3 Maintain or Increase3
Percentage of hearings and briefings relative to sitting days 28% 21% Maintain or Increase3 Maintain or Increase3
Percentage of performance audits reviewed by parliamentary committees 48%4 30% Maintain or Increase3 Maintain or Increase3
Key users of our reports and the organizations we audit respond to our findings.
Percentage of qualifications and “other matters” that are addressed from one financial audit to the next 52% 61%5 100% 100%
Percentage of recommendations examined in our follow-up audits where progress has been assessed as satisfactory 62%6 72% 75% 75%
Percentage of significant deficiencies that are addressed from one special examination to the next N/A7 100%
(2 of 2)
100% N/A8

1 There was no survey of parliamentarians in the 2011–12 fiscal year.

2 Due to the small number of respondents, percentage results are not presented. The feedback we have received has been positive and consistent with our targets.

3 There is no numeric target for these indicators. Instead, the target is to maintain the percentage of parliamentary hearings and briefings we participate in, relative to the number of sitting days, and to maintain the percentage of audits reviewed by parliamentary committees.

4 We reported 43% in our 2011–12 Performance Report. Since then, an additional chapter for the 2011–12 fiscal year was reviewed by a committee, raising the percentage to 48%.

5 In completing our financial audits in the 2012–13 fiscal year, we found that 11 of the 18 qualifications and “other matters” contained in our 2011–12 financial audit opinions had been addressed by the organizations we audited.

6 Refers to findings reported in the Status Report of the Auditor General of Canada, tabled in June 2011.

7 No special examinations completed in the 2011–12 fiscal year had previously identified significant deficiencies.

8 As of the 2014-15 fiscal year, this indicator is no longer being reported.

Indicator Table 2—Summary of our organizational performance

Objectives and indicators 2011–12 Actual 2012–13 Actual 2012–13 Target 2014–15 Target
Our work is completed on time1
Percentage of financial audits completed on time:
  • federal Crown corporations with statutory deadlines

98%

96%

100%

100%

  • other federal organizations with statutory deadlines2

91%

91%

100%

100%

  • federal organizations with no statutory deadlines

93%

93%

80%

80%

  • territorial organizations

56%

83%

60%

60%

Percentage of performance audit reports completed by the planned tabling date as published in the Report on Plans and Priorities 88% 100% 90% 90%
Percentage of special examination reports delivered on or before the statutory deadline 100%
(2 of 2)
100%
(3 of 3)
100% 100%
Our work is completed on budget3
Percentage of audits completed on budget:
  • Financial audits—federal Crown corporations

80%

84%

80%

80%

  • Financial audits—other federal organizations with statutory deadlines

57%

91%

80%

80%

  • Financial audits—federal organizations without statutory deadlines

79%

100%

80%

80%

  • Financial audits—territorial organizations

59%

81%

80%

80%

  • Performance audits

84%

69%

80%

80%

  • Special examinations

100%
(2 of 2)

100%
(3 of 3)

80%

80%

Our audit reports are reliable
Percentage of internal practice reviews that found the opinions and conclusions expressed in our audit reports were appropriate and supported by the evidence 100%
(11 of 11)
100%
(14 of 14)
100% 100%
External peer reviews find our quality management frameworks are suitably designed and operating effectively N/A4 N/A4 Yes Yes
We provide a respectful workplace
Percentage of employees who believe the Office is an above-average place to work N/A5 83% 80% 80%
Percentage of management who meet our language requirements:
  • Auditor General, assistant auditors general, and principals

84%

84%

100%

100%

  • directors

78%

79%

75%

75%

Percentage representation relative to workforce availability for
  • women

120%6

123%

100%

100%

  • people with disabilities

98%6

98%

100%

100%

  • Aboriginal peoples

117%6

104%

100%

100%

  • members of visible minorities

81%6

107%

100%

100%

Percentage retention of audit professionals 89% 92% 90% 90%
Sustainable development targets
Percentage of performance audit teams using the 4th E Practice Guide’s screening tool and consulting with internal environmental specialists to identify and assess environmental risks when they are preparing audit plans 67% 80% 100% 100%
Percentage of performance audit teams using the 4th E Practice Guide’s screening tool and consulting with internal environmental specialists to determine if there are any important environmental issues related to their audit topic 96% 100% 100% 100%
Percentage of special examinations where important environmental risks for Crown corporations have been identified receiving enhanced support and advice 100% 100% 100% 100%

1 “On time” for financial audits means the statutory deadline where one exists (usually 90 days after the year-end), or 150 days after the year-end where no statutory deadline exists.

2 The National Battlefields Commission is excluded from this calculation, as its statutory deadline is only 60 days after the year-end.

3 “On budget” means that the actual hours to complete an audit did not exceed the budgeted hours by more than 15 percent.

4 There was no external peer review in the 2011–12 or 2012–13 fiscal year.

5 There was no employee survey in the 2011–12 fiscal year. In the 2012–13 fiscal year, a short employee survey was conducted.

6 Prior year data has been restated to correct the 2010–11 data erroneously reported as 2011–12 data.