Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault’s department was cited by federal auditors for poor oversight of millions spent on green subsidies, per Blacklock’s Reporter. Auditors noted spending on subsidies had risen sharply since 2016, by $625 million, with little corresponding scrutiny of where the money went or why.Management of taxpayer funds was so sloppy it represented “potential legal and reputational damage,” said the audit of the department’s grants and contributions program. “We observed significant issues.”“This may result in a multitude of impacts including inefficient operations and reduced coordination, increased administrative burden, reduced transparency and challenges in demonstrating program effectiveness, misinformed decision-making, potential legal and reputational damage, inability to provide a recipient-focused user experience and ultimately the ability of the department to effectively fulfill its mandate.”Auditors found “errors and inconsistencies” in paperwork including “incorrect information,” “erroneous information,” “missing information,” “incorrect terms and conditions” and project files that “were missing entirely.” Management was “uncoordinated” and “inefficient,” they said.The latest audit follows a 2019 Treasury Board memo obtained through Access To Information that concluded environmental subsidies were run through a collection of federal programs so dysfunctional taxpayers could not be sure they got what they paid for. “Outcomes, target setting and reporting are weak,” it said.The memo counted 45 separate programs managed by 11 different departments and agencies. “Data tell us that capacity is weak in the federal system to define outcomes, set targets, and measure and monitor environmental impacts,” said the memo. “There is no clear guidance to support decisions by programs. The resulting allocation of federal investments is in the sum of hundreds of individual decisions.”The memo did not detail total grants, loans and guarantees paid to date. The board concluded it had no information on whether taxpayers received value for money.“Programs funding clean technology have different levels and types of information to support decision-making,” it said. “No overarching strategy guides the overall federal investment in the pursuit of clean technology for either economic or environmental outcomes. The cumulative impact of these decisions from research through to adoption is not monitored or measured or attributed.”Subsidy programs range from low-interest loans to manufacturers of electric auto charging stations, to Department of Agriculture grants to food processors. “What gets measured gets done.”
Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault’s department was cited by federal auditors for poor oversight of millions spent on green subsidies, per Blacklock’s Reporter. Auditors noted spending on subsidies had risen sharply since 2016, by $625 million, with little corresponding scrutiny of where the money went or why.Management of taxpayer funds was so sloppy it represented “potential legal and reputational damage,” said the audit of the department’s grants and contributions program. “We observed significant issues.”“This may result in a multitude of impacts including inefficient operations and reduced coordination, increased administrative burden, reduced transparency and challenges in demonstrating program effectiveness, misinformed decision-making, potential legal and reputational damage, inability to provide a recipient-focused user experience and ultimately the ability of the department to effectively fulfill its mandate.”Auditors found “errors and inconsistencies” in paperwork including “incorrect information,” “erroneous information,” “missing information,” “incorrect terms and conditions” and project files that “were missing entirely.” Management was “uncoordinated” and “inefficient,” they said.The latest audit follows a 2019 Treasury Board memo obtained through Access To Information that concluded environmental subsidies were run through a collection of federal programs so dysfunctional taxpayers could not be sure they got what they paid for. “Outcomes, target setting and reporting are weak,” it said.The memo counted 45 separate programs managed by 11 different departments and agencies. “Data tell us that capacity is weak in the federal system to define outcomes, set targets, and measure and monitor environmental impacts,” said the memo. “There is no clear guidance to support decisions by programs. The resulting allocation of federal investments is in the sum of hundreds of individual decisions.”The memo did not detail total grants, loans and guarantees paid to date. The board concluded it had no information on whether taxpayers received value for money.“Programs funding clean technology have different levels and types of information to support decision-making,” it said. “No overarching strategy guides the overall federal investment in the pursuit of clean technology for either economic or environmental outcomes. The cumulative impact of these decisions from research through to adoption is not monitored or measured or attributed.”Subsidy programs range from low-interest loans to manufacturers of electric auto charging stations, to Department of Agriculture grants to food processors. “What gets measured gets done.”
