Daryl Dolynny

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am encouraged with that response. I know I’ve asked that many times. I guess we’ll have it before the end of the 17th, which is better late than never. So, congratulations to the department for recognizing that opportunity, because Members have been asking for that for some time.

Last, Mr. Chair, with respect to this activity. The treasury division looks after the administration of all legislative tax programs and I guess to the question and, again, I do applaud the good work that has been done in terms of increasing the frequency of tax audits, especially on tobacco...

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. With that, does committee agree?

Because this is a completely different change of business model, should there be a dispute arising with respect to the transformation and change forthcoming to the businesses in question, does the government have any type of dispute system, third-party adjudicator or any type of arbitrator that would be used in the event that there is an issue in this transformation?

I appreciate the clarification on risk management, but the question still remains. In 2013-2014 we were at $2.218 million. We had $2.305 million in the main estimates of 2014 and zero increase in 2015-2016. As I said, we had a significant amount of infrastructure that hit our books, which means that in the last two years, no change. In fact, there’s only a change of $87,000 since 2013. I find that premium very weak, given the amount of infrastructure that this has assumed in liability. Can I get more clarification on that? Thank you.

Good afternoon, committee. I’d like to call Committee of the Whole back to order. With that, we’ll continue with the Department of Finance, opening comments. Minister Miltenberger.

Again, the confusion on this file in terms of when these are going to be activating from private to consignment. To my question which still remains, there is going to be a significant shift happening in September of 2015, in terms of the overall model, 50 percent of our population, 50 percent of our inventory goes from private to consignment. What will the department do in order to make this seamless so that they can at least communicate that change to Members?

Mr. Chair, just so I’m clear before I leave this activity, is that we know under current FAM policy that the department, under the guidance of the Minister or deputy minister, was allowed to move up to $250,000 of unallocated, unused funds, funded positions, and move them to another activity without having to get the proper appropriation of the House. Was this activity done in the last fiscal year? Is that reflected at all in the increased potentially we are seeing in this category over and above main estimates? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Does committee agree?

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate having the ability to come back to this Liquor Revolving Fund. I apologize. Earlier I was ahead of my questions here.

I have to say with a degree of trepidation here, I’m quite confused with this category in terms of how this is being evaluated and the discrepancies, knowing that we’ve gone from a private to a consignment model. I’ve tried to follow the margins, the dollars, the increase in agents’ commissions and, again, in looking at a note regarding the net revenue amounts being mentioned in the notes. Would the department agree to maybe having an interim...

With these vacancies, which sounds like it’s around the corporate average of 10 percent, and I’m assuming these are funded positions, I guess to the question, do those monies remain in that activity or has the department used those monies in other facets during the course of the year? Or is this money allocated for these positions? Do they stay within the category of wages and benefits?