Opening Statement to the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities

Integrity of the Social Insurance Number
(Chapter 1 - 2002 Status Report of the Auditor General of Canada)

Madam Chair, thank you for this second opportunity to discuss our audit of the integrity of the social insurance number (SIN). With me today are Peter Simeoni and Suzanne Therrien, who are responsible for this work.

While we would be pleased to discuss any aspect of our work on the social insurance number, I will confine my opening remarks to the actions planned by the Department.

At the previous hearing, the Department agreed to provide your Committee with a plan that would address all of our recommendations, describing actions, responsibilities, and timelines and indicating how much it would cost. We have reviewed both drafts of the Department's action plan with those commitments in mind.

I am pleased to note that the Department has already started working on the problems we reported. It assures us that it is committed to solving all of these issues expeditiously.

Unfortunately, we find that the plan is unclear in several important ways. First, the Department has not indicated when many of the initiatives will be completed. As a result, we cannot tell when the Department expects to have fully implemented its plans and when our Office would be able to follow-up again. In particular, the Department has not explained when it will meet the requirements of the Employment Insurance Act and Regulations for determining the citizenship and identity of SIN applicants. The Committee will recall that we criticized HRDC's policy of requesting only one document as proof of identity and citizenship, since a single document like a birth certificate is usually insufficient to check both. The Department has not yet changed this policy.

Second, the action plan is silent on costs. It states instead that "completion of each initiative is dependent on suitable funding." We expected that the Department would have a clear idea of what the cost would be and would secure appropriate resources before providing an action plan to this Committee. Initiatives may not actually go forward if there is no funding. This work also depends on the collaboration of other departments, whose work, deadlines, and resource needs are not described. In our view, HRDC should provide the Committee with a complete action plan that fills these gaps.

In 1998 and again in 2002 we noted our concern about the reliability of the documents HRDC accepts with SIN applications. While HRDC now accepts far fewer documents, it is not clear whether this decision is based on an assessment of the documents' reliability. For example, the Department no longer accepts Canadian passports as proof of citizenship and identity, but it does still accept birth certificates. The action plan does not explain whether HRDC will at some future time assess the reliability of the documents it accepts.

Issues the Committee may wish to pursue

Madam Chair, HRDC has to make a sustained effort to strengthen the integrity of the social insurance number. The first order of business is making sure that the government has committed the necessary resources to this effort. The Committee may wish to ask the officials from HRDC how much the action plan will cost, whether it is fully funded, and if it is not, what the consequences are.

There may be some confusion about what the Department means when it says that 2.6 million SINs were deactivated in October of last year. It is our understanding that these SINs can still be used to access federal benefit programs except Employment Insurance without triggering an investigation. The Committee may wish to ask the officials from HRDC to clarify the status of these SINs.

In addition, the Committee may wish to ask the officials from HRDC:

• what assurance they can provide that other departments will fulfill their responsibilities under the action plan;
• when they expect to have fully carried out the plan;
• how and when they plan to comply with the Employment Insurance Act and Regulations in determining the citizenship and identity of SIN applicants; and
• what plans they have to assess the reliability of documents they accept in support of SIN applications and to check the validity of the documents with the authorities that issued them.

Finally, the Committee may consider asking the Department for regular progress reports showing whether the elements of the plan are on time and on budget.

Madam Chair, that concludes my opening statement. We would be pleased to answer the Committee's questions. Thank you.