Proceedings of the Standing Committee on
Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration
Issue 1 - Evidence - December 12, 2013
OTTAWA, Thursday, December 12, 2013
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met this day at 9:03 a.m., in public, to consider administrative matters; and in camera to consider other matters.
Senator Noël A. Kinsella (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honourable senators, I call the meeting to order. We have a heavy agenda this morning so I thought we should proceed on time, having a quorum present.
There are a couple of points before we follow into the agenda. We wanted to report back, on an undertaking at our last meeting, to strike a little working group to help the steering committee to study and advise on video emission. I'm pleased to advise that our colleagues Senators Greene, Black, Munson and Mitchell have agreed to constitute that working group and we look forward to their help. They will be assisted with staff from the Communications branch.
On the topic of our whips' offices, we're following up, and after this meeting there will be a meeting with the whips and the steering committee.
As an old professor, I wanted to assign homework for the next few weeks. My suggested homework is that we all take home a copy of the SARs, the Senate Administrative Rules, and read them in detail, with the objective of writing out questions on a plain piece of paper. They can be theoretical questions or any kind of questions on any situation you can think of and how a circumstance you could think of would relate to the rules. We will bring them all back and then we'll get our smart people here to show how, in the rules, most things are covered by the rules. I thought that would be a good exercise, but I'll just call it homework.
Senator Downe: I'm glad you raised that, chair, because I had a question about the Senate Administrative Rules. We had them before us on November 22, 2012 — I just dug up the agenda — and there were a number of proposed recommendations, but events overtook us. Do we intend to get back to those?
The Chair: Yes, we do, and it's my understanding that they are close to some conclusion and in this committee we could formally promulgate them as an integral part of the rules.
Senator Downe: Right, because we haven't discussed them in any great detail. We started to go through them and got cut off by events.
The Chair: This homework might help to inform ourselves in the discussion that we'll have on those.
Senator Lang: Being new to the committee, and I'm not too sure if I have a copy of what the senator was referring to, could we ensure that all members get a copy of it so we can look at it over the break?
The Chair: We'll undertake to make sure you get a copy of it.
Senator Lang: Thank you.
The Chair: On the agenda is the first report of the Subcommittee on the Review of Committee Budgets. We would like to delay that until later for Senator Smith. He's extremely well-informed on that particular item and he will soon join us.
We will now move into the in camera session.
(The committee continued in camera.)
——————
(The committee resumed in public.)
Senator George J. Furey (Deputy Chair) in the chair.
The Deputy Chair: Colleagues, we'll reconvene. We are back in public. Senator Smith, your report.
Senator L. Smith: On behalf of Senator Cordy and Senator LeBreton, I'm pleased to present the first report of the Subcommittee on Committee Budgets, which deals with five committee budget applications.
[Translation]
Before I talk about the report, I would like to provide the senators with an update on the situation of committee budgets.
[English]
The committee expenses this fiscal year have been very modest and there is no pressure on the budget at this time. Specifically, $2,875,000 were allocated for committees in 2013-14, of which $500,000 was set aside for witnesses, expenses, video conferences and working meals and beverages at committee meetings in Ottawa.
Prior to the prorogation, $142,905 was charged to this envelope, leaving $357,000 to cover the remainder of the fiscal year. That's the $500,000 amount.
Of the $2,375,000 available for allocation to individual committees, only $141,410 was spent prior to prorogation, leaving $2,233,590 available for the remainder of the fiscal year. That's for travel.
Your subcommittee believes that even in circumstances where there is no pressure on the budget, it is important to ensure the committees have carefully thought out their work plans and have clear objectives before any funds are released.
Given that we are at the beginning of a new session, it is to be expected that not all committees are yet ready to submit budget applications, as different committees are at different stages of their work; some completing studies from previous sessions and others just getting started.
[Translation]
Your subcommittee did not want to delay the work of committees ready to move forward. That is why we have met twice this week to review budget requests received to date.
[English]
Four of the budgets are very straightforward and include no travel activities: Social Affairs, Human Rights, Conflict of Interest and Scrutiny of Regulations. Your subcommittee reviewed these budgets carefully and is comfortable recommending release of the funds as requested. You have the cover sheet, which outlines the funds.
Two budgets are more complex and include travel activities: Agriculture and Forestry, and Transport and Communications. The chairs and deputy chairs were invited to meet with the subcommittee to explain the budgets and to answer questions.
We first heard from Senator Mockler, Chair of the Agriculture and Forestry Committee, regarding a $22,556 budget application for the committee's study of innovation in the agricultural sector. These funds would be used for a fact- finding mission to Niagara-on-the-Lake and the University of Guelph. We were informed that this would be the committee's last trip for this study and we are comfortable recommending release of these funds.
The final budget considered by the subcommittee was for Transport and Communications for its special study of the CBC. Senators Dawson and Housakos met with the subcommittee to present their budget application for $80,597 for a fact-finding trip to Winnipeg, Edmonton and Yellowknife.
Senator Noël A. Kinsella (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: We only have one page.
Heather Lank, Principal Clerk, Committees Directorate, Senate of Canada: Just to clarify, honourable senators, the reason that budget is not on the report will be explained to you in one second by Senator Smith.
Senator L. Smith: While your subcommittee is very supportive of the study — we're talking about the CBC study — and we believe it has great potential, it is premature to recommend the allocation of funds at this time. The committee only received its order of reference on Monday, December 9, and has not yet held any hearings. The budget was approved by the committee before the Senate had agreed to the order of reference, an order of events that is not in keeping with regular Senate practice and which should be discouraged.
In addition, the subcommittee felt that the committee had not yet clearly articulated the key objectives of the study or the groundwork, how it would be laid in Ottawa, for the travel proposed in the budget. Therefore, your committee decided to delay making a recommendation on the budget application until we receive more information.
Specifically, the subcommittee will be writing to the chair and deputy chair to ask them to provide us with a short document, no more than one or two pages long, including the areas of focus of the study and its objectives.
We would also like the document to include how the committee intends to use the first few sitting weeks of 2014 to lay the groundwork for the proposed trip, though the subcommittee does not require a detailed witness list.
Once we receive this document, we will be in a better position to decide on whether to recommend funds for this trip, currently planned for March 2014.
[Translation]
Our intention is not to delay the work of this committee or of any other committee. We simply want to ensure that the committees have clearly identified and articulated their objectives before funding for their activities is approved.
[English]
Your subcommittee hopes to report to the Internal Economy Committee early in the new year regarding this budget application and others submitted for your review. We're also planning to make recommendations with respect to the public disclosure of committee travel expenses.
In the meantime, we're pleased to recommend the allocation of funds to — do I say the five committees or the four — the five committees included in this first report.
Honourable senators, I request the adoption of the report.
One of the things the committee is trying to do, which I think is modernizing our approach, is making people more accountable in terms of their order of reference so that it is money well spent for the travel that these folks are going to do.
I really applaud Senator Cordy and Senator LeBreton because of the questions that were asked. Senator Comeau started this process a couple of years ago and what we're trying to do is take it to a level. When you come into the committee, make sure you're organized, make sure you have objectives and outcomes. Don't come in and tell us, ``Well, we're going to go on a trip and ask questions.'' Wrong answer. Hopefully, you understand the approach we're trying to take.
The Chair: We have a recommendation on the floor. Are there questions on it?
Senator Tkachuk: Did he move the adoption?
Senator L. Smith: I move the adoption of the report, Mr. Chair.
The Chair: Senator Lang has a question.
Senator Lang: I totally agree with the process. I think it's well thought out, and it's one that should be followed.
I want to ask a question in my capacity as Chair of the Defence Committee. You talked about dealing with future proposals early in the new year. Are you speaking of late January? Is that to meet to look at the other committees as far as whatever proposals they have? What timing are we actually talking about?
Senator L. Smith: The fiscal year ends March 31 and I think it would be appropriate for people who'd like to travel at the end of February, early March, to get their requests and information to us sometime in February because there's not a lot of time to move.
Senator Lang: I believe that clarifies it.
Senator Cordy: I want to make a comment for those who are new to the committee and may not have noticed this. Committees are doing wonderful work. If you look at the Human Rights Committee report on cyberbullying, this is perhaps the third time that they have requested funds for reprinting the documents on their report. The requests keep coming in from all across the country. I know the home and school associations in Nova Scotia have taken this report and distributed it their associations in various cities and towns in the province. They should be commended for the work that they have done. It's a good news story.
Senator L. Smith: I wish to add one other thing. There are some senators who feel that we're trying to cut spending on travel. We're trying to make travel more cost-effective and show the benefits of why people are actually travelling. We need your help to make sure that this message gets out to other senators who are — I'm not saying complaining loudly, but it's important to understand that we're not trying to be miserly or cut back. What we're trying to do is to be cost effective and run it more like a business.
The Chair: Any questions?
Senator Seth: I would like to know how we determine which committees get more or less money for their operating budget.
Senator L. Smith: Are you talking about travel?
Senator Seth: Everything.
Senator L. Smith: We deal with travel. There is a budget of around $2.3 million left for travel. Theoretically, committees could come in and ask for an amount, and if you multiply the number of committees, it could reach that amount. Our plan is trying to encourage people that, if you come in and make a proposal, you have to show why you're making that proposal, what are your objectives, what are your outcomes going to be and why you should be spending that money.
An example goes back to Senator Lang. We had some issues historically where Defence — and I'm not being critical of the Defence Committee, but we had some committees that didn't necessarily have a focused plan. To say that you want to go and ask questions is a good thought, but it may not be the right thought that you want to propose to have money from the committee.
Senator Seth: So there is no fixed amount that this committee will be getting this much, not a lot of that?
Senator L. Smith: No.
The Chair: Colleagues, given the time marching on, can we deal with the question?
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
Colleagues, Senator Cordy has underscored a good-news story, namely the work of the Human Rights Committee on cyberbullying. If it has not already occurred, maybe we could invite our Communications branch to share that story across the country. Agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Given the time, someone else is coming into this room. Unless somebody wants to raise something, we'll have to continue with these other items at our next meeting.
Did Senator White have a point?
Senator White: Actually, in relation to our security subcommittee, I'm just trying to get a handle on where we are with that. When I first came in there was a discussion, but I hadn't heard it.
The Chair: In the interim the steering committee is going to look after that file.
Senator Furey: Chair, just as a courtesy to Mr. Janse, who has been waiting all morning to do a report on parliamentary associations, I don't know how long that would take. Would we have to go in camera to do that?
The Chair: I don't think so. No, that's public.
Eric Janse, Clerk Assistant and Director General, International and Interparliamentary Affairs Directorate, Senate of Canada: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. It will be a 30-second item.
You have before you the Fourth Annual Report on Parliamentary Associations Activities and Expenditures as prepared for our directorate for the Joint Interparliamentary Council.
[Translation]
Once again, this report is a high-profile recommendation on the various activities of the associations. It also includes the costs for the associations and other related information.
[English]
It provides comparisons to activity levels from previous years, has been adopted by the House of Commons board, and so once this committee adopts it, then it can be posted on the IIA website.
In closing, as you're aware, parliamentary associations have begun holding their annual general meetings to elect executive committees and fund their activities for next year.
Thank you very much.
The Chair: It's on pages 11 and 26. Are there questions of Mr. Janse?
Senator Downe: You may not be able to answer this, but I'm wondering if the JIC is considering any consolidations of the group. For example, we have Canada-Europe and then we have two stand-alone groups, Canada-France, Canada-U.K. that obviously speak to the founding of the country. But then we have Canada-China and Canada- Japan. We don't have Canada-Asia. Are they considering any consolidation?
Mr. Janse: That's an excellent question, senator. In fact, it was the subject of a study by a subcommittee of the JIC that ultimately went back to the full JIC with a number of recommendations. Without formally amalgamating groups to create, as you're suggesting, an Asia group, they are forcing associations within the same region to work much more collaboratively together and budgets are accorded accordingly.
Senator Downe: Thank you, chair.
Senator Tkachuk: Right now, just so you know, with all these matters, we've had discussions on this and on why we need those two separate ones, outside of the fact that they are two huge economies. What we do is we split amongst ourselves. That is, we say on other Asian matters outside of Japan and China — I'm speaking as Chair of JIC right now — we actually combine budgets and say, okay, for this particular conference we'll share China and Japan, and we allocate delegates that way.
The Chair: Thank you, colleagues.
This is the last full meeting of our committee. I wish everybody a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. That's the penultimate word. For the ultimate word, Senator Cordy?
Senator Cordy: I would ask if our colleagues on the other side would like to deal with No. 5, or would that be a lengthy discussion?
The Chair: That would be in camera, wouldn't it?
Senator Tkachuk: That's in camera. I've got the Banking Committee and I think you have a committee at 10:30 as well.
Senator Cordy: I just thought it might be short.
Senator Tkachuk: I'd like to say, Mr. Chair, that I'm certainly happy that at least one member of the press gallery has been covering the budgets and I think there has been one other that has come in over the last couple of years since we've been doing this in a public manner. I'd also like to invite the member of the gallery to come to our JIC meetings — all our budget meetings are also open to the public — so they will no longer call them secret meetings, because they're not. So, Merry Christmas.
(The committee adjourned.)