Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Internal Economy,
Budgets and Administration
Issue 10 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Thursday, November 28, 1996
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met this day at 9:25 a.m.
Senator Colin Kenny (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Since Senator Poulin has to leave, I would suggest that we deal with the liaison question at the beginning of our meeting.
You have before a revised list and, before we speak to it, I would point out an error on it. Senator Wood's name has been left off Human Resources and Protective Services. The record should show that Senator Wood's name should be included under both of those directorates.
This is may be adjusted at any time should any senator wish to be involved. We would welcome senators who are not members of this committee. If they have a particular area of interest, and they would like to be associated with this, we will accommodate them.
Senator Prud'homme: May I apply?
The Chairman: Of course. Simply drop us a note and we will include your name.
Senator Prud'homme: Finance is the area that interests me.
The Chairman: Senator Prud'homme, Finance, if we could, please.
Senator Carstairs: Mr. Chairman, our committee has met. Do you want us to report? How do you want this to work?
The Chairman: It is very much in the hands of the individual senators involved. Some groups have met and the meetings were successful. In other cases the officials have not been able to get together with the senators involved.
The advantage of doing this is two-fold: It gives the officials a feel for how senators see them; and it gives the senators a better feel for what is going on in a particular area.
When we are dealing with our budgets we will look to the senators who have dealt with any particular area to lead us as we go through them. Those senators will have had an opportunity to study these specific areas.
Those of you who have held meetings, may decide whether you wish to bring any particular matter to our attention. That decision is yours. It was not the intention that each group should make a formal report. The intention was to create a closer liaison with officials and to enhance the expertise of our senators, particularly since we are approaching budget time.
Senator Carstairs: Why is the technology committee not included? Do we fall under a different category?
Mr. Paul Bélisle, Clerk of the Senate and Clerk of the Committee: That would come under Services.
Senator Carstairs: That comprises Senators De Bané, Nolin, Comeau and myself.
The Chairman: That is a decision-making subcommittee like communications. You are to report to us at some point with recommendations regarding technology.
Senator Carstairs: As a committee, we have met with Gary O'Brien and Heather Lank. Subsequently, I attended a staff meeting of the committees branch.
One concern I would raise today -- and there will be others -- relates to the lack of security at 56 Sparks Street. There is no security for committees branch over there. I am not sure that is appropriate and I believe it is a matter we should address immediately.
Senator Di Nino: Our committee has not met, but we will rectify that. I am concerned that these discussions are to be held at a public meeting, in that we may be dealing with personnel, budgets, and matters that are generally not discussed in an open meeting. We should be open in our discussions about all of the issues, but some of them may not be appropriate for a public meeting.
The Chairman: That is a fair point. I would ask you to give us notice and we will see that it is put on the appropriate part of the agenda.
Senator De Bané: Mr. Chairman, the subcommittee on information technology will be holding another meeting at noon today in my office. I will be graciously offering lunch, as Senator Carstairs suggested to me yesterday I should do.
Mr. Chairman, we hope to submit, for your consideration, a budget for next year shortly.
We have been fortunate to have the assistance of Mr. Desramaux, the head of the computer services of the House of Commons who, through the initiative of our clerk, Mr. Bélisle, has been seconded to the Senate for six months. He is a man of great competence. He will attend our meeting as will Madam Bouchard.
The Chairman: Are people comfortable with these assignments?
Senator Nolin: I am comfortable with it.
The Chief of Protective Services and I met on two occasions. As well, we had a full subcommittee meeting with the chief and his senior staff. We were shown a simulation which was most informative. Some things are taken for granted which should not be. As a result the Protective Services work plan for 1997-1998 was amended.
Some important budget decisions will have to be taken. The approach that has been suggested we take will ease the understanding of all those budget restraints. However, important decisions remain to be taken and Protective Services and our subcommittee will be there to help this committee understand the issues.
Senator Poulin: As co-chairs on Senate communications, Senator Nolin and I would like to thank our colleagues here at this table. Since last January we have had many opportunities to discuss where we want to go in terms of institutional communications. We have made the decision that the communications service should report to the clerk.
We would be glad to receive direction or suggestions. Just this morning Senator Di Nino was commenting on the importance of having material for the youth. Does the committee expect us to continue our work and report back to this full committee?
The Chairman: All of these liaison groups are expected to continue, on an ongoing basis, to stay in touch with their areas. I do not think you need direction from the committee on that point, Senator Poulin. These meetings of the liaison group are entirely up to the senators involved.
Senator Poulin: This committee is in a different situation, because, as Senator De Bané was saying, we have something to work with.
We are dealing with a situation which is sort of working. Therefore, if there is a will that we continue looking into different options, reporting to the clerk, we would be more than willing to do so. However, we do need direction.
Senator Forrestall: I want to pick up on Senator Di Nino's comment arising out of the meeting we had with Canadian teachers and their plea for user-friendly material. Were I a member of your committee, I would be interested in meeting with the national association which represents Canadian teachers, to ask them to strike a committee to liaise with your committee for the express purpose of getting from them what they want in design, printing and distributing. That would demonstrate to them that we are anxious to be of some assistance to the students.
Mr. Bélisle: Senators, as a follow-up to your comments, Senator Forrestall, a letter will go out early next week to all of the high school teachers thanking them for their participation and enclosing an information kit. We will be asking them for their recommendations or suggestions on how to improve the kit so that it will be user-friendly. Some students or teachers may want to make suggestions. I am sure I will be get some feedback from them.
Senator Poulin: We will report back.
Senator Forrestall: We should monitor the situation because I believe we can be of some service.
The Chairman: If we may then, colleagues, revert to the agenda now.
Senator De Bané: In respect of human resources, our manager is Ms Beaudoin and the liaison senators are Senators Cohen, Milne and De Bané.
The Chairman: Senator Wood's name was added.
The Chairman: Her name was also added to Protective Services. Her name was omitted inadvertently.
Senator De Bané: Mr. Chairman, do you expect us to meet as a group with Ms Beaudoin?
The Chairman: Perhaps we could meet briefly afterwards and discuss the purpose of the liaison, because I think the other members of the committee are aware of the process.
Senator De Bané: Perfect. Will information technology be relevant to those committees, or it is part of something else?
The Chairman: It is a separate subcommittee that will be reporting back. It is not liaising with anyone.
Senator Poulin: Mr. Chairman, my name appears under Legislative Services. Unfortunately, since I already sit on more than 15 committees, time constraints do not permit me to take on any further responsibilities.
The Chairman: We will delete your name from that.
Senator Prud'homme: Will she be replaced?
The Chairman: Leave it with us for a day or two and we will sort it out.
If we could revert to the agenda and deal with the pages programme, please.
Mr. Bélisle: The pages program has been in effect since August 6, 1996. By all indications, the expanded program has been a great success. I have received comments to that effect from individual senators and from the pages themselves. I have, on a few occasions, met with the pages, once over pizza, to get feedback from them as to what their feelings and thoughts were about the program itself. The exchange has been very positive.
First, it is a more flexible system whereby the pages have the advantage of choosing the hours they may work. I see here this morning Mr. Jeannotte who is a newly recruited page. He is a second-year civil law student. Exams are coming up, so he is putting in the time this morning instead of this afternoon. That flexibility works well with the students. After all, their priority should be their studies, and this flexibility gives them the opportunity to do the best they can in that regard.
Second, there is diversification in their activities. Formerly, pages worked only in the Senate chamber, but now they also have responsibilities in committees. They also work in other areas of the Senate, particularly administration. I had the advantage of having a most helpful student in my office for two days. The student worked well and learned quite a bit.
There is now wider recognition of the program. There was coverage in the Hill Times of a swearing-in ceremony to which parents of the pages were invited. We are trying to make the program more meaningful.
I would point out a correction which should be made to the briefing notes you have. The pages were being asked to take confidential statistics. That is no longer being done. The reason it was being done was to improve the services, not to keep tabs on anything.
The Chairman: Members of the committee, I would like to introduce to you the Honourable Don Boudria, who has been good enough to come here and visit us.
We have asked you to come here today to express our appreciation to you for the cooperation you have provided on the other side.
The committee members know you have been helpful in keeping relations between the Senate and the Commons on an even keel, frequently solving problems that we have had, very quickly, and if not solving some problems, at least giving us an opportunity to exchange information and to arrive at positions with which we could work.
We would like to present you with a plaque as a token of our appreciation for all your help.
We will miss you now that you have decided to travel the world.
The Honourable Don Boudria, P.C., M.P.: I thank you for this wonderful decoration, for this certificate, of which you have made me the recipient.
[Translation]
I have had the privilege of working with Senator Kenny and with your committee in my capacity of Chief Whip in the House. Both Houses of Parliament have everything to gain by working together.
[English]
We have succeeded in joining together some of our forces, some of our staffing initiatives, and so on. By making Parliament whole instead of two entities, while respecting the fact that there are two distinct institutions within Parliament, the perception of the Canadian public towards Parliament is improving.
People, particularly those in the media, who always take particular pleasure in showing duplication wherever they can find it, real or imagined, have everything to lose in their initiatives of diminishing the credibility of the institution if we work closer together; in other words, if we can indicate that wherever there was duplication, that one, or the other, of the institutions can administer that service. That does not mean that everything has to be centred on one of the chambers. In making these changes, taxpayers' dollars will be spent more efficiently because it is the taxpayers who are ultimately responsible for all this.
Our goal is to make Parliament work better. I hope that I have, to some degree, assisted in that regard and that those who follow me in the House will continue to work closely with the Senate. I believe that the House Whip and the Senate Whip should work closely as well as the House Board and the Senate Board. In so doing, Parliament and the people of Canada both win.
[Translation]
I want to thank all of you very much for this certificate for which I am deeply grateful.
[English]
Your kindness and cooperation are such that I will almost miss being Whip.
Mr. Bélisle: The issuing of confidential certificates was discussed. We wanted to know if some of the services provided to senators could be improved, both in the reading room and at the work stations. However, I would notify you that this keeping of statistics has been stopped.
The Chairman: The intention was to measure it again at some point in the future, now that we have a base line, but without using names. People were objecting to names being listed.
Mr. Bélisle: During the period of October to November, only one senator was smoking in the reading room. There was almost no smoking in the reading room. There were a few more at the work stations, maybe four or five. That, too, is on the decrease.
Of some concern to the pages, which has been raised in the meetings I have had with them, is in the method of payment. I want you to know that all pages are guaranteed 500 hours. I spoke to you about the flexibility. However, this flexibility also means that if they do not work in a given month, as it is structured now, the page will not be paid. Some of them have asked that we review that situation. Perhaps, since we guarantee them 500 hours, we should consider a system of more regular payment.
Recruiting was done this year at the last minute because we only adopted our policy on August 6. We go back to an eligibility list that was compiled last year. That resulted in us appointing seven from New Brunswick; four from Quebec; one from Ontario; one from Alberta; one from P.E.I; and one from British Columbia. All meet the language requirements. Mr. Richard Jeannotte is of aboriginal origin, specifically, he is a Micmac.
Senator Carstairs: I have serious concerns about this page program and I am, quite frankly, shocked at the final paragraph. This is not a part-time messenger program, this is an educational program for young people who are to be educated in how the Senate works, and any consideration of any salary reduction below $14 an hour, I will tell you right now, is absolutely unacceptable to me. If you want unanimity in the committee on that, you will never get it.
I raised the subject of the 500 hours back in August. Our pages are making $7,000. Tuition fees now vary between $3,000 and $4,000 a year, depending on where they go to school. That gives them $3,000 to cover their room, board and their books. It cannot be done.
These kids are not living at home. We go out and recruit people across the country. We invite them to come to Ottawa to go to school, and we pay them $7,000. They cannot live on $7,000. If that 500 hours is not accumulated between September and very early in June, they cannot get other jobs.
I know we will give them summer jobs if they have not completed their 500 hours. However, if they only complete their 500 hours by the end of August, they will only have earned a maximum of $7,000. I have no objections to them working 500 hours. I think that is reasonable; but I do think we have to work it in such a way that they have the potential to find a summer job after they have finished university in early May. They will then have the opportunity to earn more money.
I think employing them in committees is a wonderful idea. We will be broadening our education program. I know they are frequently asked to serve coffee, but while they are there, hopefully, they will be listening and learning.
As Chairman of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee I will certainly make it a point to sit with the pages and explain what has been going on in the committee. That should broaden the educational dynamic.
Senator Milne: Senator Carstairs has said very ably what I was intending to say. I would add that I have talked with several of the pages and I know that they are very concerned about the fact that they might have to work through the summer in order to amass their 500 hours. They tell me they cannot afford to do that. Therefore they intend to quit, and I do not think that is what we want.
Senator Rompkey: Why are there pages from only six provinces?
The Chairman: It has to do with the recruiting process.
Senator Rompkey: Is there a rotation?
The Chairman: Yes.
Senator Prud'homme: Last year recruitment was heavy from the Atlantic provinces. Next year it will be the west.
Senator Rompkey: Is it the Atlantic one year and the Pacific the next?
Mr. Bélisle: No. Two years ago, senator, it was, I believe, New Brunswick and part of Quebec. Quebec is divided into two as is Ontario -- northern Ontario and southern Ontario. They were from New Brunswick and northern Quebec. There are so many from New Brunswick again this year because we could not do a proper recruiting and go back to another area.
I do not know if Newfoundland will be next, with another province, say, Nova Scotia, because Nova Scotia is not represented either. Those could be the two main provinces for the next recruiting.
Senator De Bané: Particularly Labrador.
Mr. Bélisle: Yes.
Senator Prud'homme: It was announced two years ago that they would go by region, and it would be fair between the regions.
Senator Rompkey: What part of the Atlantic region?
Mr. Bélisle: In terms of the Atlantic regions, Newfoundland-Labrador would be with another province. We usually take two provinces at a time. I could report back to you privately.
The Chairman: The bottom line is all of Canada over a cycle of perhaps five or six years should be represented in the Senate. This year it is a little out of whack because we added an extra group of pages after the recruiting period was over.
Mr. Bélisle: We may also have to review the selection process, because we used to have eight pages and this year we have almost doubled that number. It may be possible to include three or four provinces in the selection process at any given time and not just two. By the time we cover every area, if you include the territories, it would be once every six years.
Senator Rompkey: I would like to see a policy which clearly sets out that pages will be selected from Newfoundland and Labrador. Labrador borders on Quebec and at least 5 per cent of the population is bilingual.
The Chairman: There have been Newfoundland pages, and there will be again shortly, if that is what you are asking.
Senator Rompkey: That is what I am asking, except I would like to see a policy which clearly sets that out.
The Chairman: We can do that.
Senator Forrestall: Does designating these positions as bilingual work against students from any particular province or region finding employment here in the summer?
I can understand that it would not cause a problem for students from New Brunswick or Quebec or parts of Ontario, but when you get into British Columbia and 90 per cent of Nova Scotia, you would be hard pressed to find bilingual students. This would deprive them of access to the opportunity of serving here for a year.
Senator Prud'homme: The student from B.C. speaks three languages.
Senator Carstairs: Can they go for additional language training in order to qualify?
Senator Forrestall: I do not think so.
The Chairman: We have had pages from every province. Where we have had real problems with language is with aboriginal recruiting. If you recall, the committee was prepared to make an exception this year because we had been trying for eight years and had not been successful. It turned out that we found an aboriginal student who was bilingual.
Your point is well taken. How do you try to square the circle when students from large parts of the country are unilingual and are excluded because of that?
Senator Forrestall: What system does the House of Commons follow?
Senator Rompkey: As far as I know, every year, every province is represented.
Senator Forrestall: But it is not a designation. We have been through this argument, it seems to me, over the years.
Senator Rompkey: I do not think they have all been bilingual, but I am not sure.
Senator Forrestall: A qualification, as Senator Carstairs has suggested, on the House side, is the willingness to take language training.
Senator Nolin: It depends on the objective of the program, whether the objective is to provide a service to parliamentarians or to provide enlargement of knowledge to pages.
Senator Prud'homme: It is both.
Senator Forrestall: The latter more accurately reflects what we are trying to do.
Senator Nolin: We are trying to do that, but the basic objective is to provide service to parliamentarians. If we have a policy on bilingualism, I would strongly recommend that we keep it
Senator Forrestall: I dare say you would. I am just saying that I think the desire to learn the second language should be an adequate qualification.
Senator Nolin: Yes.
Senator Forrestall: Students graduating from St. Patrick's High School or St. Mary's will not be bilingual.
Senator Nolin: I think there may be more bilingual students than any other segment of the population. However, I may be totally off track.
Senator Di Nino: I do not mind picking up where my colleague, Senator Nolin, is leaving off. I would tend to disagree with him to a degree about the main purpose of the program. One of the purposes that I have recognized in the page program is to give these young people an opportunity to build leadership skills. This is what we should be looking at.
I do not disagree that the policy of bilingualism should be respected. When it comes to aboriginals and others, I think I have been very forceful in my comments in the past, and I will just go on the record again. We should be able, to some minor degree, and I am not suggesting a major degree, to relax these rules when it comes to certain segments of our population. If we discussed this matter on the floor of the Senate I would dare say that the largest majority, if not everybody, would go along with the fact that if they spoke one aboriginal language and one of the official languages, that we should, as long as they make an effort to learn the other language, make an exception.
Is it difficult to meet the threshold of 500 hours because of our schedule, or is it because the students themselves have a schedule which will not allow them to participate? You may wish to respond to that at a later date.
Mr. Bélisle: I looked into the hours, senators, the last time this issue was to come up before the committee, and indications were that some of them were close to having met at least more than half of those 500 hours. One was close to 300. That will give him some time flexibility in the next term.
Senator Di Nino: If the students are unable to participate because of their own schedules, that is one problem; if it is because we do not make the opportunity available to them, that is another problem. I happen to agree with Senator Carstairs. I believe that, between September and May the students should be able to complete their 500 hours and be free to look for a part-time job.
I would not mind seeing pages work with senators. I think that is another experience which would add to their education and experience.
Senator Carstairs: I think it is very important that the young people speak both official languages However, there is a level of speaking two languages, as we are well aware. I know that your present assistant, who was a page, and my assistant, who was a page, both went to St. Anne's College the summer before they became pages to ensure their language skills were at a satisfactory level. One is from P.E.I., the other is from Nova Scotia. Has that been eliminated from the program, or was it never part of the program?
Mr. Bélisle: I was not aware that these two individuals had gone for language training. If they did, I am not sure who paid for it. I will inquire into that.
To answer Senator Di Nino's question on the hours, I will have to make enquiries of the pages themselves in order to give you a fair response.
Senator Prud'homme: I share the views of Senator Carstairs and others. However, I live for the day when we hire unilingual French. I have never seen one on the Hill yet.
Senator Di Nino: We should, is what I am saying.
Senator Prud'homme: Yes. I could imagine senators asking for a page, "Oui, monsieur, qu'est-ce que vous voulez, s'il vous plaît?" I know some senators who would be quite turned off by that. "Je ne parle pas anglais, monsieur, je m'excuse." I would never criticize young person who came to me and said, "Bonjour, je fais un effort".
I was instrumental in the hiring of Mr. Landriault who, I am sure, will become an extraordinarily good politician.
Let us not start relaxing the rules too much. When the times comes, if someone from Nova Scotia or Labrador can speak a few words of French, I do not think any one of us here would create a scene, as long as it is not a policy.
Senator Forrestall: I agreed with what the senator was saying up to his last qualification. It is the inclusion of that type of qualification that leads me to make this observation. You know how often I have voted in favour of language policies that have come through this country over the last 30 years. I take a back seat to no one on this particular question. However, when the application of a policy promotes unfairness, then I think a voice must be raised.
I am not suggesting we change policy; I am just raising the question. The positions are designated, but I thought the qualification was the willingness to take language training. Pages that I have had anything to do with, not necessarily here but over on the other side, encouraged their parents to send them to St. Anne's.
The Chairman: What I have taken from this is that the report is a satisfactory one; however, there are some areas the committee would like to revisit, including recruiting, pay and language education. We will ask the staff to address those inasmuch as they were found to require further elaboration than what existed in this document.
Senator Prud'homme: The sad reality news is that when we need our pages the most, which is in December, that is when they have exams.
The Chairman: There is one last item, colleagues, and it is a difficult one. It has to do with the handling of our budgeting. I would ask Paul to speak to it in just a moment. Because of the constraints, we only budgeted for 80 per cent of senators' research. Senators can still claim the full amount of their $50,000, but we only set aside $40,000 in the budget.
We have did that because we have never had a situation where every senator has claimed all of the allowance. We have tracked it closely and we tried to match it as best as we could. In the event that senators decide to use all of their $50,000, as they are entitled to, the staff in each department hold back. They do not spend a portion of their funds, to ensure that funds are available for senators.
This is a tremendous burden on Madam Aghajanian because she knows that certain programs are going ahead. She knows, however, that the priority is to take care of senators' needs. As Paul goes through this paper you will see that it is a request of senators to predict as best they can what their expenditures will be in the last quarter of the year.
We would like to know by February 1, what you plan to do for the last two months of the year. The plan calls for a contingency fund in the event that there is some misunderstanding or something unusual comes up. We have asked all of our managers to predict what they will require. However, unless senators are prepared to consider their last quarter plans, it is very difficult for us to budget.
We are in a situation where funds have lapsed for programs we had hoped to complete simply because we were not certain what senators were going to do.
Mr. Bélisle: Senator, I think you have covered the comments I wanted to make to the committee. In the last two years the Senate has lapsed somewhere in the vicinity of $1.3 million. That is as a result of holding money until the last moment so that it could be available for certain administrative expenditures and for the senators' offices.
We cannot use that money for capital expenditures, and that puts us in the position of applying for supplementary estimates in the subsequent year. If we had an indication of how much we should plan for and not wait until March 31, it would be very helpful in terms of our money management. Madam Aghajanian, do you have anything to add?
Madam Aghajanian, Director, Finance Directorate: No. You have both dealt with it very well.
The Chairman: Any comments?
Senator Prud'homme: Having reflected on this discussion, I strongly disagree. We are always being asked to make these predictions. Last year we spent 64.97 per cent of the maximum possible. We may have budgeted for 80 per cent, but we spent 64.97 per cent of the maximum allotment, which means 104 senators, multiplied by $50,000, which makes $5,200 million, and we spent $3,378 million, exactly 64.97 per cent.
The Chairman: This year we budgeted 84 per cent. The last year we did not budget 80 per cent.
Senator Prud'homme: Last year I spent $9,000 of my $50,000 because I am a researcher by choice. I am not complaining.
Are you saying you will send a letter on the January 1, another one on January 10, requesting us to make up our minds before February 1, and that after that we will be cut off? If you spend only $10,000 of your $50,000 will you be allowed only 10 per cent of the remaining $40,000?
The Chairman: No, that is not what the letter says. The briefing note indicates that the plan was to save 10 per cent, but the letter says Finance will keep a small balance from senators' research and office expenses to cover other emergencies.
Senator Prud'homme: Who are we at the mercy of?
The Chairman: We are asking senators to think ahead in terms of the management of their offices. That is not happening now.
Senator Milne: I agree with any effort to help Finance plan and budget in an orderly fashion. I do have some concerns in that I am not sure how much I will need for the last three months of the fiscal year, because I am not certain that my computer programs are doing what I want them to do. I may incur unexpected expenditures because of this. Therefore, I rather object to the phrase: "will not be permitted" in the letter.
The Chairman: Is it mitigated at all by the next paragraph.
Senator Milne: I do not know if you can call the purchase of a computer an emergency. However, my loss of temper over the computer might create an emergency.
The Chairman: In that situation you would send in a letter to Finance saying, "I plan to spend $10,000 in the last quarter, but if I have computer problems it might well be $20,000." At that point Madam Aghajanian would then put you down for $20,000.
Senator Milne: At that point I would be over budget.
The Chairman: The point is she would know your situation.
Senator Milne: That is fair game, as long as it is made clear.
The Chairman: The question is: How do we make it clearer? The senator might say, "I am going to spend every red nickel," and that is fine. However, we do not think senators are even thinking about what they will spend in their last quarter.
Senator Milne: According to the letters I have received, some of them have already made their decisions.
The Chairman: They want money.
Senator Prud'homme: On the 1st of February the government comes in with an immense redistribution plan. But a senator might suddenly realize he needs to hire staff to help him in a particular project.
The Chairman: That would be an emergency.
Senator Prud'homme: Who will have the ultimate say?
The Chairman: At the end of the day the senator is entitled to this money. He can declare an emergency just like a pilot can declare an emergency in a plane.
Senator Prud'homme: As long as the rules are clear.
The Chairman: We agree there should be some planning, but there may be better ways of asking our colleagues to help us solve this problem.
Senator Di Nino: You might consider eliminating the sentence Senator Milne mentioned.
The Chairman: No expenditures.
Senator Di Nino: I do not think anybody will create any problems.
The Chairman: Otherwise, honourable senators, do I have your agreement?
Senator Di Nino: Go for it. I do not think you will have a problem.
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: If there are no other items of business you would like to raise, I would suggest that we adjourn.
The committee adjourned.