Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Human Rights
Issue 1 - Evidence, November 19, 2007
OTTAWA, Monday, November 19, 2007
The Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights met this day at 4:11 p.m., pursuant to rule 88 of the Rules of the Senate, to organize the activities of the committee.
[English]
Jessica Richardson, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, there is a quorum. As clerk of the committee, it is my duty to preside over the election of the chair. I am ready to receive a motion to that effect.
Are there any nominations?
Senator Jaffer: I nominate Senator Andreychuk.
Ms. Richardson: It is moved by Senator Jaffer that Senator Andreychuk do take the chair of the committee. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Ms. Richardson: I declare the motion carried. I invite Senator Andreychuk to take the chair.
Senator A. Raynell Andreychuk (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: Thank you, senators. I hope we will have a good year working together finishing up some of the work we started and maybe embarking on new things of interest to us.
Without further remarks, I will move to the election of the deputy chair. I am looking at Senator Oliver to move that Senator Jaffer be the deputy chair.
Senator Oliver: I am pleased to so move.
The Chair: Is there agreement?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: It is agreed. I declare that Senator Jaffer is our deputy chair.
We must go through the usual procedure. The next item of business is the following motion:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be composed of the Chair, the Deputy Chair, and one other member of the Committee to be designated after the usual consultation, and
That the Subcommittee be empowered to make decisions on behalf of the Committee with respect to its agenda, to invite witnesses and to schedule hearings.
Senator Oliver: So moved.
The Chair: Is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Oliver: Have the usual consultations taken place?
The Chair: The usual consultations have taken place with the proposed deputy chair, but I would like to talk to that person, and it is the usual suspect. I will do that after the meeting.
Senator Oliver: The motion as is is fine.
The Chair: Thank you.
Item 4 is the following motion:
That the committee print its proceedings; and
That the chair be authorized to set the number to meet demand.
Senator Oliver: So moved.
The Chair: Is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item 5 is the following motion:
That, pursuant to Rule 89, the Chair be authorized to hold meetings, to receive and authorize the printing of the evidence when a quorum is not present, provided that a member of the Committee from both the government and the opposition be present.
Is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item 6 is the following motion:
That the Committee adopt the draft first report, prepared in accordance with rule 104.
The report has been circulated. If there are no questions or comments, is someone prepared to move that motion?
Senator Munson: I so move.
The Chair: Is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item 7 is as follows:
That the Committee ask the Library of Parliament to assign analysts to the Committee;
That the Chair be authorized to seek authority from the Senate to engage the services of such counsel and technical, clerical and other personnel as may be necessary for the purpose of the Committee's examination and consideration of such bills, subject-matters of bills and estimates as referred to it;
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to retain the services of such experts as may be required by the work of the Committee; and
That the Chair, on behalf of the Committee, direct the research staff in the preparation of studies, analysis, summaries and draft reports.
Is there a mover?
Senator Oliver: So moved.
The Chair: Is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item 8 is the following motion:
That, pursuant to section 32 of the Financial Administration Act, and Section 7, Chapter 3:06 of the Senate Administrative Rules, authority to commit funds be conferred individually on the Chair, the Deputy Chair, and the Clerk of the Committee; and
That, pursuant to section 34 of the Financial Administration Act, and Section 8, Chapter 3:06 of the Senate Administrative Rules, authority for certifying accounts payable by the Committee be conferred individually on the Chair, the Deputy Chair and the Clerk of the Committee.
Senator Oliver: I so move.
The Chair: Is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item 9 is the following motion:
That the Committee empower the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure to designate, as required, one or more members of the Committee and/or such staff as may be necessary to travel on assignment on behalf of the Committee.
Senator Dallaire: I so move.
The Chair: Is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item 10 is as follows:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to:
1) determine whether any member of the Committee is on «official business» for the purposes of paragraph 8(3)(a) of the Senators Attendance Policy, published in the Journals of the Senate on Wednesday, June 3, 1998; and
2) consider any member of the Committee to be on «official business» if that member is
(a) attending an event or meeting related to the work of the Committee; or
(b) making presentation related to the work of the Committee.
Senator Munson: I so move.
The Chair: Is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item 11 is the following motion:
That, pursuant to the Senate guidelines for witness expenses, the Committee may reimburse reasonable travelling and living expenses for one witness from any one organization and payment will take place upon application, but that the Chair be authorized to approve expenses for a second witness should there be exceptional circumstances.
Senator Jaffer: So moved.
The Chair: Is that agreed?
Senator Oliver: Are some witnesses not paid by the committees but by the Senate itself? If that is the case, what is this motion for? Does this motion mean that this committee, out of this committee's budget, pays it?
Ms. Richardson: There is a central budget from which all witness expenses come. They never come out of an individual committee's budget. This motion authorizes the committee to sign off on the witness expenses when they are submitted, to say that this person appeared before the committee and they would like the expenses paid.
Senator Oliver: So the central administration does not have that authority?
Ms. Richardson: Under the rules, the committee agrees to pay a particular witness's expenses because the witness appeared before that committee, but it is from a central budget.
The Chair: A couple of years ago, in a committee I sat on, organizations asked for expenses for two witnesses.
Senator Oliver: I remember that.
The Chair: In some cases there were five, and I think the rule between the administration and the committee said that they pay but that the chair can authorize a second witness only.
Senator Oliver: That is a good rule. I agree.
The Chair: Agreement then?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Then we will go to item 12:
That the Chair be authorized to seek permission from the Senate to permit coverage by electronic media of the committee's public proceedings with the least possible disruption of its hearings; and
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be empowered to allow such coverage at its discretion.
Is there a mover for that?
Senator Munson: I so move.
The Chair: Agreement?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item 13 is in camera meetings:
That each Committee member be allowed to have one staff person present at in camera meetings, unless there is a decision for a particular meeting to exclude all staff.
In the past, if we went in camera then we needed to seek permission to have one person in. A recommendation, I believe, from the chief clerk is to have that permission as routine so we do not need to seek it at every committee meeting, and if we wanted to exclude then we would. It is up to you to agree or not.
Senator Dallaire: I have not studied it enough, probably, but if a senator attends a committee that the senator is not a member thereof, is it the practice versus the rule that the individual senator can remain, should the committee go in camera, or is it the rule and practice that a senator not remain?
The Chair: A senator can stay in any meeting.
Senator Dallaire: In camera.
The Chair: In camera. The senator cannot vote, and is subject to any other rules the committee members will put. I know in some committees, they say they hear from committee members first and then those that are not; in others it is whoever puts their hand up. No, there are no exclusions. You can show up at any committee at any time.
Senator Dallaire: My follow-up is, can a staff member of a senator who is attending, who is not a member of the committee, also sit?
The Chair: Only by special application, in my understanding, and the committee votes to say whether that staff person can stay.
Senator Dallaire: In the absence of the senator?
The Chair: Yes.
Senator Dallaire: Very good. That is what we would do here?
The Chair: Yes, I think we would wait until the issue arises, and then it will be at the discussion and discretion of the members of the committee.
Senator Oliver: I think there is an exception with the so-called Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration. I am not a member of the committee and it seems to me that I can go to a number of their meetings but when they have certain in camera meetings, even though I am a senator, I cannot go to those meetings. Is that the rule?
The Chair: Yes, but I think it is on the subject matter. They have had some hearings, investigating, et cetera. Then even other members of the Internal Economy Committee cannot sit on that subcommittee.
Senator Oliver: Okay.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Nancy Ruth, you need to leave early, but thank you for coming.
We will take it case-by-case as it comes up. There is agreement then?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item 14 is a motion to destroy recordings and transcripts of in camera discussions of a draft report from previous session, and the motion is as follows:
That the recordings and transcripts of the in camera discussions of the draft report on the study on Canada's international obligations in regards to the rights and freedoms of children taken during the first session of the Thirty-ninth Parliament be destroyed.
This item is here again, something that I was not aware of, that we must move a motion to destroy in camera recordings and transcripts when we prepare drafts of reports. I said to the clerk that I have been here for quite some years and I do not remember a motion that has come up to do it. Apparently, the practice has been haphazard, and they are now instituting that it should happen. We did not do it with the draft discussions, recordings and transcripts from the previous session, so it is here specifically.
Senator Oliver: Is this motion broad enough to include all those from all the years past that were never destroyed?
The Chair: No.
Senator Oliver: They will float around the Internet somewhere for all to read?
The Chair: We are not sure what is happening and where they are. Because I was not chair continuously I cannot say, but this one was our last draft and apparently it was not done so we are asking for it.
Senator Oliver: I so move.
The Chair: It is a signal that you will have this motion in other committees now too.
Senator Dallaire: I have a question because I was involved previously with the Access to Information Act. Do we have a dispensation? Is that written somewhere?
The Chair: We are Parliament. It does not apply to us.
Senator Dallaire: All parliamentary activity?
Ms. Richardson: Access to information does not apply to Parliament. That is my understanding.
Senator Dallaire: To any of our work?
The Chair: Now you are drawing the lawyer out in me.
Senator Dallaire: I hope not.
The Chair: To most of our routine proceedings, yes, because anything that is within the ambit of parliamentary privilege, but there may be things that senators do in some combinations — help me out here, Senator Oliver — that might not be caught by parliamentary privilege, but our legitimate, historic workings, run under the ambit of Parliament, would be covered. However, we have friendship groups and all those kinds of things. They are not covered by this privilege so I do not know. They are in that never-never middle land that I do not think we have tested. However, access to information does not apply to anything that we do within our rules, procedures, practices, committees, et cetera. Am I somewhat correct?
Senator Dallaire: I find it unusual that we must say that we will destroy the drafts when we are not subject to access to information; what is the difference?
Ms. Richardson: The Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament recommends that it be done.
The Chair: There is ongoing discussion in the Rules Committee about this whole concept of in camera because different people have different opinions, so they look at it from time to time.
Senator Dallaire: Yes, agreed.
The Chair: Now we come to the most contentious one, item 15, the time slot for regular meetings. We are bound by 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. on Mondays, but with the understanding that this time was the best for us. If there was to be any negotiation, I would dearly love to negotiate any time during the week, but that is not on, I understand, by either leadership. We could have some flexibility, but we would need the approval of the leaders to move from the 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. slot. I need an indication now, and I see Senator Jaffer, as to whether this time slot is the best one for us, or do we find some other time better for the membership? I know how difficult it is, and everyone else who chairs committees on Monday has the same problem of members arriving on Mondays. I thank those who are present, some who have been diligent in coming, because it is a hardship, particularly if you do not live in Ottawa. It means coming earlier, and it takes one more day.
Senator Oliver: Around this table, the worst is for Senator Jaffer, who must come here all the way from Vancouver to make a four o'clock meeting. She cannot leave at nine o'clock in the morning to be here on time.
The Chair: I must leave on Sunday to make it for the four o'clock.
Senator Jaffer: For that reason, I request that you consider a five o'clock meeting, which means I can come on Monday morning rather than Sunday afternoon.
The Chair: Now, I have a problem with a hockey player, who has been diligent.
Senator Munson: It is arduous for me because I must walk here. It takes me 25 minutes, and sometimes it takes me 23 minutes.
Senator Oliver: When he is not skating on the canal.
Senator Munson: Then it takes me about six minutes.
The Chair: If we went to a five-o'clock-to-eight-o'clock time slot, then I would need the approval of the leadership to do that.
Senator Munson: Five o'clock to 7:30.
Senator Dallaire: That is your last offer?
Senator Munson: It depends, you see. We all have lives to live and I understand human rights. It is bizarre to talk about this on Monday night, but I play hockey at eight o'clock and/or nine o'clock. It is important for my life right now.
The Chair: Thank you. Is there some agreement that five o'clock is okay?
Senator Dallaire: Five o'clock.
The Chair: Then it will be 4 p.m. to 7 p.m., and I will undertake to obtain approval from the two whips for 5 p.m. to 8 p.m., and I will report back to you.
The other thing is, we can sometimes sit for a longer day and maybe not sit every Monday. I made that suggestion. It worked well for a short time, where if we said we will not sit every Monday, that we could sit every second Monday but take a longer time, I received the concurrence of the leadership. Then members started to fall off, and we went back to every Monday.
Senator Jaffer: It would be better if we had longer hours every second week, because then we could achieve more. The only hesitation I have is that both of us are on the Special Senate Committee on Anti-terrorism. If that committee is slotted in on Mondays, that may be a challenge. Otherwise, I prefer a longer time every other Monday.
The Chair: It was not a problem because they sat from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m., and then we sat from 2 p.m. onwards. The problem was in enticing members to come, and giving them some benefit from not having to come every week. Attendance did not improve so, at the advice of the whips, we went back to meeting every week. I am ready to entertain anything that would give routine attendance. The deputy chair must manage her side and I will manage mine.
Senator Dallaire: The longer days help, because then people must travel only one Sunday out of two. In my case, it has been more a matter of being available on Monday. It is not the timing, because I drive or fly in from Quebec City. If you want every second week, that would be fine.
The Chair: The only thing that will be on the table now is to move the time slot from 4 p.m. to 5 p.m. That is what I will seek. I am asking both sides to reflect on whether there is another way. I am looking at the membership here, and we have a few missing. I do not know if that is only because the meeting is an organizational one, but I did tell people that we would discuss future business.
Senator Munson: That begs the question, who is missing? We had a meeting of the Standing Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, and everyone was in the room. Who is missing?
Senator Oliver: Senator Lovelace Nicholas, Senator Pépin and Senator Poy are not here.
Senator Munson: The three are from our side.
The Chair: I note the difficulty, but human rights is an important area. I encourage everyone to come.
Senator Dallaire: I applaud the five o'clock option. It makes it easier.
Senator Munson: I will leave at 7:30 p.m. every second week.
The Chair: Turning now to other business, do we want to go in camera?
Ms. Richardson: We must give them a moment to shut down.
The Chair: Before we do that, we have a cast of thousands here today because our researcher has a new researcher from the Library of Parliament with her — she is showing her the ropes, so to speak — as well as two interns. I suggest that they can stay. They have been advised of confidentiality, et cetera. We are not writing a draft report. It is future business, so we may not come to a decision. I believe they are seeking a motion from senators that they could stay for educational purposes.
Senator Munson: And our staff members.
The Chair: Your staff members are already exempt under that motion. Is there agreement to allow them to stay?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The committee continued in camera.