Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 1 - Evidence - Meeting of November 7, 2013
OTTAWA, Thursday, November 7, 2013
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day, at 9 a.m., to hold an organization meeting pursuant to rule 12-13 of the Rules of the Senate.
[Translation]
Daniel Charbonneau, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, I see that we have a quorum. As the clerk of the committee, I have a duty to preside over the election of the chair. I am ready to receive a motion to that effect. Are there any nominations?
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I nominate Senator Tardif for our chair.
Mr. Charbonneau: It is moved by the Honourable Senator Fortin-Duplessis that the Honourable Senator Tardif do take the chair of this committee. Honourable senators, is it your pleasure to adopt this motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Mr. Charbonneau: I declare this motion carried.
I invite the Honourable Senator Tardif to take the chair.
Senator Claudette Tardif (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: Dear committee members, thank you for your trust and for electing me chair. We will definitely need your participation and opinions to reach our objectives. This is an excellent committee, where we can have a frank exchange of views, in large part thanks to the work done by Senator Maria Chaput, who has done her duty as chair for almost eight years with so much dedication and generosity.
Senator Chaput, you have done a wonderful job and have chaired the committee well. You sought to build consensus and to maintain the focus on our objectives, while always being ready to listen and respect all the members' opinions.
Thank you, and as a member, Senator Chaput, rest assured that your observations and opinions will certainly help us deal with the issues we will have to discuss in our meetings going forward.
We are moving on to item no. 2, the election of a deputy chair. Would anyone like to move a motion to that effect?
Senator Chaput: I nominate Senator Champagne.
The Chair: It is moved by the Honourable Senator Chaput that the Honourable Senator Champagne be deputy chair of this committee.
Is it agreed, honourable senators?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Under item no. 3, we have the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure. We need someone to move this motion.
Senator Poirier: I nominate Senator Fortin-Duplessis.
The Chair: The following is moved by the Honourable Senator Poirier:
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.
The Honourable Senator Fortin Duplessis will be that member. Senator Fortin-Duplessis, do you accept?
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Yes.
The Chair: Is it agreed, honourable senators?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you very much. The motion is adopted. This is a real pleasure, as Senator Fortin-Duplessis has been sitting on this committee for a number of years. I will be very glad to work with you and Senator Champagne.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: It will be five years in January.
The Chair: Five years already.
Item no. 4 is the motion to publish the committee's proceedings.
Would someone like to move this motion?
The motion is moved by the Honourable Senator Charrette-Poulin.
Item no. 5 is the authorization to hold meetings and to receive evidence when quorum is not present.
Would someone like to move this motion?
The motion is moved by the Honourable Senator Fortin-Duplessis.
Senator Charette-Poulin: I have a question, Madam Chair. How many members will we need for a quorum in this committee?
Mr. Charbonneau: We need a quorum of four members in this committee.
Senator Chaput: How many are we?
Mr. Charbonneau: Nine in the committee. You can hear from witnesses, listen to their testimonies, as long as you have one member of the government and one member of the opposition — so two senators — but you cannot make any decisions without four senators present.
Senator Poirier: Is the chair taken into account for the quorum?
Mr. Charbonneau: Yes.
The Chair: Are we ready to adopt motion no. 5?
Hon. Senators: Yes.
The Chair: The motion is moved by the Honourable Senator Fortin-Duplessis.
The next item concerns financial reports.
You have it in your documents. That was with regards to the last meeting, and it covers two fiscal years of the last session of Parliament. Everyone has that document. Could someone move that the report be adopted?
Senator Chaput: I have a question. Is this a new way to present the financial report? Over the previous years, did we always have report 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14, and so on? This is a new format.
Mr. Charbonneau: Yes, this is a new format that meets the new criteria of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, so that the information would be clearer. Before, it was just by order of reference and for a period of two or three years — the length of a session — but now, it is divided by fiscal year, for the sake of greater clarity.
Senator Chaput: It is true that we have not travelled. All we did was hold committee meetings. That answers my question.
The Chair: Are there any other questions?
Senator Poirier: I just want to make sure I understand. When you talked about the period from 2011-12 until now, you were talking about expenses that have already been incurred. When we look on the last page, where it is a matter of 2013-14, are those expenses already part of the 2013-14 budget up until now?
Mr. Charbonneau: Yes. Those are expenses from the fiscal year that began on April 1, 2013. They are the expenses that have been incurred from April 2013 until the prorogation of Parliament. That is considered a fiscal year — 2013- 14 until the end of March. Everything will start over now, and in the next report, the expenses from October 2013 to March 2014 will be included.
Senator Poirier: No part of that report shows us what remains in the budget. So is this just an expense report?
Mr. Charbonneau: Yes. There are no requests for funds. That is a separate process. This is just a report.
Senator Poirier: Okay, thank you.
The Chair: Is everyone comfortable?
Hon. Senators: Yes.
The Chair: The motion is moved by the Honourable Senator Chaput. Are you ready to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Item no. 7 has to do with research staff.
You have the motion before you, and it reads as follows:
That the committee asks 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 . . .;
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, analyses, summaries, and draft reports.
Could someone move this motion?
It is moved by the Honourable Senator Poirier that the committee have the authority to assign research staff. Do you agree?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: At this time, I would like to invite Marie-Ève Hudon to join us. Welcome, Marie-Ève. I have to say that we are lucky, as we have an excellent analyst for the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. How long have you been with the committee?
Marie-Ève Hudon, Analyst, Library of Parliament: Since it was struck.
The Chair: Since it was struck. So she has a wealth of information.
Senator McIntyre: How can we refuse? We cannot possibly refuse.
The Chair: Thank you for your dedication, and the analytical and support skills that you always bring to the assistant.
Item no. 8 concerns the authority to commit funds and certify amounts. The following is moved by Senator Charette-Poulin:
That, pursuant to 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;
That, pursuant to 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; and
That, notwithstanding the foregoing, in cases related to consultants and personnel services, the authority to commit funds and certify accounts be conferred jointly on the chair and the deputy chair.
Honourable senators, is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: The motion is carried.
Item no. 9 has to do with travel.
The following is moved by the Honourable Senator Chaput:
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.
The Chair: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Now, we will deal with the designation of members travelling on committee business. I am taking the time to read these motions because I think we need to make sure we understand what we are adopting.
The following is moved by Senator Fortin-Duplessis:
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 a presentation related to the work of the committee; and
That the subcommittee report at the earliest opportunity any decisions taken with respect to the designation of members of the committee travelling on committee business.
The Chair: Honourable senators, is that agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: The motion is carried.
The next item concerns the travelling and living expenses of witnesses.
The following is moved by the Honourable Senator Poirier:
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 Chaput: I have a question. I raised this at the organization meeting of another committee I'm on. When I was chair, I found the decision of whether to reimburse expenses for a second witness should there be ``exceptional circumstances'' to be somewhat difficult. We may need to look at some examples that are a bit more concrete and specify what exactly ``exceptional circumstances'' means. It was not easy for the clerk or the chair to figure out whether to allow a second witness or not. One time, we decided against having the second witness because I did not feel it was necessary. Would it be possible to get something a bit more specific — a definition, at least — something that could guide the chair in making that decision?
Senator Poirier: If the text of the motion is the same for all committees, then, exactly what is meant by ``exceptional circumstances'' should be spelled out. If it is the same for all committees, I do not think that we, as members of the committee, should change what the text says. It is not for us to change it; the committee that handles those matters has to do it.
Senator Chaput: The wording is the same, correct?
Mr. Charbonneau: Yes, exactly. I can give you three recent examples of situations when this exception was used.
The first pertains to academics. Two individuals from the same university were supposed to appear, but because they had two different points of view, the exception was applied.
The second example involved a person with special needs. The exception could be invoked in that case because the witness needed assistance.
And the third, and most recent, situation involved a committee that had invited young people to appear. The exception was used so that a parent or legal guardian could accompany them. Those are three examples that provide guidance on when to invoke the exception.
Senator McIntyre: Another situation might involve someone with a physical or mental disability who needs an escort or attendant. In that case, I could certainly see the reasons for allowing a second witness.
The Chair: Is that good?
Senator Chaput: Yes, very good. Thank you.
The Chair: Is the committee ready to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Motion carried.
Communications
It is moved by Senator Fortin-Duplessis,
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be empowered to direct communications officer(s) assigned to the committee in the development of communications plans where appropriate and to request the services of the Senate Communications Directorate for the purposes of their development and implementation; and
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be empowered to allow coverage by electronic media of the committee's public proceedings with the least possible disruption of its hearings at its discretion.
Senator Charette-Poulin: Will the motion allow a member of the Senate's communications team to attend committee meetings?
Mr. Charbonneau: Yes. I can introduce her if you like. The communications officer assigned to the committee is Brigitte Lemay.
The Chair: Thank you and welcome Ms. Lemay.
Moving on to item 13, the time slot for regular meetings.
Our window is 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. Our meetings are usually about two hours long. In the last session, our time slot was 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. That seemed to suit most of the senators. Does that time slot still work, or would you like to propose a different time?
Senator Poirier: Personally, for me to be here by 4 p.m., I would have to get to Ottawa on Sunday because there is no direct flight.
The other option would be to take a 6 a.m. flight. I would have to be at the airport by 5 a.m., and I live an hour away. That would mean I would have to get up at 2:30 or 3 in the morning to get here on time.
Changing the time to 4 p.m. would be an issue for me, because if I had to come back every Sunday, my budget would not cover the cost of my staying in a hotel four nights a week.
I know others are in the same boat. I would prefer to keep it at 5 o'clock. I am not sure about everyone else.
[English]
Lynn's situation is the same as mine with flying time. There are not a lot of direct flights that get us here from certain parts of the country, so it makes it difficult for us to get here on time. Family time is short. I don't mind coming out on Sunday once in a while, but I would rather come out on Monday than every Sunday for two reasons: family time and expenses.
[Translation]
Senator McIntyre: Personally, I also prefer Monday at 5 o'clock. I take the train. I leave Sunday night at 10:30, and I get to Montreal at 9 in the morning; then I have to wait until 12:50 for my train to Ottawa. I get in around 3 o'clock in the afternoon. I need a bit of time to take a cab to my hotel or apartment, so 5 o'clock would work well for me.
Senator Charette-Poulin: My first choice would be 4 p.m., but after hearing what my colleagues have to go through, it would be easy for me to accommodate 5 o'clock. You have my utmost admiration.
The Chair: We seem to be reaching a consensus on 5 o'clock.
Senator McIntyre: We could always change it to 4:30, once in a while.
The Chair: If we say 5:00, then, I was just going to ask whether you would agree to move the meeting to 4:30 p.m. on Monday, November 18, as an exception. That would be our next meeting. Next week, we are off.
[English]
Senator Poirier: If you put it at 4:30 —
Senator Tardif: Just for November 18.
Senator Poirier: Yes. There is still a possibility that some of us may be late.
[Translation]
The Chair: We will leave it at 5 o'clock, then.
[English]
Senator Poirier: Normally, we would go from 5:00 to 7:00 and, if need be, we would go to 7:30 or 7:45, or whatever. I would prefer 5:00. If I didn't have to come back the night before, it would be better.
[Translation]
The Chair: So we will start at 5 p.m. There may be times when ministers, for example, will not be available then, and during the last session, I believe, we sometimes heard from ministers on a Thursday morning or different day, depending on when they were available. So we may need to adjust our schedules. But our normal time slot will be Monday, from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Senator Poirier: Madam Chair, was there a special reason you wanted to meet a half-hour earlier on November 18?
The Chair: It had to do with my other duties with the Association Canada-France; I had something. But it is fine. If the meeting does not run too long on the 18th, and I think we are coming back, I will be able to attend.
Senator Charette-Poulin: May I make a practical suggestion? Since that Monday is the one after the break week, when none of us will be here, would it be possible to hold our first meeting the following Monday?
The Chair: That depends on you, honourable senators. Ms. Chaput, do you have a hesitation?
Senator Chaput: It is just that our committee has so few meetings, since Monday is our only window, and when there are long weekends, we lose our Monday. So if someone were to evaluate the work done by the Official Languages Committee based on its meeting hours — because we have been evaluated in the past — we would have less work to show for it. That being said, this would be an exception. If that is the wish of the committee, I will abide by its decision.
The Chair: I think the meeting on the 18th will probably be to look at the orders of reference. We will not be having any witnesses, because the Senate has to approve our orders of reference. The meeting will not be very long. Of course, it all depends on the discussion around some of the orders of reference. Still, we do have to start the process, and it takes time to submit our orders of reference to the Senate.
Senator Chaput: Do we have any orders of reference to be discussed today?
The Chair: I would like to adopt them today, if possible, and that may depend on a general order of reference in order to proceed.
Senator Chaput: We would be doing it ahead of time. Perhaps, in order to help the senators, on the Monday we get back — and this is just an idea — the following week, we could hold a longer meeting?
The Chair: On November 25?
Senator Chaput: Yes, the week after, to make up the time. I do not know. But I am open; if you do not want to meet the week we get back, I will go with the flow.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I agree with Senator Chaput. We have so few meetings, that we really need to —
Senator Chaput: And we have already had to justify the committee's purpose, when the Senate's various committees were being examined. The meeting hours were taken into account. I told them we did not have any other time.
[English]
There's no other time when we can meet? We only have Monday, late afternoon?
[Translation]
Senator Poirier: Personally, I have no problem with coming back for a meeting on the 18th at 5 o'clock.
The Chair: If we have a consensus, we will meet on Monday, the 18th, at 5 p.m.
[English]
Senator Beyak: If I can change my flight; if not, I will get a substitute for myself.
[Translation]
The Chair: So, honourable senators, are you agreed that our regular meeting shall be set for Monday, from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m., and occasionally till 7:30 p.m.?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Motion carried. And we are meeting on November 18.
Other business
At this time, I would like to read a proposed motion regarding staff at in camera meetings, and I believe you have the information there.
That the senators' staff be allowed to stay in the meeting room when the committee sits in camera, unless the members of the committee decide otherwise.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I so move.
The Chair: Do I have a seconder?
Senator McIntyre: I second the motion.
The Chair: Honourable senators, are you in agreement?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Motion carried.
I now move we continue in camera to discuss the orders of reference.
(Proceedings continue in camera without reporting)