Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Internal Economy,
Budgets and Administration
Issue 5 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Thursday, March 19, 1998
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met this day at 9:06 a.m.
Senator Bill Rompkey (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Please proceed with budgets.
Mr. Paul Bélisle, Clerk of the Senate: Honourable senators, there are two budgets before from the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, one for the balance of this fiscal year and one for the next.
Senator Gustafson: We have a budget for the Standing Senate Committee of Agriculture to travel to the Prairies. We will be going to six locations in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta on Bill C-4. We have before us the budgets covering two years, I understand.
Anything more than that I will rely on Mr. Armitage's good judgment. He usually does a good job.
The Chairman: Any questions?
Senator Maheu: The same motion asks that they be empowered to permit coverage by electronic media.
Senator Gustafson: That is very important. If you have any knowledge of what is happening out in the Prairies on this bill, it is very important that we have professional coverage on this.
Mr. Bélisle: They already have the power to do it.
Senator Di Nino: You said these are two budgets?
Mr. Blair Armitage, Clerk of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry: We are travelling over the end of this fiscal year and into the next one, senator.
Senator Di Nino: For clarification, Mr. Chairman, do we have the authority to deal with next year's budget and this year's budget? How do we do this? Should they be separate?
Mr. Bélisle: Senators, you may want to just approve this year and wait until you have the others.
Is there a necessity, Mr. Armitage? Is it because as of April 1 you are travelling?
Mr. Armitage: We are in Edmonton on April 1 and Winnipeg on April 2.
Senator Di Nino: For clarification, can we do that?
Senator Poulin: Has this gone through the Senate chamber?
Senator Robichaud: It has not yet.
Senator Poulin: It has not?
The Chairman: No. We would report it this afternoon.
Senator Poulin: I am referring to the full budget for 1998-99.
The Chairman: That has gone through.
Senator Poulin: It has gone through?
The Chairman: Yes.
Senator Poulin: It has been voted on.
Mr. Bélisle: There may be a possibility here. I do not know how much you wish to spend now until we have another meeting of Internal Economy, but there are provisions in the rules that you can spend $10,000 of emergency funds. Will that be enough to carry you through?
Senator Di Nino: I am totally happy to accept your ruling that it is in order. My question was: Can we deal with two different budgets?
The Chairman: As I understand it, we can and we should.
It is very important that parliamentary committees travel. We have said before that the committees are really the strength of the Senate and it is important for senators to be out on the road, in the regions, visible, asking questions, listening, and that is going to cost money.
Mr. Bélisle: 1998 will be applied to this year's budget. 1999 will be applied to next year's budget. It is different from what we discussed earlier.
Senator Di Nino: The first question I have, Senator Gustafson, is: What are you trying to accomplish; what is the objective of this exercise?
Senator Gustafson: First, in the agriculture community in the prairies, this bill has been very divisive among farm groups, farmers and so on.
The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry has a direct responsibility to hear firsthand from the farmers, not only farm groups, but individual farmers as well, and we intend to do that if you give us permission.
Senator Di Nino: The objective is to listen and hear what Canadians who have an interest in this issue wish to say to us so that we can create the kind of legislation that will reflect their position; is this what we are trying to do?
Senator Gustafson: Hopefully we can hear from farmers and bring amendments that will be positive to the bill and give direction. However, first we need to hear from them. We have been invited to do that by many farm groups and farmers, and I feel that the Senate committee is quite able to defend itself very constructively for the benefit of all senators.
Senator Di Nino: I agree and I support this application. There are still a couple of other questions I should like to deal with.
Under professional and special services, a communication consultant, there is a request for $7,500. Perhaps Senator Gustafson can help me, I do not see an explanation of how we will communicate or disseminate this information to the public once we gather it? Is there no provision here to communicate?
The Chairman: There is a communications consultant.
Senator Di Nino: That is only the consultant. Are we preparing a report? Will we have a press release every day? Will we be doing something to let the people know what kind of opinions are being expressed by our colleagues and friends who appear before the committee?
Senator Gustafson: Mr. Armitage may wish to speak to that, but I do not think that will be a challenge. Our danger may be too much publicity. It is important that we have people with us, and I understand that is the case, who are professionals in this area.
Senator Di Nino: You expect that the media will be interested and will be covering these proceedings.
Senator Gustafson: There will be a significant force of media covering our committee and they will be interviewing individual senators as well as witnesses who appear because it has been a high priority situation on the Prairies.
Senator Di Nino: I hope this information is widely spread throughout the west particularly, but in other parts of the country as well.
I notice that you are asking for transportation costs. Is it not usual or often that the senators would travel on their points instead of asking for specific costs through a committee?
Senator Gustafson: The opposite is true in committees I have been on. They do not want you to use your points. Mr. Armitage can speak to that.
Mr. Armitage: I will not speak on behalf of the executive, but I do know from past experiences as a committee clerk that the reason behind resisting it is that using your points can artificially inflate a senator's end-of-year accounts, showing their travel as being far higher than others simply because they were using their points.
Senator Di Nino: I actually like your other answer better, because that is a loaded question. It is for transparency. It is because we need to tell people to do this kind of a job, it costs this kind of money. We should not be afraid to tell people this. We should go on record as saying that it is important to have a full and open dialogue with the public on the things that we do and how we spend their money and why we spend it. Your first answer was the right one, transparency.
Senator LeBreton: Watching the press from Western Canada, this is a huge issue for them. Senator Gustafson should be congratulated for the efforts he has undertaken in this regard.
It is of interest to note that the Official Opposition, when this bill was before the other place, was down dancing around the doors of the Senate with mariachi bands and burritos.
I hope I am not telling tales out of school, but Senator Gustafson has a letter signed by several members of the Reform Party urging the Senate to do something and get out there and have this heard. The hypocrisy continues. When it is handy for the Reform Party to beat us over the head with a phoney issue, they are doing it; and yet, as we have seen in other cases in the Senate, they are down at the door begging us to do things to help.
I wanted to put that on the record and I congratulate Senator Gustafson and Mr. Armitage and the committee for going out and doing a job that parliamentarians should be doing.
Senator Gustafson: We have had many requests to be on open lines, in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba. There has also been much press coverage on this, even down to The Financial Post.
The Chairman: Are these budgets approved, honourable senators?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The committee adjourned.