Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources
Issue 8 - Evidence - June 4, 2009
OTTAWA, Thursday, June 4, 2009
The Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources met this day at 8:13 a.m. for the consideration of a draft budget on emerging issues related to its mandate.
Senator W. David Angus (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good morning, everyone. This morning, we are here to consider and I hope approve an application for budget authorization for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010. The budget contains preliminary requests in connection with our study that was moved in the Senate this week and financing for our proposed trip to Washington in September or October. The idea is that we would be up and running with our studying by that time, and then we would come up with a more fleshed-out budget to cover a longer period.
The budget is before you, senators. You will notice that in some aspects it has been cut down from the earlier version you saw, and in other aspects it has been modestly increased.
On the first page, which relates to general expenses, there was a standard item in there for hospitality and things like that. We took it out. Senator Mitchell and I felt that a number of these line items were a bit hackneyed. Given that the Internal Economy Committee is being even tougher than in the past — probably with good reason — we thought we would try to only put items in the budget that we can really defend and that are specifically for the things that they say they are for. Perhaps some of the traditional ways of dealing with budgets are not familiar to me, as chair, or to Senator Mitchell, as deputy chair. However, we are prepared to take our medicine and to defend our position when the time comes. We think we should ask for the money we need and be prepared to justify it.
Those first four items have to do with preliminary work that we would like to start this summer in terms of research in the field of energy as it relates to climate change so that we could have all the necessary materials before us when September comes around. Research data would be available to all of us so that we could speak on these subjects across Canada, write op-ed pieces and do the things we have all said we should be doing as a committee regarding this hopefully groundbreaking, state-of-the-art energy policy that we are hoping to develop.
The items on the first page of the budget add up to $61,250. Is everyone comfortable with that amount? Are there any questions?
Senator Lang: Have you received estimates from consultants? How did you come to those figures?
The Chair: That is a good question. We arrived at the figures in consultation with the clerk and other clerks in the Committees Directorate, as well as our own gut feeling in terms of what it would take. We could have a holus-bolus figure and do a request for proposals, which we discussed. We were advised that that takes quite a bit of time, and therefore we thought we would sole-source the items. Those are estimated amounts. We will not go and say, "Here is $10,000; please give us a bibliography on cap and trade." It is our best guess, the best we can do.
Senator Lang: You are comfortable with it.
The Chair: Yes. It is $57,000. We may spend it all and we may have to ask for more. It is a vast field of study, as you know. I have so many press clippings on my desk. I think, "Here is the ultimate article I have been looking for." I clip it out and take it back to Montreal only to find that La Presse has a three-page spread that is even better. That is another justification for doing this. We need to keep a compendium of relevant materials.
We also need people who are able to prepare a communications plan for us because, obviously, we are not getting the message out that Senator Mitchell and I would like to see go out in a planned, coordinated way. The Senate does have communications people. The very able gentleman sitting here will be working with these people so that we can have a functional approach to the matter.
Are there other questions? I do not have anything in there for our trip to Rankin Inlet.
Senator Adams: The travel estimate is for 12 people.
The Chair: For Washington, yes.
Senator Adams: I can tell you that I will not be there, so you can put down 11 people.
The Chair: That is a good, relevant point. We are advised that, generally, everyone does not go.
Senator Adams: Maybe only five or six will go.
The Chair: That means what it means.
What is your retirement date? You are the dean of the Senate right now.
Senator Adams: I finish next Wednesday. I hope today is not the last day and we will be here next week.
The Chair: We will miss you, sir.
Senator Fraser: We will have the flags fly at half-mast next Wednesday.
Forgive me, as this is not my committee, but I am a member of the Rules Committee. You are aware of the questionnaire that has been sent out about committees.
The Chair: Yes, we are aware of that.
Senator Fraser: One of the things that I put down on mine is that for purposes of truth in budgeting, we should not have to budget for every single member of the committee to go on these trips; rather, we should budget for the number of senators we expect to go on these trips.
Since we all get a chance to fill out the questionnaires and since the more voices there are to make a point, the more likely it is to see the light of day, I wanted to make a plug. If anyone agrees with me, they can put that down on their questionnaire. Thank you for giving me the floor.
The Chair: Thank you for your always insightful comments.
In a perfect world, we would like everyone to come to Washington.
We are anticipating, Senator Adams, that your large shoes will be filled when the time comes in the fall and that there will be another senator on the committee, but you never know. We will adjust at the time. In future budgeting, Senator Fraser's point will be taken into consideration.
Senator Neufeld: With respect to Washington, you will have to help me here as I am a new senator. Are senators not able to travel to Washington, D.C., X number of times a year in the present budget?
Senator Fraser: Not for committees.
The Chair: Each senator has 64 travel points. My understanding is that the points are designed to allow a senator to go back and forth to his or her home base. The points are also eligible for other uses, including three or four trips —
Senator Neufeld: To Washington, D.C.
The Chair: I think I am right on that.
Senator Neufeld: My question is: Why even have it?
The Chair: Because this is a committee expense, and it will be allocated in the overall budget. Now the Auditor General is looking into all of our activities, so it will be accurate.
Are there any other questions?
Page 2 and page 3 of the draft budget speak for themselves. The total of the budget that we would be bringing forward is $176,100.
Senator Lang: With respect to the conference fee and the two senators, what is the specific intent of that budget item? Is there a specific reason?
The Chair: That is another good question, one that we must have spent about 20 minutes on yesterday.
These conferences do take place. There is one every day in our field. Rather than come forward on an ad hoc basis to say that we want to send two senators, I think our suggestion was that we take it out. We do not have a specific one in mind right now. The advice to us was that we should put this item in the budget because there is a limit per committee of $20,000 anyway. You will notice that we are claiming $19,850.
Senator Lang: Thank you.
The Chair: I am advised that we require a motion stating that this budget application on the special study of emerging issues for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010, be approved for submission to the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration under these three headings: Professional and Other Services, $67,900; Transport and Communications, $100,050; All Other Expenditures, $8,150, for a total of $176,100.
Senator Adams: I so move.
The Chair: Do we have a seconder? Senator St. Germain.
Is there any discussion? All those in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: The motion is carried, unanimously.
I already have a draft letter to send to Senator Furey in his capacity as Chair of the Internal Economy Committee for next steps in this regard.
If no one has any objections, we will proceed in camera.
(The committee continued in camera.)