This Web page has been archived on the Web.

Section I—Messages

Message from the Auditor General

The Report on Plans and Priorities marks another stage in the continuing redesign of the government's Expenditure Management System. We recognize that parliamentarians need to understand and be better informed on the cost of doing business - they need timely and clear information in order to make informed decisions on where dollars will be spent. This report establishes our performance expectations and outlines the general directions the Office wants to take during the estimate year and the next two fiscal years. It contains a mix of financial and non-financial information and presents our planned expenditures and activities during the review period.

As legislative auditors we will continue to conduct independent audits and examinations that provide objective information, advice and assurance to Parliament. We will also be facing new challenges in the years ahead in our audit work that will affect the Office's allocation of audit resources. Here are some of these new challenges:

• In conducting the annual audit of the Financial Statements of the Government of Canada, the implementation of the Government's Financial Information Strategy (FIS) will impose some development and conversion costs on the Office.
• The Government of the Territory of Nunavut will become a new audit entity for the Office, representing a third territorial audit entity and including both attest and value-for-money work. It will also entail additional audits of the full range of departments, boards and corporations.
• Key activities such as air navigation services are being transferred from government departments. New organizations have been created, such as the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Others, like the proposed Revenue Agency and Parks Agency were announced in the 1996 Budget speech. This could represent a new type of audit work for the Office and a new product for parliamentarians to review. Our audit work in this area will be important in ensuring that Parliament is well informed and that government is held accountable.
• In 1998-99, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development will start to review sustainable development strategies of government departments.

We are living in an era of significant change in the public sector. Governments all around the world are rethinking and reshaping the way they go about their business. One of the forces driving these changes is to provide essential services at prices taxpayers can afford. This brings the need to continue modernizing Parliament's ability to scrutinize and control the entire business of supply. That is the aim of the Reports on Plans and Priorities and I am pleased to participate directly in this new government-wide effort.

L. Denis Desautels, FCA
Auditor General of Canada

13 February 1998

Management Representation

Report on Plans and Priorities 1998-99

I submit, for tabling in Parliament, the 1998-99 Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) for the Office of the Auditor General of Canada.

To the best of my knowledge the information:

• accurately portrays the Office's mandate, plans, priorities, strategies and expected key results of the organization.
• is consistent with the disclosure principles contained in the Guidelines for Preparing 1998-99 Estimates (Report on Plans and Priorities).
• is comprehensive and accurate.
• is based on the Office's information and management systems.

I am satisfied as to the procedures used for the RPP's production.

Michael J. McLaughlin, CMA
Deputy Auditor General and Senior Financial Officer

13 February 1998

Section II—Overview of the Office

Mandate, Roles and Responsibilities

Enabling Legislation

1. The Auditor General Act, the Financial Administration Act and a variety of other acts and orders-in-council set out the duties of the Auditor General and the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development as they relate to legislative auditing and monitoring of federal departments and agencies, Crown corporations and other national and international organizations.

Activity

2. The principal activity of the Office is legislative auditing. Put simply, the Auditor General is required to provide interested parties with answers to the following questions about the Office's activities.

Legislative Auditing

3. We are different from departments and agencies by virtue of our independence from the government of the day and our reporting relationship to Parliament. Our independence is assured by a broad legislative mandate, freedom from certain controls over our budget and staff, and a 10-year mandate for the Auditor General.

The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

4. The Commissioner's primary role and responsibility is to monitor, on behalf of the Auditor General, the departmental sustainable development strategies and action plans and the status of, and responses to, public petitions on environmental matters. The Commissioner is also required to report annually on the results of his work.

Strategic Framework

5. The Office's Strategic Framework reflects a number of areas where we intend to focus our efforts to meet new and greater challenges and make our Office an even better and more satisfying place to work. The Strategic Framework was reviewed and updated in the fall of 1997. The OAG Vision and Mission Statement guide the work of the Office.

The OAG Vision and Mission

6. An elaboration of the Office Mission Statement sets out eight objectives and other effects that we want our work to achieve. These are listed below.

In achieving our mission, we want to make a difference by promoting:

• a fair and frank accounting of the government's stewardship of financial and other resources;
• efficiency and productivity in the public service;
• cost effectiveness in government activities;
• collection of revenues owed to the Crown;
• objective assurance on matters found to be satisfactory and unsatisfactory;
• compliance with authority;
• deterrence of fraud and dishonesty; and
• sustainable development.

7. We share these objectives with many other parties inside and outside government, which complicates the attribution of results to the audits we perform. Many share a commitment to good government, and it is often through their co-operation and participation that we effect change. We assess our own effectiveness in terms of our ability to conduct high-quality audits that address significant topics and contribute to making a difference, as described in Section III of this document.

Organization of the Office

8. Table 2 in Section IV provides the summary organization chart of the Office.

9. The Executive Office provides overall policy direction, legal support, professional practice review and international activities.

10. The Corporate Services Branch provides direct support to the audit function.

11. The Audit Operations Branch is responsible for carrying out all the audit activities of the Office.

12. The Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development is responsible for monitoring and reporting on the progress of federal government departments towards sustainable development. The Commissioner also assists the Auditor General in performing the duties of the Auditor General that relate to the environment and sustainable development.

13. The Office staff is multidisciplinary, with qualified accountants making up about 63%; another 23% with postgraduate degrees in other disciplines include engineers, lawyers, statisticians, sociologists, historians, environmental specialists and economists, and 8% have both.

Reporting Our Work

14. The work of the Auditor General and the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development is reported in several places and in several formats, pursuant to enabling legislation.

Financial Spending Plan

Exhibit 1

Section III—Plans, Priorities and Strategies

Summary of Key Plans, Priorities and Strategies

15. The following table summarizes the key results that the Office is hoping to achieve, and indicates which components of our business line will help to achieve them. The most important links are marked with an X, even though every component could conceivably contribute to every key result.

Office Priorities for the Medium Term, 1998-2000

16. As the federal government prepares for the 21st century, our Office is placing special emphasis on improving the government's financial position, accountability, financial management, public service renewal and the environment. These five subjects have come up frequently, particularly in value-for-money audits, and we believe we can make a positive difference in them during the next three years. They will provide a focus for all audit work, although they do not replace our normal coverage of audit entities and matters of current significance to Parliament.

17. We are planning a status report on these five priorities by the end of the year 2000. Although its exact form and timing have not been set yet, it will likely review what improvements have been achieved to date and what still needs to be done in the future. More detail follow below, including draft performance measures for each priority:

Priority 1: Help improve the government's finances and information on its financial condition by:

18. Supplying useful information, and encouraging the government to follow suit. This involves providing better information directly to parliamentarians and the public about the government's financial performance and health, and about the performance of associated systems and processes. It also involves encouraging the government to provide such information on a regular basis by publicizing its usefulness and demonstrating the feasibility of its production. Draft performance measures are:

• examples of new financial information used by parliamentarians or decision makers;
• examples of financial improvements implemented and the benefits obtained.

Main outputs that will help to advance this work are value-for-money audits dealing with Finance, Treasury Board, Results Measurement, Information Technology, Sustainable Development, and Revenue Canada. In attest audits, disclosure of some specific financial statement items like loan guarantees could also have an impact; otherwise, no extra audit work is foreseen, and any contribution to this priority will be a by-product of regular work.

19. Improving the effectiveness of revenue programs. We can do this by helping to maintain the integrity of the self-assessment system administered primarily by Revenue Canada and the Department of Finance; and by examining other risk areas such as protection of borders and trade administration. This priority includes non-tax revenue and cost recovery issues. Possible results indicators to measure how well we achieve this priority are:

• increase in dollars collected due to implementation of audit recommendations;
• examples of changes that increase fairness in the tax system.

Main outputs that will help to advance this work are value-for-money audits of Revenue Canada, and work on non-tax revenue issues such as cost recovery and user fees. Any contributions to this priority from attest, public accounts or special examination work will be a by-product of regular work and not require extra resources. Audits of Employment Insurance and the Canada Pension Plan also have the potential to contribute.

20. Finding savings in government operations. Savings are defined broadly as:

• actual monetary reductions; or
• potential for future expenditure reductions.

It is the responsibility of every audit team to look for savings opportunities, and each year we expect from value-for-money audits at least two or three good examples of quantified financial amounts arising from identified instances of waste, reduced expenditures and improvements in operational efficiency and effectiveness. However, we realize that much of the credit for actual savings achieved should go to the organization implementing our recommendations for improvement.

Priority 2: Stimulate advances in accountability concepts and improve accountability practices in government.

21. This priority involves modernizing thinking about accountability in light of the changes going on in the public service, and improving the practice of accountability (frameworks, reporting and follow-up action) in departments, agencies and new delivery arrangements. Some of the improvements expected are:

• better reporting of performance information based on accepted criteria;
• central agencies acting to ensure a reasonable rate of success in government-wide management improvement and other initiatives;
• changes made to alternative service delivery arrangements as a result of advice and audit recommendations from the Office, such as improved planning, review and reporting framework and practices;
• performance information used by parliamentarians, through committee oversight and reporting, or by decision makers in Cabinet, central agencies and departments.

Almost all audit teams in the Office will make some contribution to this issue. For example, there will be value-for-money chapters dealing with government-wide accountability and results measurement issues and with entities such as Environment, Finance, Treasury Board, Indian and Northern Affairs, Canadian International Development Agency and Human Resources Development Canada. Special examinations now focus directly on results, as will summary chapters on accountability in Crown corporations.

Priority 3: influence the quality of financial management in government.

22. For many years, we have reported concerns about financial management problems. For example, decision makers have not always had adequate information on the cost of activities, or information linking financial and operational results. Government accounting systems are not designed to support accrual accounting or to set rates for cost recovery. Some success has been achieved due to the capabilities of particular individuals, but it has seldom been institutionalized. A more effective comptrollership capability both at the centre of government and in individual departments is essential for the success of the planned renewal of the government's accounting systems. The main changes will be accrual accounting throughout the year, strengthened accounting for tax revenues, and adoption of full accrual accounting for capital assets.

In the fall of 1997, the government received the report of the Independent Review Panel on Modernization of Comptrollership in the Government of Canada. The government has indicated that it is taking this report and its recommendations to heart and is setting up the leadership necessary to move forward. The Office encourages the government's efforts to improve comptrollership. Financial management lies at the core of comptrollership and one of the things that the Office will do to support the government's efforts is to complete our development of the Financial Management Capability Model. The basic structure of this model is described in Chapter 2 of our 1997 Report. Over the next year, we expect to complete consultations with government financial managers on the validity of the model, revise the model as necessary to reflect these consultations, pilot-test the model and publish its first release. In subsequent years, we will be applying the model in key departments. Key results will be:

• the publication of the model;
• assessments of financial management capability in departments and agencies.

Priority 4: Contribute to necessary changes in the public service.

23. The "necessary changes" referred to are those to reform and renew government and the public service. These changes flow from the policy decisions taken during and since Program Review that redefine the role of the federal government in society, leading to downsizing and changes in the types of functions that are left. The large number of employees soon to reach retirement age creates another imperative for change.

Work on this priority includes monitoring reform and renewal initiatives in the public service, and auditing the main elements of human resource management (HRM). We intend to publish value-for-money audits and studies of government-wide issues as well as work dealing specifically with Treasury Board Secretariat, National Defence and perhaps other departments. This is closely related to work on the accountability priority. Special examinations of Crown corporations will also address HRM issues. Expected results and performance measures include examples of improvements such as:

• key HRM systems (such as pay, classification, performance appraisal) modernized and decentralized where appropriate;
• evidence that the public service supports "continuous improvement" and learns from its experiments and mistakes;
• informed dialogue with Parliament on the importance of the public service as an institution and on public service management issues such as risk-taking, leading to parliamentary reviews of public service issues;
• line managers held accountable for HRM, which is recognized as a critical element in their performance;
• streamlining of central agencies and clarification of their roles and responsibilities.

Priority 5: Implement fully the role of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development.

24. While the Office clearly places a priority on defining and starting up activities required by the amendments to its legislation, this is not sufficient. There are specific results the Commissioner would like to achieve in the next few years, in particular:

• narrowing the gap between policy promises and performance, as demonstrated by examples of improvements in program implementation;
• strengthening co-ordination and integration, leading to examples of the elimination of barriers to co-operation;
• improving information for Parliament, as demonstrated by examples of new information used by parliamentarians or decision makers.

Work on environment and sustainable development could likely touch all the entities we audit. Government-wide and entity-specific value-for-money audits will address environmental issues, for example in Environment, Natural Resources, Fisheries, Agriculture, and National Defence. Attest audits will continue to examine the disclosure of environmental liabilities in the financial statements of all public sector entities. In Crown corporations and other entities such as the territorial governments, we will look for opportunities to assist with and encourage the preparation of sustainable development strategies and other environmental reporting practices.

Details by Component of OAG Business Line

25. The principal business line of the Office is legislative auditing. The "Financial Spending Plan" of our principal business line is found in Section II of this document. Each of its five main components is described below. The allocation of resources is driven initially by the demands of attest audits, most of which are required by legislation to take place annually. Special examinations of Crown corporations are required every five years, and they require a level of resources to provide the assurance set out in legislation. Our remaining resources are allocated to value-for-money auditing and environmental and sustainable development work.

Public Accounts Audit

26. The fundamental purpose of the financial statements of the Government of Canada is to provide information to Parliament, and thus to the public. These statements facilitate an understanding and evaluation of the full nature and extent of the financial affairs and resources for which the government is responsible. The financial statements reflect the financial position of the government at its fiscal year end (March 31), as well as results of its operations, its financial requirements and changes in its financial position for the year. The Government of Canada prepares these financial statements in accordance with its stated accounting policies, and includes them in the annual Public Accounts of Canada.

27. The Auditor General examines the annual financial statements in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards to obtain reasonable assurance that they are free of material misstatement, and he expresses an opinion on the fairness and consistency of their presentation. By doing so, the Office lends credibility to these statements. If the examination discloses that the financial statements are materially misstated, the Auditor General will qualify his opinion on them.

28. As part of the annual Public Accounts audit, audit teams review transactions to see if departments and agencies conformed to selected laws and regulations that govern their operations. This involves checking the spending authority contained in appropriations acts and other relevant legislation. Compliance audit work of this nature is also part of all the other audits done by the Office.

29. The government is planning to improve the usefulness and timeliness of its financial information with the implementation of a new Financial Information Strategy (FIS). The main elements of FIS are the modernization of systems and the implementation of accrual accounting.

30. The vision of FIS is to enhance the government's decision making and accountability, and to improve organizational performance through the strategic use of financial information. Through the modernization of systems, accounting data will be moved from the central accounting systems maintained by the Receiver General for Canada to new departmental systems.

31. FIS implementation will therefore impose some development or conversion costs on the Office, and there will be some continuing costs. The new modernized system will have to be reviewed and the audit approach changed from a central focus to a departmental focus. With the move to accrual accounting, capital assets and tax receivables will now be subject to audit.

32. Partially offsetting these increases will be some efficiency in the Office-wide approach to the Public Accounts audit, as more audit reliance can be placed on the new systems and the timing of the audit spread throughout the year.

33. Planned spending for this component of our work will be approximately $4,400,000 for 1998-99.

Exhibit 2—Annual Audit of the Financial Statements of the Government of Canada—Annual Audit Costs

Every year, the Auditor General expresses an opinion on the Financial Statements of the Government of Canada. For 1996-97, the Opinion of the Auditor General can be found in Section 1 of Volume 1 - 1997 Public Accounts of Canada. The dotted line shows the expected costs for future years. These are expected to increase and then level off as the government's accounting systems are renewed and as accounting practices for physical assets and tax revenues are strengthened. Audit costs are not expected to decline until after the year 2000.

Crown Corporations and Other Financial Statement Audits

34. We audit almost 100 sets of financial statements of parent Crown corporations, federal departmental corporations and other federal entities, territorial governments and organizations, other Canadian entities and international organizations. The Auditor General examines these financial statements and expresses an opinion on the fairness of their presentation.

35. We expect that the number of separate opinion attest audits in federal Crown corporations will remain at approximately the same level over the next two years. Some smaller entities will be wound up or eliminated while others will be added, but the larger ones will remain stable.

36. The budget for territorial governments and organizations attest work will be increasing as additional audits will be required once the new government of Nunavut is created in 1999-2000.

37. With respect to other entities, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is one of the government's recently established organizations. In 1998, the Auditor General will begin providing an opinion on its financial statements and an assessment of its performance information in its annual report. The government is also in the process of setting up a new Revenue Agency and Parks Agency. The Auditor General could be asked to examine these other entities and provide an opinion on their financial statements. Providing assurance in performance information represents a new type of work for the Office and its implications are being assessed.

38. Planned spending for this component of our work will be approximately $10,400,000 for 1998-99.

Exhibit 3—Total Cost of Annual Audits of Federal Crown Corporations, Territorial Governments, Agencies and Corporations and Other Entities

This graph shows the annual costs for audits of federal Crown corporations, territorial departments and agencies and other entities. Although our costs of auditing federal Crown corporations increased after 1994-95, we remain committed to reducing the costs of our annual audits through new audit methodology and the specialization of audit staff. We have developed entity-by-entity hour targets that should result in our reaching our ultimate goal of reducing audit costs by 15% from 1994-95 costs, as shown by the dotted lines.

The costs related to other entities were successfully reduced to our 15% target during 1996-97. Our budgeted costs for these entities will remain at this level throughout the remainder of the planning period.

Our audit costs in territorial departments and agencies are proceeding as planned toward our goal of a 15% reduction by 1998-99.

Value-for-Money Audits

39. Value-for-money (VFM) or performance auditing is an approach to auditing that examines the management of practices, controls and reporting systems. We do not question the merits of government policies; rather, we provide information to help legislators judge how well policies and programs have been implemented. The main outputs are chapters or audit notes in the Auditor General's periodic reports to Parliament, but this work could also result in special publications, methodology, briefings for parliamentary committees, speeches, and management letters.

40. VFM audits are more discretionary in scope and frequency than either attest audits or special examinations. To identify matters that are of most interest and significance to Parliament, we consider:

• audit worthiness, which is determined by the level of expenditures, the importance of each program, the level of interest among members of Parliament, the degree of risk involved in the program delivery, and the issue areas the Office is addressing;
• auditability, determined by the complexity of the program and the level of resources needed to audit it and whether it falls within the Auditor General's mandate; and
• past audit coverage by the Office and other review work carried out by the government or other knowledgeable observers.

42. We attempt to schedule VFM audits to cover the most significant issues in a reasonable period of time. Audit teams have developed five-year audit plans for each of the 25 major departments and agencies of the federal government and for 12 issue areas that could cross departmental lines, such as accountability and results measurement, financial management and financial control, human resource management, major capital projects, compliance with authorities and information technology. Emerging issues are evaluated within this framework and the five-year plans are updated each year.

43. We plan to publish approximately 35 chapters in four reports, in April, May, September, and December 1998, on subjects such as accountability and results measurement (8 chapters); environment and sustainable development (8); financial management and financial controls (2); human resource management (3); information technology (2); revenue collection (3); cost effectiveness in government activities (4); government's stewardship of financial and other resources (2); and other government-wide and entity specific issues (3).

44. Planned spending for VFM audits in 1998-99 will be approximately $29,300,000. Planned spending includes VFM audits and studies that have a significant environmental and sustainable development content (in our previous report these were shown separately). Except for environmental work, the level of VFM effort will be reduced in 1998-99 and 1999-2000 because of increased work on the third round of special examinations, which is expected to peak in those years.

Exhibit 4—Average Cost of VFM Audits

VFM and government-wide audits and studies do not have generally accepted indicators of performance or quantifiable measures that are easy to compare with those in other jurisdictions. We are now carrying out shorter, more focussed examinations of particular issues. We are paying close attention to planning and managing the cost, timeliness and results of audits. We believe we can now maintain our coverage while still lowering the average cost of VFM audits to $750,000 by 1998 - indicated on the graph by a dotted line. This does not include government-wide audits and studies, each of which is unique in scope and coverage.

Special Examinations

45. Special examinations of Crown corporations are required by the Financial Administration Act once every five years. In addition, we are sometimes requested by the Governor in Council to carry out special examinations of Crown corporations that are exempt from this requirement. Some examinations are done by the private sector, but most are done by this Office with only one or two done jointly with the private sector. Legislation requires the examiner to provide an opinion on whether the corporation's management systems and practices provide reasonable assurance that assets are safeguarded, resources are managed economically and efficiently, and operations are carried out effectively.

46. Because of differences in the size, complexity, mandates and risks associated with these corporations, the amount of effort needed to arrive at an individual opinion is less predictable than in financial statement audits. Practices have been developed that respect legislative requirements, professional standards, and the need to be efficient.

47. A third round of examinations of 34 Crown corporations is under way and will be largely completed by the year 2000-01. In 1998-99 we plan to report on 8 corporations, namely: Pacific Pilotage Authority, Via Rail Canada Inc., Business Development Bank of Canada, National Arts Centre Corporation, Canadian Commercial Corporation, Canada Development Investment Corporation, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited.

48. Planned spending on special examinations will be approximately $5,500,000 for 1998-99.

Exhibit 5—Average Cost of Special Examinations

Special examinations of Crown corporations are not conducted every year. Rather, they are carried out over a period of years (i.e. a cycle). The first cycle was conducted between 1984 and 1989 and the second was conducted between 1990 and 1995. The third cycle is currently under way. Our target average cost in future years of $390,000 for special examinations conducted in each of the three cycles is indicated by the dotted line. This is shown to decrease because of improved methodology and experience obtained in previous cycles. Eight special examinations will be reported in 1998-99. We expect that the cost of completing these special examinations will be 20% lower than in the second cycle.

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

49. All VFM audits and studies that have a significant environmental and sustainable development content have been integrated into our regular value-for-money audits along with the financial requirements for completion of these audits and studies. For 1998-99, approximately $ 1,100,000 has been allocated for this work.

50. Twenty-four federal departments and agencies were required to table sustainable development strategies in the House of Commons by 15 December 1997. The purpose of these strategies was to outline each department/agency's plans for integrating sustainable development into its policies, programs and operations. The strategies provide the benchmark against which progress toward sustainable development will be measured. Each strategy should explain how the department/agency proposes to achieve its sustainable development goals and the targets in its action plan.

51. In 1997-98, the Commissioner began the review of sustainable development strategies for conformance with legislation and policy direction, as well as a more in-depth analysis of the strategies produced by the following departments: Environment, Finance, Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Industry Canada, Natural Resources, and Public Works and Government Services Canada. This work will be completed in 1998-99 and presented in the Commissioner's 1998 Report.

52. Planned spending for the Commissioner's Office will be approximately $1,400,000 for 1998-99.

Update on Internal Matters

53. Some important Office activities have taken place during the current fiscal year and others are planned for the coming years. The following provides a description of these activities:

• The Office's Strategic Framework was first introduced in 1993. Over the years, the Strategic Framework was updated as some strategies were completed and others updated and revised to respond to changing circumstances. The latest revision was made in 1997 and contains 20 implementation strategies. We have decided to focus on a smaller number of strategies that will have an impact on key professional and administrative practices to face the challenges and changes we will encounter over the next few years.
• The Office has embarked on a complete review of office classifications, including the management category compensation and classification. The intent is to create a new classification structure that will comprise one category - legislative audit - with five groups. The Office's current classification structure has 17 groups.
• With the implementation of the new Framework for Managing Office Accommodation, developed by Public Works and Government Services Canada (in response to Program Review), the Office has embarked on a space optimization project. The purpose of this project is to provide more interesting and functional work environments for our employees while using less space. The project should be completed by the end of 1999.
• The Office's Sustainable Development Strategy was tabled in the Auditor General's December 1997 Report. The challenge will be to implement it in the coming years. This will require the participation of every employee, integrating environment and sustainable development into audits and contributing to optimal use of resources in the Office.

Exhibit 6—Ratio of Audit Project Time to Net Available Time—Audit Operations Branch

The Audit Project-Hour Ratio (APHR) calculates the percentage of available staff time that is used directly for audit activities. Available staff time takes into consideration any leave time taken (vacation, maternity, sick, etc.) that is not available to the Office to carry out its activities. The balance is available to fulfil the time needs (hours) of the Office. We have determined that considering various factors including the need for training, the effects of stress and workload on our staff, an acceptable APHR range would be between 70% and 80% for our Audit Operations Branch.

Section IV—Supplementary Information

Table 1—Spending Authorities—Office Summary Part II of the Estimates

($ millions)

Personnel Information

Table 2—Summary Organization Chart (September 1997)

Table 2.1—Planned Full-time Equivalents (FTEs) for Business Line

Additional Financial Information

Table 3—Office Summary of Standard Objects of Expenditure

Table 4—Program Resources for Business Line for the Estimates Year 1998-99

($ millions)

Table 5—Details of Transfer Payments for Business Line

Table 6—Details of Revenue

Table 7—Net Cost of Program for 1998-99

($ millions)

Other Information

Table 8—References

Listing of Statutory Reports

Contacts for Further Information

Office of the Auditor General
240 Sparks Street
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K1A 0G6
(613) 995-3708
FAX (613) 957-4023

Corporate Services Branch
Michael J. McLaughlin, Deputy Auditor General

Environment and Sustainable Development
Brian Emmett, Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

Audit Operations Branch
Raymond Dubois, Deputy Auditor General