Opening Statement to the Committee On Public Accounts

Chapter 12 - Information Technology: Preparedness for Year 2000 (October 1997 Report)

L. Denis Desautels, FCA
Auditor General Of Canada

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to appear before this Committee to discuss with you the federal government’s progress in preparing for the Year 2000. In October 1997, we tabled a report on the status of the federal government’s efforts in addressing the Year 2000 date coding problem. We concluded that the rate of progress in government departments and agencies had generally been slow. Most of them were in the process of completing the inventory assessment and planning phase, and only a few had started to repair or replace non-compliant systems. These results indicated that the federal government still faced 65 to 90 percent of the total effort needed to become ready for Year 2000.

We concluded that if progress were to continue at the rate we had observed during our audit, it would likely be too slow to overcome the Year 2000 threat. If this should happen, systems that support major programs and essential services may fail and continuous delivery of these programs and services would be at risk.

Further to this Committee’s Second Report to Parliament on the Year 2000, the Treasury Board Secretariat submitted two documents:

• on 30 March 1998, a revised progress report on the government’s readiness as of the fall of 1997; and
• recently, the government’s response to the recommendations detailed in the Committee’s Report.

We reviewed the revised progress report. In my letter to the Committee of 20 April, I indicated that the report is consistent, in all material respects, with survey information contained in the Secretariat’s files. The review did not include a validation of such information with departments and agencies.

We have carried out a preliminary review of the government’s response to each of the 14 recommendations included in the Committee’s Second Report. The response refers to the report by senior assistant deputy ministers as the “workplan”. However, that report, which was presented to Cabinet in February, does not include timelines or the level of details on necessary action to ensure a smooth transition of government programs and services to the 21st century.

Mr. Chairman, I am encouraged to see the progress that has been made by the government since our audit in 1997. The interest expressed by members of this Committee and the Standing Committee on Industry has made a difference in maintaining a focus on resolving this imminent threat to the government and Canada.

Nevertheless, we must not become complacent. Time is passing and the Year 2000 threat remains real and urgent. Departments and agencies need to continue to be vigilant. We need to hear about some successes. We should expect government organizations to come forward in the near future and declare that not only that the government-wide mission-critical systems but also their respective departmental mission-critical systems have become Year 2000 compliant.

My Office is conducting a follow-up audit of the government’s preparedness for Year 2000. We expect the audit to be completed in time for reporting by the end of this year. We plan to review surveys conducted by the Treasury Board Secretariat and to examine progress made on initiatives such as technical resources, funding and vendor compliance. We will examine the state of readiness for several systems and applications that support government-wide mission-critical functions, as defined by the Secretariat.

In our view, a continual oversight and audit presence underscores the gravity of the situation and adds impetus to departmental action.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening remarks and Mrs. Cheng and I would be pleased to answer questions.