THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON DIVERSITY
OF THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL ECONOMY, BUDGETS AND ADMINISTRATION
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, May 3, 2017
The Subcommittee on Diversity of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met this day at 3 p.m. to examine the findings contained in the fifth report of the Senate Administration’s Advisory Committee on Diversity and Accessibility and issues of diversity in the Senate workforce.
Senator Mobina S.B. Jaffer (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, I call this meeting of the Subcommittee on Diversity to order. The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration has given the subcommittee the mandate to examine the findings contained in the fifth report of the Senate Administration’s Advisory Committee on Diversity and Accessibility and issues of diversity in the Senate workforce.
[English]
As part of our review, we have invited representatives of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. Today we will hear from Carl Trottier, Assistant Deputy Minister, Governance, Planning and Policy Sector, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer; and Margaret Van Amelsvoort-Thoms, Executive Director, People Management and Community Engagement, Governance, Planning and Policy Sector, Office of the Chief of Human Resources Officer.
I want to thank both of you for being here. As a subcommittee, we are very excited to do this work, but more importantly, we want to learn from your experiences. I understand that you have a presentation to make. Please go ahead.
Carl Trottier, Assistant Deputy Minister, Governance, Planning and Policy Sector, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat: Madam Chair, thank you for welcoming us here today to share some of the recruitment and retention programs and the best practices that we have been working on in the Government of Canada, in the core public administration, to promote a diverse workforce and inclusive workplace.
Madam Chair, I think it would be useful to start with a few words on roles and responsibilities. Given the number of key players involved in recruitment and retention in the core public administration, it might be helpful to get that out of the way and understand who is who.
The Office of the Chief Human Resource Officer, where I work and which is part of Treasury Board Secretariat, is in fact the employer for public service employees and is responsible for workplace and workforce policies, terms and conditions of employment and provides institutions with data information and advice on a range of HR-related issues.
In essence, the work we do assists federal organizations to fulfil their responsibilities for day-to-day HR management, including recruitment and retention.
[Translation]
The Public Service Commission plays two major roles: one of oversight to ensure the integrity of the hiring process, and the other of providing a range of recruitment and assessment services to individual organizations.
Finally, the Canada School of Public Service has a full suite of learning and development programs, including orientation training for new recruits and other courses that incorporate information on employment equity. There are also a number of policy instruments to help reduce barriers and support the full participation of all groups in the workplace. These include the employment equity policy.
[English]
I understand you are particularly interested in learning about what we are doing to attract and retain employment equity groups within the public service and what are some of our best practices and lessons learned that might be useful for the Senate.
Currently, all four employment equity designated groups — women, Aboriginal people, persons with disabilities, and members of a visible minority group — continue to exceed their workforce availability, so we're actually doing quite well on that front. However, there is more that we can do, and I'll come back to that in just a bit.
To that end, we have a number of initiatives under way, and we would like share those with you.
Last summer, we partnered with the Assembly of First Nations to place 30 indigenous post-secondary students from across the country in meaningful summer jobs in a variety of departments and agencies here in the National Capital Region. The initiative was given an 88 per cent approval rating by participants, and at least two thirds of the students received an offer of some form of continued employment after the pilot project ended.
[Translation]
The program was so successful that we are expanding it this year to include up to 120 students coming to Ottawa. We are also looking at how we could expand this program into the regions to help bring job opportunities closer to indigenous communities.
We are using this program as a model for a separate initiative aimed at persons with disabilities that will give a small number of youth summer employment in the National Capital Region this coming season.
We are also partnering with LiveWorkPlay, a Canadian charitable organization that connects people with intellectual disabilities to homes, work, social and recreational activities, and relationships with people in the greater community. At last count, LiveWorkPlay had 13 employment pilot projects within 7 federal public service organizations.
[English]
You may also be aware that the government has deputy head champions who help advance specific priorities for visibility minorities, persons with disabilities and Aboriginal people. Currently there is no deputy champion for women, but there is work under way to be able to move forward with the deputy champion.
These deputy champions lead the work of departmental champions and chairs of employee networks across the government. The focus of that work ranges from identifying barriers and priorities for action, to education and awareness, sharing best practices and generally supporting employment equity objectives. For example, a visible minority network is looking at ways to deal with potential bias in recruiting by having more visible minority members on hiring panels. The Aboriginal network is undertaking an analysis of issues and opportunities faced by indigenous peoples seeking a career in the public service or those already working here. The persons with disabilities group is finalizing an accessibility strategy and action plan.
[Translation]
And the Women in Science Network at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada showcases the important contributions of women in the department to inspire a new generation of women scientists in the public service.
When you look at the challenges faced by each of the designated groups, there are some clear overarching themes. For example, inclusiveness, engagement and respect and, in particular, opportunities for development and advancement are common threads that drive the work of champions and their groups.
[English]
As I mentioned earlier, we are well represented compared to the workforce availability in each of the four designated groups under the Employment Equity Act, but we do have challenges in specific areas, such as low representation in the executive category among three of the designated groups: women, Aboriginal peoples and members of visible minorities.
To help address equity gaps in the executive categories, talent management discussions within organizations include proactive identification of diverse talent and feeder groups with senior management potential, both from within and outside the public service.
Our Executive Leadership Development Program optimizes diversity and accelerates the development of high-potential leaders within the executive ranks. Diversity, age, gender, employment equity groups and regional and organizational representatives are all leveraged to the very extent possible when selecting cohort participants. Diversity and inclusiveness are also elements of the programs' curriculum.
[Translation]
Last November, the President of the Treasury Board announced the creation of a joint task force with both government and union representatives to explore new ways to strengthen diversity and inclusion in the public service. The task force mandate goes beyond employment equity to focus on how we can build a more diverse workforce and an inclusive workplace.
They have been consulting with employees and stakeholders across the public service, and will issue a progress update later this spring, followed by a final action plan in late 2017.
[English]
You may have read in the news recently that we are working with the Public Service Commission to undertake a name-blind recruitment pilot project in the federal public service. The pilot will compare outcomes associated with traditional screening of job applicants versus screening in which managers are blinded to the applicant's name. The pilot will involve 35 to 50 external selection processes from six participating departments.
The pilot is planned for completion by October 2017, at which time the Public Service Commission is expected to release a final report. The results will be used to inform further discussions in this area.
Let me conclude with a couple of lessons learned based on our recent initiatives to promote diversity. In the program I mentioned earlier, Aboriginal students taught us some very valuable lessons, such as the importance of reaching out and working with Aboriginal organizations to promote mentors and support the students in the programs. Robust on-boarding and orientation for the participants was also very key, and opportunities for participants to provide feedback about their experience helped us grow and improve the project into what it is today, which is four times the size of what it was.
I know time is limited. Therefore, I will stop here to allow for questions and answers.
The Chair: I want one clarification before we go to questions. First, it is mandated by the federal act that the public service should be reflective of the population. Am I not correct? This is the law, right?
Mr. Trottier: Yes.
The Chair: The other thing — it drives me crazy — it that, forever and ever, the census that was relied on was 2006. I'm hoping you will say that's not the census you are still relying on. What census are you relying on for your figures?
Margaret Van Amelsvoort-Thoms, Executive Director, People Management and Community Engagement, Governance, Planning and Policy Sector, Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat: We recently got the results of the latest census conducted, so we updated the numbers; 2011 would have been the last one.
The Chair: It took forever to get it. It's not your fault. I'm not criticizing you. It drives me crazy when people say they have met the limits and it's 2006. Canada has changed since then.
What are the numbers now? Is it 52 for women?
Mr. Trottier: You can look at it from an overall public service-wide perspective. When we go through the MAF, the Management Accountability Framework exercise where we identify how departments are doing, we look at the workforce availability for that department and the area that they are in, so it fluctuates a bit for the department. That is the target that they need to achieve.
The Chair: What does the census say?
Mr. Trottier: The overall number for workforce availability for women is 52.5 per cent, whereas what was achieved was 54.4 per cent. Workforce availability for visible minorities is 13 per cent and what was achieved was 14.5 per cent. Workforce availability for Aboriginal people is 3.4 per cent and what was achieved was 5.2 per cent. For persons with a disability, workforce availability is 4.4 per cent, and what was achieved was 5.6 per cent.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Tannas: I have a special interest in Aboriginal issues. So 3.4 per cent would be pretty close to the populations that would have status and/or be members of First Nations bands, plus Inuit, plus, I suspect, a small and genuine representative of Metis. My understanding is that people self-identify in this category.
I'll be as blunt with you as I am with others. It's an urban legend that if you want to get ahead, you find your Aboriginal roots and declare them; nobody challenges you, and all of a sudden you're in a special category.
Has this been any discussion on how you could say if you really are interested in matching up to the 3.4 per cent — which is people with status, people who are genuinely members of a First Nation, and another small group which would be Inuit — that there should be some proof of what you're talking about so that we're not congratulating ourselves with 5.2 per cent when maybe we're not meeting the 3.4 per cent? Is there any discussion about that?
Mr. Trottier: There is some discussion about that, but it's going in the opposite direction than you're saying. We actually can't get people to self-identify even when they are. Yes, it's very, very hard to get them. So we are not picking up that people are using this as a lever to move ahead, but in fact we're seeing the opposite.
We would love to encourage people. Because it's "self-identify," we can't force people, nor can we mandate the self-identification. So that's our challenge in terms of trying to get people to do that.
Senator Tannas: I have asked this on a couple of other occasions, and you're the second group that has said that specifically. And you must be going by the fact that it's obvious and they should be self-identifying, and they are not; is that right?
Mr. Trottier: And this is Carl speaking right now, saying there is probably a myth out there that if I self-identify it's actually a knock on me more so than a help. We don't know how to turn that around.
So what we're doing with this program is bringing it forward. It's saying, "Aboriginal peoples, come work for us; we're going to take good care." We give them an extremely good program. I was a mentor. We pair them up so that each single individual has a mentor and a manager. They create this trio where they support this employee. We have elders that come and that help them bridge the gap between the cultures and assist them.
There is an 88 per cent approval rating on the program at the end of the day, so we want to keep doing that. We want to then push it into the regions, because it really does start with the students. They will bridge over into the public service. They will be the employees of tomorrow.
Senator Tannas: I am hearing that there is no issue here at all in your mind and that these numbers are actually understated.
Mr. Trottier: Nothing indicates that that is the case. The only indication I have was the reverse. That's all we have.
Senator Tannas: Exactly.
Mr. Trottier: It's very hard to pinpoint because it's voluntary, so that makes it difficult.
Senator Marshall: I have several questions. You made reference to proactive identification. That is self-identification.
Mr. Trottier: Yes.
Senator Marshall: At the beginning of your remarks, you were talking about your relationship with the Public Service Commission. You were talking about providing oversight, so who are you providing oversight to?
Mr. Trottier: We're responsible for the programs and we oversee the programs. The Public Service Commission is responsible for all the rules that are necessary to run the recruitment initiatives moving forward.
Margaret, do you want to elaborate on that?
Senator Marshall: I haven't caught on yet.
Ms. Van Amelsvoort-Thoms: As the employer, we have responsibility for the employment equity programs, per se, so all the different initiatives and obligations. We do the measurement and report on the performance of the public service through our annual employment equity report.
The Public Service Commission has the mandate for appointment and a non-partisan workforce, so they're focused on the whole staffing and recruitment process. They run the website where people submit applications. They have all the staffing policy element of that. As the employer, we are looking at the broader employment equity, so we work closely with them. Obviously, we want to bring them in and then we want to make sure we take care of people as they arrive into the workforce.
Senator Marshall: Will Treasury Board give them direction as to implementing the diversity program?
Ms. Van Amelsvoort-Thoms: They have obligations under the Employment Equity Act as well. They are very focused at making sure that in recruitment they have the mechanism, because there is self-identification when employees become employees, but there is also the opportunity to self-identify when you're applying. On the application form, it asks you to voluntarily identify. So they are very concerned with looking at whether we are attracting enough people as they apply and then looking at the whole intake process or hiring process.
Senator Marshall: You were talking about the pilot project whereby you hired 30 Aboriginal or indigenous individuals. Is that done through the Public Service Commission?
Mr. Trottier: That's done through us.
Senator Marshall: Is there some sort of overlap there with regard to the Public Service Commission versus Treasury Board?
Mr. Trottier: The Public Service Commission doesn't run programs, but they do oversee the staffing rules and recruitment.
We run a program with specific objectives. One of them is to increase, in this case, indigenous —
Senator Marshall: They are responsible for the merit principle.
Mr. Trottier: That's right.
Senator Marshall: How do you pick the 30 indigenous individuals? How do you reconcile that with the merit principle?
Ms. Van Amelsvoort-Thoms: I'll walk through the mechanics of it.
When we looked at that whole program for summer students, the Public Service Commission runs the Federal Student Work Experience Program. Students apply through their website.
Those students then self-identified as being Aboriginal students. We went and asked them for referrals of the students who had self-identified. We did an initial triage and referred them to the departments who wanted to hire. Those departments then did a subsequent assessment of the students to determine who met their needs for the positions they had.
So with the authority that the PSC has in terms of assessment and staffing, a lot of that is also delegated to departments. Deputy heads have that, and managers then do the assessment to determine who the qualified person is that they are going to appoint. But the initial intake comes through the Public Service Commission.
Senator Marshall: I can sort of see where there would be an overlap between the two.
You are looking at something similar, you were saying, for individuals with disabilities, which would be a good thing. You're also looking at putting more visible minorities on recruitment panels. What are the timelines for things like that? These are things you're looking at in the future, so is that something imminent or is it two, three, four years away?
Mr. Trottier: I would say for the students with disabilities, it is this summer. I think we're at 18 students. We thought we would be at 10. Departments are willing to take them on. It's actually a lot of work for the departments.
Senator Marshall: This is for the indigenous category?
Mr. Trottier: No, for disability.
Senator Marshall: Okay, good.
Mr. Trottier: That is for this summer. We are hoping to increase that next year. We started with 30 last year. We're at 120 for indigenous. If we double this next year, that would be great.
Senator Marshall: So you have momentum.
Mr. Trottier: LiveWorkPlay is also an amazing program. We don't run that one. The model that they have created is we will walk hand in hand with the employer. We will send you an individual that has an intellectual deficiency that is willing to work and can do some work. We will send a coach with that person. The coach will train the manager as to how to interact with the individual, and the coach will train the individual as to how to interact with the manager. Any moment that there is a need, the coach steps in and helps.
Senator Marshall: You are sort of setting up the support.
Mr. Trottier: Yes. So there is a one-on-one relationship with employees. They have 13 projects on the go w. That's happening right now.
We brought in LiveWorkPlay and exposed them to all the departments and told the departments to listen to this story because it's a really good story. Then we handed it over to the departments and said, because it's a one-on-one relationship, contact them directly. I'm keeping my eye on that one because I want to see it grow.
Senator Marshall: How do you identify the people for those projects? You started off with I think 30 indigenous people, and then you are moving into individuals with disabilities. Is it is an application thing?
Mr. Trottier: It is self-identified again, referred by the Public Service Commission, and then the match is made. The employer says, "Yes, it's a good match and I'll take this person."
Senator Marshall: You were talking about the minister's task force. I'm really interested in that because I'm not familiar with it. Can you tell us more about that? You could start off by telling me about the objective or the mandate.
Mr. Trottier: I will take a step backwards. In 1987, the Province of Ontario created their first diversity and inclusion strategy. The federal government does not have one. We do not have a diversity inclusion strategy. Therefore, this is about building a strategy and making the public service more diverse and more inclusive.
Senator Jaffer: I have to stop you for a moment. A vote will take place at 3:54. We have lots of time.
Senator Marshall: I was just checking.
Okay, keep going.
Mr. Trottier: The objective is a 12-month project where we bring the union and the employers’ representative from different departments in together. The relationship between those two is so great in the sense that they are all working towards the same goal — a more diverse and more inclusive workforce.
At the end of May, we will have a report from them that will be an indication of what they have looked at and where they want to go. Already, they are talking about awareness and education.
Senator Marshall: So there are no targets yet.
Mr. Trottier: The targets will be in the final report, which will come in the fall. They are likely going to come to the minister and say, "Here are our recommendations to you, as the employer, about what you should be doing for this." My sense is that that will turn into action plans where we're going to be putting in place and developing approaches for improved diversity and inclusion.
Senator Marshall: You don't anticipate that the report will tell you how to do it. You're anticipating they will probably give you the end result.
Mr. Trottier: They are going to send us in the right direction. They are going to say, "You need to be better at this and you need to focus on that. You need to be better with education and awareness, because there is still stigma out there in certain areas of diversity and inclusion." We'll take that and then build programs and we'll build action plans.
Senator Marshall: When was that established? You're expecting the report by the end of May.
Mr. Trottier: I believe the minister announced it in November of last year. It will go to November of this year, with the final report.
Senator Marshall: That's interesting.
Those were my questions.
Mr. Trottier: I will just add there will be some interesting stuff coming out of this. If this committee is interested in the fall, I'm more than happy to come back and share.
The Chair: Absolutely.
I have many questions. I'm really impressed with your Aboriginal program. I was involved in another life in trying to encourage Aboriginal young people to go to law school. It's not just about Aboriginal people; it's about vulnerable groups of people who don't have the infrastructure. What did you put in place that made this program so popular? Did you have accommodation? Did you have mentors?
This is something we really need to learn from you because we have a page program here, and then we could have other programs here. So maybe we can copy you. If you can be as detailed as possible, it would be helpful.
Mr. Trottier: I'll start, and I'll hand it over to Margaret if I miss some details.
The one thing we were also thinking about when we were doing this is that there are indigenous peoples in quite remote areas who don't have access to these types of jobs. We wanted to also target them, and we said that in order to bring them to Ottawa, we need to offer accommodations. So right from the start, we negotiated with the University of Ottawa to have residences.
The Chair: For how long?
Mr. Trottier: For the summer. So we dealt with that. We changed our policies on accommodations and travel.
Ms. Van Amelsvoort-Thoms: Exemptions were created.
Mr. Trottier: Exemptions were created to be able to facilitate access for the employees.
We knew that culture would be a big issue. Therefore, we quickly went out and spoke to elders and brought the community in to assist us in understanding how it is that we set up a program for Aboriginal students. They were extremely helpful, and the School of Public Service was extremely helpful as well in connecting us with them.
The structure, I mentioned earlier. They arrive with big bright eyes. It can be overwhelming to come to Ottawa and the public service. We had mentors with them, had their managers with them, and we met with them weekly to offer them support. I gave targets to my mentee in terms of what it is she should be achieving. Each mentor was doing the same.
The Chair: Each one had a mentor?
Mr. Trottier: Each one had one mentor. We were going above and beyond because we knew that there was an added challenge of bringing someone into the public service that had a different culture.
The Chair: Do you have a clothing allowance?
Mr. Trottier: No.
What were allowances?
Ms. Van Amelsvoort-Thoms: We covered their accommodation and we paid for their travel to come from whichever location and take them back home again at the end of that time.
The Chair: The other program I have heard extremely good things about, which maybe you can mentor the Senate through, is your Executive Leadership Development Program. I have heard nothing but amazing things about that program. It would help us if you could tell us, please, how you set it up, how you are now sustaining it and the lessons learned.
Mr. Trottier: I'll be honest; I don't know a lot about the executive leadership program. Had I known, I would have invited my colleague to come along.
The Chair: Can you provide us with that?
Mr. Trottier: We can provide a written response to that.
The Chair: Please.
Mr. Trottier: We've just redesigned the executive leadership program and we'll be more than happy to put something together for this committee.
Senator Marshall: When you talk about leadership, are you talking about the representation of minorities in senior positions?
The Chair: No, I haven't touched that. This is the program to accelerate the development of leaders.
Senator Marshall: I'm wondering, when you look at the visible minorities, where are they located in the departments? Are they all at the bottom or are they spread throughout the different levels? It's great to have 52 per cent representation of women, but they're all clerks and there's no one at the senior level. Are the visible minorities throughout the organization at different levels or are they mostly at lower levels?
Mr. Trottier: If I remove the executive cadre, they're pretty much throughout the levels. You can go pretty senior and they're well spread within that.
Where we do have difficulties is in the executive cadre, and the three that I mentioned. That is our biggest challenge when it comes to employment equity.
That's where the Management Accountability Framework comes in. The Treasury Board Secretariat meets with every deputy in town, with his or her score and how they did with regard to being able to attract. The targets are set and the deputy either is successful or not. The targets are given to us. They know that they need to do better next time.
Senator Marshall: Who sets the targets? That's kind of good. It's a number thing, is it?
Ms. Van Amelsvoort-Thoms: The targets are actually the workforce availability levels. That's the analysis we get from Statistics Canada that says, "Here's the market you could have in that particular group for those jobs." That's what we're measured against.
Senator Marshall: If 5 per cent of the population is indigenous, then you would think 5 per cent of the executive level should be indigenous.
Ms. Van Amelsvoort-Thoms: Not exactly. What we do is we ask what the population of indigenous people is who could be employed by us. It doesn't look at the total indigenous population. It looks at, let's say, in a certain category of work, the availability in that labour force of visible minority persons, and then that's the target that's set. If you looked at the total population, you have people who are not at working age yet or those past working age, so they try to zero in on what would be the actual candidate pool that we would be able to pull from.
Senator Marshall: I'd like to go back to what we were talking about when I was asking you to clarify the role of Treasury Board and the Public Service Commission. The pilot projects, they're your projects, right? But the Public Service Commission is kind of involved, aren't they?
Mr. Trottier: We're partners when it comes to that. We wouldn't be able to do it without them and the pilot wouldn't exist if it wasn't for us.
Senator Marshall: All departments aren't participating in the indigenous pilot project, are they?
Mr. Trottier: We have 30-some departments that have said, "I want a student," and we have a total of about 120 spots — no, sorry, more than that. I think it's about 140 spots. We know that some will fall through, so we're anticipating 120 at the end of the day.
Senator Marshall: For individuals with disabilities, how many departments would be participating in that?
Mr. Trottier: Seven departments. I believe seven departments have 18 students.
Senator Marshall: Which departments? The others would be too many to list. Do you have it there?
Mr. Trottier: I'm not sure. We can provide them for you.
Senator Marshall: I'd be interested in knowing.
Mr. Trottier: No, sorry. I have the departments for name-blind pilot project, but I didn't bring it. We'll provide that.
Senator Marshall: For individuals with disabilities, is it just generic disabilities; it doesn't say physical versus developmental?
Mr. Trottier: No.
Senator Marshall: I can't think of anything else. I think when I read the transcript of the meeting, I'll have more questions.
The Chair: I think there was a deputy minister from the Aboriginal community. How many deputy ministers?
Mr. Trottier: I know of one, but that doesn't mean there's only one.
The Chair: I understand. And disabled?
Mr. Trottier: I know one.
Ms. Van Amelsvoort-Thoms: It's based on self-identification. We don't have the data for the deputy ministers because they're a different appointment authority. It's what we happen to know.
The Chair: My pet peeve is it's 52 per cent women, yet they're at the bottom, right? How many women are in senior positions like deputy ministers?
Mr. Trottier: I believe it is around 38 or 40 per cent, or something like that.
The Chair: How many are visible minorities?
Mr. Trottier: I'm going to be more comfortable coming back to you with numbers because I'm just going off memory and I don't want to mislead you in any way. We have those numbers.
The Chair: Before you leave, my colleague Senator Omidvar is to learn about your name-blind recruitment. She's really keen that we implement it here. Can you help teach us about how did you do it, why you did it and how you set it up?
Mr. Trottier: Minister Brison and former MP Hussen, now a minister, did have a conversation about "name-blind." Minister Hussen was suggesting that the U.K. was proceeding with such an approach and believed that we should be taking that approach. Minister Brison turned to us and said he would like us to look at that. So we partnered with the Public Service Commission, which is very adept at creating methodology to do this, and over the past year we've been building the methodology that goes along with that. In reality, about 30 to 50 external processes will be going through this. There will be two managers and they will be seeing the same application, each one. One will be blind; one won't be blind.
Then there are formulations of it, all traditional, with some blind and some traditional with some blind, and as the two managers alternate, they cover all possibilities. At the end of the day, they will see if there have been different results from one manager versus the next on the same application, depending on whether it was blind or not.
Senator Marshall: But you're not doing it yet, are you? Are they doing it now?
Mr. Trottier: We've met with the departments. We're going to be teaching them methodology and so on, and then we're going to hand it over and say, "Okay, we want so many processes to go through." In the fall, the Public Service Commission will write up a report and provide it to us.
The Chair: It will be interesting to see what happens with that, because there's lots of talk about that, to see if it makes a difference.
Mr. Trottier: Yes. The more you scratch at it, the more complex it gets. What about where you went to university? That could be an indication of something. What about your hometown? That could be an indication of something as well. All of those identifiers will be masked or blind. The Public Service Commission will be doing that, and then we'll send the application to the department blind to one manager, not blind to the other.
The Chair: When reading up for these meetings, one of the things I kept reading was that for the identification, apparently people self-identify when they apply, but then they stop. I have asked, and people say they get worried then, because once they get in, they think self-identification may hurt them. Do you have anything to add?
Mr. Trottier: I think it's the same comment as before. What we're hearing is that it's hard to get them to self-identify. Maybe they convince themselves when they're applying that it's best and then they revert back and would rather not be singled out for this reason and want to proceed on their own merits.
The Chair: Either they think they won't get hired because of that, or they don't want to be seen to be hired for that.
Ms. Van Amelsvoort-Thoms: Exactly.
Senator Marshall: I have a couple more questions. I want to go back to the executive level. Are they prime ministerial appointments?
Mr. Trottier: No. They're deputy appointments by the clerk at the ADM level.
Senator Marshall: So the executive level is all deputies and ADMs?
Mr. Trottier: You have five levels of executives, from an EX 1 to EX 5. That's the executive cadre. On top of that, you have deputy ministers.
Senator Marshall: So deputy ministers aren't executive, are they?
Mr. Trottier: They're not considered executives.
Senator Marshall: Who appoints the deputies? Is that the Prime Minister?
Mr. Trottier: The Prime Minister.
Senator Marshall: For the five executive levels, who appoints them?
Mr. Trottier: The appointments of 1, 2, 3 and 4 — and even 5 — can be done at the deputy minister level. Deputy ministers are responsible and accountable.
When it comes to the 4s and 5s, usually the deputy minister has a chat with the clerk, and they may see eye to eye.
Senator Marshall: We might be going back over old territory, but I want to make sure I get it straight in my mind. Is there a target for the five executive levels? Do the deputies have to have a target of 50 or 40 per cent women? Are there targets for that?
Mr. Trottier: They have the same targets that Statistics Canada has provided in terms of workforce availability. That is what they are to attempt to achieve.
Senator Marshall: Are they measured on that?
Mr. Trottier: They're measured, and it creates a conversation with the deputies. They're encouraged to find ways to achieve —
Senator Marshall: The diversity goes right up to the executive level or the object of —
Mr. Trottier: Yes, absolutely. The deputy champions are deputies, and there's a champion for all but women right now.
The Chair: There hasn't been one for women forever. Why?
Mr. Trottier: There isn't, but there's a groundswell going on right now.
The Chair: As Chair of the Human Rights Committee, we were studying this, and there wasn't a champion. So it's not a new thing.
Mr. Trottier: No, it's not a new thing. But I think it would be a good thing if there were a champion, and there's something in the works to be able to create a champion.
Where there are champions, they're quite active and they reach out into the departments. Each department has a champion. So they have this huge network through which they can create action plans to try to promote employment equity.
We're going to try to encourage them to also do diversity and inclusion. So we're looking at governance in terms of how it is that we can promote that.
Senator Marshall: That's interesting.
The Chair: We have asked you to provide a lot of things.
Senator Marshall: We'll go away and say, "I should have asked that."
The Chair: We will suspend the meeting at this time. We might impose upon you to come back if we get stuck.
Mr. Trottier: Yes.
The Chair: Sorry you had to listen to the bells calling us for a vote in the Senate chamber.
Mr. Trottier: We would be happy to come back.
(The committee suspended.)
——————
(The committee resumed.)
The Chair: Our next witnesses, from the Senate of Canada, are Angela Vanikiotis and Julien Labrosse. Thank you very much for being here. We are looking forward to your presentations and your help with our work.
Angela Vanikiotis, Manager, Human Resources Operations, Diversity and Official Languages, The Senate of Canada: Mr. Labrosse has come prepared with some quick facts and some achievements of the Senate Page Program as they stand today.
The Chair: I just caution you: If we have Senator Tannas with us, we have get something done very quickly, a motion, and then we'll continue. Thank you.
Julien Labrosse, Officer, Administrative, Ceremonial and Protocol, Office of the Usher of the Black Rod, The Senate of Canada: I thought I would start off by giving you a few quick facts about the page program and what we have been able to achieve in terms of diversity and representation over the past seven years. We started in 2010.
Every year, we hire 15 university students in their first university degree. They can come from all over the country, and they have to be studying in the National Capital Region for the duration of their contract, naturally, because the Senate is located in Ottawa. However, we facilitate them taking part in exchanges from their home university in their home province and the University of Ottawa. That's fairly easy. So that way it doesn't force them to register at a university in Ottawa. It broadens our pool of applicants.
The program is also led by two senior pages — the chief page and the deputy chief page — who can be second- or third-year pages. Only pages returning in a leadership position may compete for a third year in the program. Usually the program is two years, but if you come back in a leadership position, you can do it for a third. The contracts run from August to August, and they can be renewed for a second year.
We hire approximately seven pages per year. Of course, that depends on the year in university of the pages and, of course, the willingness of pages to come back for a second year. Some pages just want to do one year. Other people do their first year as a page in their fourth year of university, and they cannot come back because they graduate.
We also strive to reach the best provincial representation and employment equity representation, while maintaining high standards.
The Chair: Can I have you stop there?
Senators, we have two motions. One is a motion to hear evidence without quorum. May I have someone move that motion?
Senator Marshall: I so move.
The Chair: We don't need a seconder.
The Chair: All those in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: The second motion is that it's moved by Senator Tannas that the subcommittee ask the Library of Parliament to assign analysts to the subcommittee and that the chair, on behalf of the subcommittee, direct the resource staff in the preparation of the draft report.
All those in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you, senator.
Senator Tannas: Sorry I can't stay.
The Chair: I understand. You have another committee.
Mr. Labrosse, please continue.
Mr. Labrosse: I propose to go through a few of our achievements since 2010.
We have had gender parity since 2010. We usually have seven or eight women as part of the Senate Page Program. We have 15 pages in total, so, naturally, there are years where we have eight, others seven.
We have never had fewer than eight provinces or territories represented since the year 2013. Our current team is actually quite diverse. It represents 10 provinces and territories, so all provinces and territories with the exception of Alberta, Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories, and includes two visible minorities — one indigenous Canadian and one Canadian with a disability.
Other achievements: In 2016, we hired our first page from the Yukon since 2005. They are all here if you want to look at them. I can go through the list if you would prefer, or I can leave that to the committee.
The Chair: No, we can read it.
Mr. Labrosse: In terms of how the page program recruits from diversity groups, we have developed different techniques throughout the years. Of course, over the last few years, we've dedicated a lot of effort to reaching out to diversity groups and networks to promote the page program through letters. We write letters to the ethnic press, for instance, but also indigenous communities and clerks of legislative assemblies and other people who can help us in achieving better diversity.
We work in close collaboration with Senate Communications to promote the page program through the Senate social media accounts, which is a great way to reach our target audience, which is younger people.
We rely also on Canadian universities to help us through explaining how they can facilitate participation through exchanges.
We also are very involved with the Forum for Young Canadians, Encounters with Canada, the Teachers Institute on Canadian Parliamentary Democracy, and various model parliaments. In fact, this year we have had a large number of model parliaments. There is actually one on Saturday again. We have had two over the last weekend, and so this is a great way for us to promote the program. Pages usually do a presentation to try to sell the program to participants in model parliaments.
We also rely, of course, on the help of senators and members of Parliament to promote the program.
Over the last few years, we have really tried to improve our regional balance. There used to be an overrepresentation from Ontario, and we have tried to change that so that we have better representation from all the provinces of Canada.
Our main challenge is getting applicants from the target provinces we were looking at. It's hard to select people if we don't have anyone applying from those provinces. We have assisted those people, and we haven't screened them out necessarily through the process to make sure they could be assessed in as many ways possible until the end, when we make our final decision.
We have also taken provincial origins into consideration while developing the final team, and we have ramped up indigenous recruitment and looked at bilingualism. Our other main problem is really competing with the House of Commons.
Indigenous recruitment is hard as well, in part because of linguistic considerations. It's hard to be bilingual when your first language is neither French nor English, so that can be a challenge for us.
We have learned a lot of things over the past few years. We have realized that reaching out to high schools directly is a great way to do it, if not to get people right away, at least to plant the seed in their minds so that when they go to university, they still think about the page program.
We have had over the last few years a lot of help from senators promoting the program in their respective provinces, which has made a huge difference in terms of getting applicants in the first place. Social media works extremely well for us, also understanding how we can help people through the application process.
The other thing we have learned is that getting the first applicant from a province is difficult, but once that is done, then it's easy to get other people because it spreads through word of mouth. One of the best examples is Prince Edward Island. We had many years without an applicant from Prince Edward Island, but we have had applicants every year since we had our first one. We've actually had two pages from the same high school, so professors and teachers speak to each other. Getting the first one is always difficult and then it spreads.
Bilingualism is sometimes a challenge, especially in certain provinces, though that's changing a lot with French immersion programs. French immersion is actually very effective amongst new Canadian communities, who often send their kids to French immersion schools. So we have had a lot of bilingual applicants coming from provinces where it has been a challenge, who come from new Canadian families. So that's fun.
The other thing is convincing people to come to the National Capital Region. That can entail significant expenses for certain people, sometimes much more than staying where your parents live, at your parents' house, and going to the local university. There is a financial consideration that has been a challenge at times.
Another problem, of course, is that pages right now are paid less than House of Commons pages.
The Chair: By how much?
Mr. Labrosse: By about $3,000 or so.
The Chair: Why is that?
Ms. Vanikiotis: Every year there is a salary proposal put forward over at the other house, and it goes through its approval process and it gets approved. They take in various considerations, and we get word of it afterwards.
The Chair: But why are we paying less?
Ms. Vanikiotis: I don't know.
Greg Peters, Usher of the Black Rod, The Senate of Canada: Sorry for being late; I was leading the Speaker's parade.
There was a period where the regular normal increase, where employees receive an increase over a period of years, somehow the pages got missed. There was a bit of a glitch there somewhere in the system. I did a presentation to Internal a few years ago under Speaker Kinsella to rectify that, and it was rectified whereby any future increases would be reflected for the Senate pages.
As a result of that tweak, it put us back a bit, and we have been playing catch-up ever since.
Senator Marshall: How can we fix that? Is that something that could go before Internal Economy, or is that something that we should fix?
Mr. Peters: Absolutely. Senator, I think that's a great question. I think the plan is to develop, in concert with Human Resources, Finance and Corporate, a briefing package. Right now, I think there is sort of an investigation ongoing with the house side and with HR, which has been going on for some time.
Senator Marshall: There are 15 pages and it's a $3,000 difference, so that's $45,000 a year.
Mr. Peters: Right.
Mr. Labrosse: If I may add, this is becoming a bit more of a challenge now with tuition increasing and the page salary not necessarily following, especially with the House of Commons.
For the next year, we had to convince someone to come to the Senate rather than the house, and this was one of the factors that she cited.
Senator Marshall: Well, $3,000 is a lot of money.
Mr. Labrosse: If you come from a modest background, it makes a very large difference.
Mr. Peters: If I may interject, I think it also made a difference in the numbers of how many applied this year as opposed to last year. I think those numbers are decreasing slightly. We're getting great, quality candidates at the end of the day, so the story is still good. However, we're having to convince a few more people to potentially come to the Senate because they can be a page for two or three years, that kind of thing. I suspect that's a factor.
Senator Marshall: I wasn't aware of that. If I was, I had forgotten it.
Are we on to questions? Are you still doing your presentation?
The Chair: I'm sorry; I interrupted you.
Mr. Labrosse: I've reached the end of my comments.
The Chair: Angela, did you want to add anything?
Ms. Vanikiotis: I was going to go over the recruitment process, but we can take questions now, if you like.
The Chair: Let's finish the presentation.
Ms. Vanikiotis: I was just going to do a little description about the recruitment process.
We have various outreach activities going on throughout the year. A communications plan was prepared. There are various activities that happen, some of which are very interactive with the population through social media and digital engagement, and we have a great partnership going on with the Communications Directorate for all those objectives to be achieved.
We officially launched the program in October, and it remains open, so we continue to collect applications and continue outreach to the various provinces until early January, after which time we engage the pages to help us screen the applications we receive. We try to be as inclusive as possible, because at the end of the screening session, we want to have as many people to consider from across Canada as possible to put the best representative cohort of Canada in place for the Senate.
We evaluate the cover letters first and foremost. We ask three key questions. Typically, we ask: Why do you want to work here? What changes would you bring? How would you make a difference? With all of that, we screen the individual's desire and their passions.
From there, we go on to a written exam that tests knowledge of the Senate and the Canadian parliamentary system, as well as current affairs.
From there, we continue to look at the applications, and then we get into an interview process. There are group interviews, which is quite novel here in the Senate. We invite a number of applicants — maybe up to five people — and hold a group interview. It's very interactive. The students really like that because it engages them and they're willing to speak to their opinions.
Mr. Labrosse: If I may add, it also assists people because they are able to build on the answers of each other, and they take turns in answering first. It promotes fairness in a way because it allows them to build off of each other.
Mr. Peters: We get a better product because while there are no trick questions, the idea is to draw out as much as you can. You may get someone who is more of an introvert, so we find that it helps with that group atmosphere.
Ms. Vanikiotis: It's a great dialogue.
From there, we go to a second-language assessment. We look for a certain level of proficiency to work here, which is a good level of bilingualism.
The reference checks are done. We test three people that they have put forward. We call the prior supervisor of the applicant. We also call as many supervisors as we can, and then we integrate the results. All things considered, we pick 15 individuals or 7, depending on how many are coming back from the prior year, in order to have the best possible cohort.
Mr. Peters: Those reference checks I conduct personally for all of the potential page candidates.
The Chair: Roughly how many applications do you get per year?
Mr. Peters: For example, last year we had approximately 240. About 130 or so wrote the exam, plus or minus, and we interviewed 38, something like that. We chose seven last year. So we get a fairly good cross-section from across the country.
You've probably already briefed honourable senators on the demographics in the provinces.
Ms. Vanikiotis: Yes.
Senator Marshall: You'd think you would get more applicants if the pay raise could go through.
Mr. Peters: Senator, this year the total applicants were from 240 down to 130 or so. We see a drop, and because we're recruiting more, why the drop? So I don't know.
Senator Marshall: Salary is a factor.
Mr. Peters: A few of the candidates I did call this year indicated they had both offers, so at the end of the day they did come to the Senate side after we gave a really good, fulsome discussion on the benefits. But I think it is a factor.
Mr. Labrosse: There is another factor in terms of diversity. As you would know, Senator Marshall, some provinces, including your home province and my home province of Quebec, have much lower tuition than the province of Ontario. Ontario has one of the highest, so for someone coming from my home province or your home province, the cost of moving to the National Capital Region and studying in one of the universities here is much higher.
Of course, you could study at Université du Québec en Outaouais, which is in Quebec, and the tuition is much lower, but the diversity of programs offered is much reduced. For someone coming from some of those provinces with lower tuition, the cost is more important.
Senator Marshall: You were talking about the page program and the four universities in the Ottawa region. What are they? There is Carleton University and then the University of Ottawa, and what are the other two?
Mr. Labrosse: Université du Québec en Outaouais is in Quebec. They offer university programs, but the diversity of programs is much smaller. It's part of the network of the universities of Quebec that has campuses all over the province.
The last one is Saint Paul University, which is more religious.
Senator Marshall: The Diversity Subcommittee — I don't know if remember this, Senator Jaffer — was talking about Algonquin College and post-secondary was raised, whether they should be included. Why would they be excluded?
Mr. Peters: It's a great question.
Senator Marshall: It's post-secondary.
Mr. Peters: It is post-secondary. Part of it has to do with the schedule of classes for, let's say, Algonquin College, those types of organizations.
We have had intense discussions about this with HR over the past two or three years, trying to look at different ideas. Exchange opportunities have taken place before with universities, with MUN or another university where that has been possible. We are still reviewing the potential of community colleges.
We have thrown on the table the idea of expanding. It's hard to cut into the 15 because we need 9 or 10 pages to manage the Senate and committees, but we’re looking at expanding the program slightly to allow for colleges and maybe look at the scheduling of those pages. We are exploring opportunities for diversification of that. We're not there yet, senator, but I think we have taken to heart the concerns expressed previously.
Mr. Labrosse: One of the challenges is scheduling. There is also the fact that Algonquin and La Cité Collégiale, for instance, are based in Ontario and most of their students are Ontarians. We have never had a problem recruiting in Ontario. Ontarians can represent 70 per cent of our applicants.
Senator Marshall: I mention it because I know someone from Newfoundland who is now attending Algonquin, but I only know one.
Mr. Labrosse: We could do exchanges between colleges elsewhere in the country and Algonquin, for instance, but exchanges at the college level are somewhat different because those degrees are tied to provincial models, which are not necessarily transferable from one province to the other. That's one of the challenges we're trying to mitigate and it's part of our ongoing discussion.
Mr. Peters: If I may add as well, senator, one of the other areas we have explored is the co-op experience. We have had a couple of very successful co-op opportunities where they traditionally weren't entertained here. We have done that and they have worked out very well, so I think there is flexibility there.
Senator Marshall: Do you think that setting targets would make a difference? With regard to diversity, there are targets for women, for people with disabilities, for indigenous people. Do you think that it would help if we had targets such as one for each of the Atlantic provinces and three for Ontario? Do you think that targets would make a difference?
Mr. Peters: I think it would make a difference to provide a focus. But, at the end of the day, being merit-based has to come into play as well.
I can't really announce this year because we're still in the throes of the decisions, but each year is different. We had 240 applicants last year, 130 this year. We are finding from a diversity perspective that the numbers are increasing. I think that's due to the fact that the pool is becoming more diverse with former guides, let's say, on the house side, and so on.
Angela, can you speak to targets?
Ms. Vanikiotis: Targets are numbers-based. It shifts our focus to numbers, whereas in the past, selecting people for the cohort, we were looking for a diverse group coming from different perspectives across Canada. Perhaps their families have migrated and they have that perspective of being a new Canadian, and they have joined the French immersion school. That's a perspective we would like to bring into the cohort.
Everything I have seen so far is a great indicator of how the selection committee comes together to look at all the different perspectives and what people can bring to the team. Ultimately, if we keep the folks that are coming for their second year, we have a good sense of what they will bring to the table. We then look for other people to bring to the table, just to foster that team of different perspectives and the opportunity students have coming from across Canada and the different provinces to work together here in the Senate, not only to learn from the honourable senators in the chamber or in committees, but also from each other. It's a great opportunity.
Mr. Peters: Back to the diversity, the social media side, working with Communications with regard to social media and the website, we want to ensure that the imagery used reflects the diversity that exists but the diversity that we're shooting for as well.
Anecdotally, within the page family themselves, I was talking to Angela earlier about some neat examples of where the parent of a page is involved and does a dinner for all the pages that's culturally sensitive to their diverse background, let's say, using India. It's the sharing of the diversity of the Senate pages and their families, because it extends beyond the pages. It goes to their families, because they are all sharing in the challenges of being a student. We really encourage that.
I host two or three get-togethers at my office where we invite a guest speaker. There are all of those opportunities that we're enhancing, and there is the added value to the structure of the recruitment process that bodes well. We are very alive to the diversity piece. We are hyper-vigilant to ensure that we shoot for excellence so that the Senate pages reflect the rich diversity in this country. It's working.
The Chair: My absolute dream before I leave in a number of years is that we have a target of three Aboriginal people, because I think it would really reflect the North.
This program is doing so well. I cannot give enough compliments to the three of you. You have done an amazing job. But we weren't there before. When I came here 16 years ago, we weren't there. I couldn't ask for more, except the three Aboriginals.
It's so amazing. I have to tell you, it brings tears to my eyes when I see a young visible minority girl, woman, being the chief, and all that. It really makes me feel so proud to be a Canadian.
What did you do? What do we learn from you? How do we reproduce this for the rest of the Senate?
Mr. Peters: I think it's a combination of shared values with Human Resources.
The model that I've developed within the Black Rod's office is having former chief pages as my officer of ceremonial protocol. Julien worked with Human Resources on page recruitment and then I recruited him over to my office.
The link between Human Resources, all of the best practices that they've developed, we've been able to enhance that, but it's also an attitude.
We're a great country. We're very diverse. We have to push. I feel it's an obligation for me, as the Usher of the Black Rod, with the responsibility of this program, to work with Human Resources and with all these partners.
The Chair: Let me tell you what I'm thinking, because I don't for a minute want anyone to think that I don't think Senate Human Resources is not doing a good job. I think they're also doing an amazing job. With the resources they have and how well they've done, I have nothing to criticize. You were further ahead because it's smaller, so it's easier to do. Who are the young people going to university? We know it's a diverse group.
If we had a white paper and if we were redesigning this program, what would you say would be the necessary five elements to have a really diverse page program? You may not have the answer today; I don't expect that. If we could look and maybe say, "Would that work in the Human Resources program?" Could Mr. Presseau use it? What could he learn from you? What should he implement? Both Ms. Proulx and Mr. Presseau have done an amazing job of implementing, but what could we learn? What more can we learn from you that we can put into the Human Resources program?
Mr. Labrosse: If I may speak to my experience as, first, a page and then chief page among those diverse groups of people, it wasn't something formal that made us gel together. It was really that it creates an environment where there are people coming from all over who interact with each other, and in a good group and a good environment. Fostering a good environment and starting somewhere where you put people in contact with diversity eventually spreads because it becomes normal for you, so you start talking to different people.
What I liked so much about the page program is that it was one of the only settings that I've been to in my life where it was absolutely normal to go for dinner with 12 people, coming from nine different provinces, and sharing four different first languages. That was just normal. That environment of people being together, interacting with each other on a day-to-day basis, opens up your mind to diversity and forces you recruit. All former pages try to do a bit of recruitment for the program because we all love it. It creates a mindset that pushes you to do a bit more. It's not very quantifiable and it's not rules you can write down, but creating an environment where everyone is respected in their diversity is crucial, I find.
Mr. Peters: And celebrated. We have a page this year who is disabled, let's say. As far as accommodation, there is none. It's amazing. This individual is a leader, a shining star within the page program.
There is another thing about numbers. You asked earlier, senator, about targeting three from this province or targeting diversity. I think that, in a way, we're doing that now — maybe not in a formal way, but we look through a filter. Everything we do when it comes to the HR side, the interviews and so on, when we look at how many candidates have been successful and who we place, who are the chosen ones, in a sense we're looking for those numbers. We're looking for that, because it's such a small team of 15, and we want it to reflect the diversity within the Senate of Canada. If you look at the diversity within professions and geographic diversity, what we're trying to do is reflect that within this microcosm of 15. I'm very pleased with what we've been able to do over the last two or three years in focusing on it.
Senator Marshall: When recruitment is done in the Senate for other staff, not the page program, is it done through a ranking? Are numbers assigned? That's how it was done in my previous employment. You do an interview and you put in numbers, and then you tally up the numbers. Is that the way the recruitment is done here? I'm trying to compare the way we recruit and evaluate candidates for regular Senate employment and how we do it for the page program. Is it similar or is it identical?
Ms. Vanikiotis: Sometimes. Let's say the assessment is quantitative; it's an accounting competition. You want the person who has the best score, because they can add and they can do all these wonderful ledgers and spreadsheets and then build a strategy based on that.
Sometimes it's not about that. It's qualitative; it's about depth of policy advice or how well they can write. Yes, they could get high scores for that as well, but sometimes they bring different perspectives.
The answer to your question is that sometimes ranking is used. It was used more in the past. It's used less now. We look for a good fit to the team. We look for people who can bring assets to the job in order to assist a directorate or work team to evolve, if they could bring something fresh and new.
Senator Marshall: Let’s assume you have two candidates and you're making a subjective appraisal of them. You look at the one from Ontario and subjectively they're the superior candidate. Then you have one from the Atlantic provinces that still meets the minimum requirement but isn't at the same level as the person from Ontario. Who gets the page slot in that case?
Mr. Labrosse: We would have to look at a variety of considerations. Of course, there's a ranking. But say everyone qualified in the pool of people who could potentially become pages, so they've succeeded throughout all the steps. Over the past couple of years, we've have tried to get the best representation of provinces we can and then look at what's possible with who we have and who has succeeded thus far, to get as many provinces represented as possible, and then we add pages from additional provinces. If you look at the data we've provided, you can see that there are usually more than eight provinces represented, and territories of course.
The North is more complicated because it has a very small population, so getting one page from the North is a victory in itself.
Senator Marshall: Bilingual also.
Mr. Peters: Bilingualism is a factor.
Mr. Labrosse: We've been fortunate in that since 2010, I think, we've had a page from the North every year except one. We try to take that into consideration, but also the other employment equity groups: women, visible minorities, Canadians with disabilities, and of course indigenous Canadians.
The biggest problem with recruiting indigenous Canadians, as you had discussed, Senator Jaffer, is getting them to apply in the first place. It's very rare that we have applicants with an indigenous background, and when they do apply, we try to help them throughout the process.
Mr. Peters: I work closely with individual senators within their region, whether social media, photographs with the current page, if we're looking at using that page as a recruiting tool for other pages from that area. In the North as well, obviously with senators from the North, we've been working hard. We've had situations where we identify someone and meet with them. They come to the city and then decide to back out for some reason. We've had those disappointments as well, where we thought we had something and it didn't work out.
The Chair: I was involved in a program for which my firm gave substantial sums of money. We were told that the University of Victoria — and I, as a minority, understand this — if you have just one, it's very lonely. In fact, Supreme Court Justice Rosalie Abella said this: When we were one or two it was lonely; when three got to the Supreme Court, then we could make the change.
I think if we had more than one, there would be a comfort level.
Mr. Labrosse: I fully agree with you, Senator Jaffer. Our main challenge right now is getting one applicant, which is the source of our issues. I would love to have a minimum of three indigenous Canadians representing different parts of the country. We're struggling to get one person to apply.
The Chair: What can we do? Can we get our senators from the regions to help?
Mr. Peters: Senator, with the evolution of the newly appointed senators and with some of those senators obviously of indigenous background, I think the opportunities are endless and exciting, really, with what we can do to liaise with those senators and pick their brains on ideas.
We talked about the Forum for Young Canadians and the Model Parliament, some of these areas we have tapped into, but if you look at those young, indigenous Canadians that are connected with certain new senators that have been appointed from an indigenous background, it's very exciting. There's lots of work to do there.
I would go forth in a confident manner to say that if we were to put our heads together and to develop a very comprehensive strategy, I think we could reach a goal sooner than we realize.
The Chair: Mr. Presseau is here as well. Maybe we should look at a comprehensive program where some people work as pages and also work for a year or a summer in Human Resources as well; so it’s a group. One thing you said that really struck me is that you get the group together. There becomes a synergy, a bonding. We want people who are here to work to stay here for other opportunities. The idea is to give them access.
Mr. Peters: The Senate Page Program cultivates future employees within senators' offices, within the Senate administration.
The Chair: I have hired many.
Mr. Peters: It's a unique opportunity. We could go through a list of those successful candidates who have ended up somewhere else in the Senate. It's nurturing that. That has to be nurtured, watered, but we've been doing that over the last couple of years and it's paying off.
The Chair: Can you give us what that nurturing looks like? What kind of recommendation should we make to Internal? What should we be recommending? What you have done is exciting. What Human Resources has done is also exciting, but where do we go from here? How do we move this to be more reflective?
Mr. Peters: I would be happy to do that.
Senator Marshall: You asked the question a few minutes ago about what else we can do to make the page program more attractive. We can pursue the issue of the salary discrepancy to see if anything can be done, but is there something else we can look at to make it more attractive and probably attract more candidates?
Mr. Peters: Great question, Senator Marshall. We have great success in the letters that go out for the page program recruitment for members of Parliament and honourable senators. But if you look at social media, individual senators' websites, maybe we could sit down with Communications. Maybe there is something we could do such as a "page corner" or something that represents the page from your area, and linkages with the senator and the page. There's no one better to advocate the page in that region than the senator from there. Maybe linking up from time to time for a page visit to the senator's office, that's one idea, but there are many others, if we have more time.
Senator Marshall: I know you probably need time to think about it, but we're not ready to write our report yet. You can reflect on it and let us know if there's something else we should be including.
The Chair: To Ms. Proulx and Mr. Presseau, I was thinking that we could go to Internal together. Definitely we will have a recommendation on the salary. We could say that this year, this is what we should do. We should be more specific; this is the model we should follow. Perhaps informally we should say, "What would that look like?" I ask all of you — and us too — to brainstorm together so we can take more than recommendations to Internal. Of course they still have to approve.
We've come a long way. The Senate has done really well, but we always want to improve.
Senator Marshall: Do you know how many applications they get over on the Commons side?
Mr. Labrosse: We could endeavour to find out for you.
Senator Marshall: Do they get 630 and we get 140?
Mr. Labrosse: I do believe they get more. There are many factors for that. First of all, they have the pull of being on TV and having the Prime Minister, the ministers and the Leader of the Opposition.
Sadly, there's not necessarily huge awareness of the Senate throughout the world. When I go back home, sometimes I need to explain that I don't work for the Ottawa Senators but for Parliament. Sometimes that is a bit of a struggle.
There's also awareness of the page program. Explaining the job of a page isn't necessarily the easiest thing. Bringing awareness to the existence of the page program is a problem. This is where we rely on senators themselves, because unlike us, they go back to their home provinces and are able to bring the message to people they meet and to help us recruit in those provinces. It's been particularly useful up North because it's expensive and difficult.
Senator Marshall: But if the salary were the same, they could say, "I didn't get the job over in the Commons, but the salary is the same."
Mr. Labrosse: We are very successful at getting people who have been accepted on both sides to come our way, because we have many things that make us very attractive — aside from the salary, of course — such as being able to stay for two and even three years, and being there for all of the large events. The House of Commons pages don't take part in special events like we do, for instance, for the swearing in of senators or the Speech from the Throne. Senate pages attend Senate committees, which is not the case in the House of Commons. That is another bonus.
These are the things we use to lure people. However, salary is a consideration in the decision.
Mr. Peters: I think we could do a little better ourselves at communicating the fact that most ceremonies of Parliament occur in the Senate, that's where the Senate pages are, and so on. When someone has this predicament of picking the House of Commons or the Senate, maybe we can expand a little bit more in our recruiting to make up for that difference. Usually they're sitting down with their family that evening to discuss which one they should take. When they hear two years, maybe three, opening up a Parliament, Speech from the Throne, there is an enticement. This fall we're looking at large events in Parliament.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We really appreciate this. We're all one team rowing in the same direction, so I'm sure we'll come to some solutions and recommendations together. Thank you very much.
(The committee adjourned.)