Proceedings of the Standing Committee on
Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration
Issue 3 - Evidence - September 18, 2014
OTTAWA, Thursday, September 18, 2014
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met this day at 9 a.m. for the consideration of administrative and other matters.
Senator Noël A. Kinsella (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: I thank everyone for being here this morning. I trust that all colleagues have had a successful recess period in our respective provinces representing our people. I advise that your steering committee has had several meetings on Senate business during the summer months.
This morning, we are going to begin our agenda with a presentation and just an update for everybody, perhaps one of the most successful outreach programs that the Senate of Canada is engaged in, and that is our Teachers Institute. We do know from colleagues in other upper houses that they are very impressed when they learn about this particular program. It's managed by the Library of Parliament.
[Translation]
We are happy to welcome Sonia L'Heureux, the Parliamentary Librarian. She will provide us with an overview of an important program, the Teachers Institute on Canadian Parliamentary Democracy, which has been very successful.
[English]
Sonia L'Heureux, Parliamentary Librarian, Library of Parliament: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
[Translation]
Honourable senators, it is my pleasure to be here this morning to provide you with an overview of the Teachers Institute on Canadian Parliamentary Democracy.
[English]
The Teachers Institute, as mentioned by the Speaker, is organized by the Library of Parliament under the stewardship of the Speakers of the Senate and the House of Commons. Every year, the program brings outstanding educators from across the country together for a unique professional development opportunity. It's a first-hand look at how Parliament functions.
The program is specifically designed for educators and administrators who cover Parliament in their curriculum. This includes elementary, middle and high school level educators who teach history, civics, social studies, law and/or political science. Since its inception in 1996, the Teachers Institute has been offered 17 times, and over 1,200 teachers have benefited from the program.
The program is run in Ottawa, right in the parliamentary precinct, over a one-week period in November. By the end of the program, participants gain an insider's view of the intricacies of Parliament and the legislative process, as well as a better understanding of the key players, their functions and activities.
[Translation]
The program includes presentations, panels and group discussions, simulations of committee meetings, educational visits and individual meetings with parliamentarians.
I want to stress the importance of the time participants spend with parliamentarians. That aspect is key to the success of the Teachers Forum. The Senate's direct participation in the program helps enhance the experience provided to the participants.
[English]
As one of the hosts of the event, the Speaker of the Senate addresses all Teachers Institute participants in the Senate Chamber. Following this, a panel of senators has the floor to provide participants with a window into the life of a senator. This panel enhances teachers' understanding of the work that senators do and the challenges they face in carrying out their duties.
Last year, participants heard from Senator Ataullahjan, Senator Cordy, Senator Jaffer and Senator Martin. These direct exchanges with parliamentarians are key to impacting participants' overall perception of Parliament.
As expressed in a testimonial from last year's program, a teacher noted that:
The senators who spoke to us were moving and powerful! What comes across most is how much textbooks really do leave out or ''not know'' about the ''real workings'' of Parliament.
That was a quote from one of our participants after meeting some senators.
[Translation]
The participants always mention their exchanges with senators and members among the program's highlights. Moreover, the relationships the participants build with their representatives during the institute continue after they return to their respective provinces.
[English]
For example, earlier this year, Ann Marie Maloney, a past Teachers Institute participant, organized an event with her students in St. Catharines, Ontario, called the Canadian Exhibit. As part of the exhibit, students explored Canada's past and present through displays, art, music and dance. A highlight of the event was the attendance of Senator Victor Oh, whom Ms. Maloney had invited after having met him at the 2013 Teachers Institute.
In addition to senators and MPs, participants meet with parliamentary officials, Senate and house administration personnel, procedural experts and members of the press gallery.
The itinerary also includes special off-site sessions that are only possible due to the affiliation of the Library of Parliament with some of its programming partners. This includes a tour of Rideau Hall and an audience with His Excellency the Right Honourable David Johnston, as well as a visit to the judicial branch of Canada's government and a tour of the Supreme Court.
[Translation]
The testimonials we receive from participants often remind us of the added value of including those external partners in the program. A Quebec participant said something along the following lines:
The message of the Governor General was really conveyed to all those who participated in the institute or in its organization. I want to thank them from the bottom of my heart for so much openness, honesty, and authenticity in human relations.
[English]
So the participant really enjoyed interacting with people in Parliament.
[Translation]
Former participants draw inspiration from their experience at the Institute and continue to look for innovative and compelling opportunities to motivate their students and help them understand Canada's parliamentary system.
[English]
The Library facilitates the continuing engagement of all former participants by bringing them together through an alumni network. The Teachers Institute alumni network is used by the Library as an outreach tool to connect with teachers across the country and to promote the Parliament of Canada's educational resources.
It is also from within this alumni network that new members are found to join the Teachers Advisory Committee. This committee is made up of one former Teachers Institute participant from each province and two from the territories. The teacher advisers assist with the planning, promotion, selection of participants, delivery and evaluation of the annual Teachers Institute. The committee also advises the Library when new or existing classroom resources are being updated or developed. These alumni also give us insight into the unique challenges that the Teachers Institute faces.
Of growing concern is the fact that teachers are finding it increasingly difficult to be able to participate in a week- long professional development opportunity in Ottawa. Costs, especially those assumed by the schools for supply teaching, often prevent selected participants from attending or potential applicants from applying to the program.
The cost to participate in the program can also be daunting for some. The Library of Parliament collects $500 from each participant as a registration fee. In recognition of this, the Canadian Association of Former Parliamentarians provides us 10 bursaries of $500 each to educators who would not be able to attend without the bursary.
[Translation]
Although registration fees cover part of the program's cost, the library must set aside $230,000 of its budget for products and services of the Teachers Institute. The library ensures that all expenditures are justified and kept to a minimum. Despite that fact, as expenses increase with the increasing cost of living, the financial pressures on the library are growing, and the institution must restrict certain elements of the budget, especially in terms of hospitality expenses.
In order to ensure that the budget set aside for the Teachers Institute is justified, the library is constantly assessing the program to determine whether it is still meeting the set objectives and the participants' needs.
As a result, an assessment process has been developed for the Teachers Institute. Regular assessments are carried out at the end of each annual institute, and a larger-scale survey was conducted to mark the program's 10th anniversary.
[English]
In 2007, the Library conducted an extensive impact study of the Teachers Institute to measure the possible long- term impact of the program. The study illustrated that the vast majority of teachers, as a result of their participation in the program, experience a significant increase in their knowledge and understanding of Parliament and that years later they were still applying what they had learned. The study also confirmed that participating in the Teachers Institute gave teachers the confidence to reach out and share what they had learned with teachers at their school and other schools. It is also through these evaluations that we receive testimonials that emphasize the importance and success of the program. One of our alumni stated that:
The breadth and depth of this program was more than I could have imagined. I have always had a passion for teaching, but I lacked the confidence to teach the parliamentary system. Every component of this program has provided a foundation of knowledge and practical and effective strategies to bring it alive in my high school classroom.
I can say that from my own personal experience, I have had many participants tell me that they really started to understand the Senate and the work that happens there through participation in the Teachers Institute and the ability to interact directly with senators.
It is also worth noting that we would not have made it to where we are without the continued support of the Speakers of the Senate and the House of Commons.
The Library is also fortunate to have the involvement of senior advisers from both the Senate and the House of Commons in terms of the administration. These advisers help shape the Teachers Institute program from year to year and act as a sounding board for improvement and new initiatives.
The Teachers Institute welcomes the continued involvement of senators, and I look forward to taking your questions and comments about the program.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms. L'Heureux.
Senator Marshall: Thank you very much for your presentation. The briefing note that we have says that there are 70 participants a year. We usually have very good representation from Newfoundland and Labrador, so I'm curious as to how the 70 gets allocated among the provinces and territories. I'm not looking for a decrease for Newfoundland and Labrador; I'm just curious why we're so well represented.
Ms. L'Heureux: The participants are selected based on letters of recommendation and their experience in teaching civics and their engagement in communities. That's done through our Teachers Advisory Committee, which also looks at their ability to teach this topic.
If I look at this year, we are expecting seven participants from Newfoundland. We try to have representation from every part of the country.
It also depends on their ability to get funds to cover the supply-teaching costs when they do come here. Some provinces and school boards are a little more generous than others, so those are elements that are out of our ability to control. That's where the former parliamentarians come in and sometimes assist in providing some support when there are issues with supply teaching.
Senator Marshall: One last question. You indicated what individual senators are doing to support the program and you mentioned that there's a presentation in the Senate. Is there something else we can do as senators? I know for senators from Newfoundland, we attend the dinner and we bring them to our offices and around the Senate, but is there something else we should be doing to support the program?
Ms. L'Heureux: Of course, participating in the dinner makes a big impact on the participants — the people who are there. You have a better read of the school system and your provinces reaching out to them. We do reach out to the school boards, to our alumni network and associations of teachers. You may also have some significant impact when you do interact with school boards in inviting their participation.
Senator Munson: Thank you for being here today. I'm curious about the former parliamentarians and the bursary. That seems to be a tangible involvement in the work of teachers. I don't know if other senators have received a letter, but I received a letter from an Ontario teacher in North Bay about the program, dealing with history, the First World War and all kinds of things that this teacher would like to do. It costs $450 to have this series of books.
It was a compelling argument to senators and/or MPs to get involved in primarily a provincial program, but it's history for Grade 7 and 8. This gentleman sent this — I'm sure other senators may have received it — but it was a compelling argument to please come and help them. ''Help, help, help.''
We do have those meetings at the beginning of the year with teachers and there's the dinner. I have attended some in the past during my first years in the Senate, and I really enjoyed it.
How do we engage in a real dialogue? I want to send some money to this teacher, because he is so involved in Canadian history and our participation in World War I, World War II and so on. How do we get more involved? How do we have that real dialogue?
Ms. L'Heureux: As you know, education is a provincial jurisdiction, so we're careful in our program to focus exclusively on parliamentary matters and explaining the parliamentary system. For an issue like that, we would probably not get as involved, because it goes beyond explaining Parliament; we don't really have a mandate at the library to do that.
On the other hand, we encourage teachers to invite senators and interact with them and support what they do. We provide them with educational material if they want to do some age-appropriate action in their schools.
For something like that, we're a bit more constrained in terms of the library. Every year we have issues that come up where we try to find more creative ways to stay within our mandate in assisting the teachers. For example, last year, there were a lot of questions around Aboriginal issues in terms of how Parliament addresses Aboriginal issues. We decided this year that, instead of addressing exactly how to address Aboriginal issues, we could talk about consensus government and what is that in a parliamentary context, because we have some examples in Canada of a consensus government, which often arises out of Aboriginal communities.
So we're a little constrained in terms of what we can do, given our mandate. I know that doesn't answer exactly your question.
The Chair: Senators, we thought it would be important for us to underscore one of our success stories that, as we go forward, the engagement with the Canadian public is very important — so that the great story of the Senate of Canada for the past 147 years is not overly filtered. There is no better group of Canadians who can help in reaching our public in a knowledgeable way than through the teachers and the school system.
The next institute is on exactly what dates?
Ms. L'Heureux: It is November 3 to 7, I think.
The Chair: I'm glad we have on the record the tremendous participation with those bursaries by the Canadian Association of Former Parliamentarians.
Thank you, Ms. L'Heureux.
Honourable senators, Item No. 2 on our agenda is the adoption of the minutes of our meeting of June 19. Those minutes have been circulated.
Senator Wells: I have one suggested change within the minutes, and that's under the joint advisory working group on security. In the first line, it says ''it was agreed that a joint advisory working on security.'' I would add ''group.'' That's on page 3 of 16.
The Chair: With that correction, is there a motion to adopt the minutes as corrected?
Senator Doyle: I so move
The Chair: Agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Is there any business arising from those minutes that are not covered by the agenda that anyone wishes to raise?
Senator Marshall: I was wondering, on page 5 of 16 where we're talking about the public reports that are expected to be tabled in the fall of 2014. They're not tabled yet, are they? But we'll be looking for them within the next month or so?
The Chair: Yes.
Senator Marshall: Perfect. Thank you.
The Chair: Is it agreed that the minutes be accepted as corrected?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Item No. 3 is the second report of the steering committee on decisions taken during the summer adjournment. As all senators know, during adjournment, the steering committee is authorized to take decisions, and we report those decisions as having been taken. We'll ask the Clerk to proceed.
Gary O'Brien, Clerk of the Senate and Clerk of the Parliaments, Senate of Canada: Honourable senators, steering had two meetings over the summer, one in July and one in August. Pursuant to the motion approved by the committee at its organizational meeting that when Internal is not able to meet, steering is authorized to take decisions on its behalf but to report those decisions at the next meeting of the full committee.
The second report lists about 10 decisions, I assume, that were taken. The first one dealt with the contract that was approved by steering for a functional review of the Senate Communications Directorate. It was awarded to Blueprint Public Relations, after a competitive public process, which our procurement people were very much involved with. This decision was taken to award a contract of $150,000.
Steering also agreed to approve the two-year option with respect to the purchase of furniture, which is already in the contract. It could be renewed for either one or two years. They agreed to exercise the two-year option.
I understand Grand & Toy is closing its retail outlets, but to provide for a smooth transition to a new regime for getting stationery, ink and toners, it was agreed that the contract for Grand & Toy be extended to December 31, 2014. We will be launching a separate competitive process for office supplies.
Our IT people have provided a plan for the changing of this room with respect to video conferencing — a new plan to install permanent cameras. However, the exact design, the impact to this room and how it will look were discussed actually Tuesday at the steering committee. It was agreed that whatever plan is put forward, it will come before this full committee. So the full committee will have a look at it and give its sanction to whatever changes are to be made. This is a precious room. It has a specific purpose, which is to promote Aboriginal issues, and we don't want to impact too directly with this technical change we're making with respect to our broadcasting equipment.
It was agreed that the business plan that had been discussed at the full committee in June be formally approved and that it be posted.
The other issue that had also been discussed with the full committee in the spring and just before the adjournment was with respect to the scanners that are needed for the security of our buildings. The life cycle of scanners we have has pretty much expired. Funds have been identified within the main budget, and steering authorized the administration to proceed to an RFP to replace the X-ray scanners over a three-year period. Of course, the results of that RFP will come back to the full committee.
It was also agreed that the methodology for calculating the budget amounts used in past years for newly appointed and departing senators be confirmed. This came from a technical issue of a conflict of information between the SAR and the research guidelines that had been in effect for many years on how the exact calculation — whether it was monthly or by day — be confirmed going forward, so there's no misunderstanding of amounts. Everything senators got was perfectly in order, but we wanted to confirm that the methodology used was the one steering agrees with.
There are also a number of working groups and advisory working groups that have been created. I did a little analysis of this over the summer. There are at least 10 working groups, advisory groups and their memberships. I know Senator Fraser approached me earlier today about getting a list, and perhaps this list could be circulated to all members of the committee so there's no misunderstanding, however, with respect to one replacement: Senator Massicotte replaced Senator Downe on the LTVP, as well as the renovations for the Centre Block.
Steering also agreed that the administration be authorized to hold an open house. This will be our third open house. We started it in 2006, I believe. We had one in 2009. It's time to renew this in order for all the directorates to have an opportunity for better internal communications within the Senate community and to understand what they do — who is on first base, who is on second base. It will be held next Thursday, in this room, in the morning. We hope senators will have an opportunity to attend. I think you'll find it very beneficial.
The Chair: Discussion, honourable senators?
Senator LeBreton: I have a couple of questions on this.
On the contract for furniture, can you explain this in a little more detail? Do we have several suppliers? How does the acquisition of furniture actually take place? I'll ask all my questions and then you can answer them.
With regard to the modernization of this room for video conferencing, is it not perhaps a premature expense, in view of the fact that the whole place will be closed down and moved across the street? By the time we're back into this building, technology being what it is, we may be spending a lot of money updating this room only to shutter the place, and then whatever number of years it is that we're back here — although I won't be here. Basically, the idea is that we may be going back to another expense to update the equipment.
On the accountability through corporate reporting, I was wondering if you have a specific timetable on the regular and timely release of this information.
Marysa Oueriemmi, Director, Building Services, Senate of Canada: With respect to the contract for furniture, it's a very large contract, because we have to encompass all possible items, from office chairs, ergonomic chairs, guest chairs, tables — all of the furniture within the precinct.
When this committee approved the competitive process — I believe it was 2011 — it was for three years, with as well the option to renew or extend the contract for two one-year periods. What we had done over the summer months is to seek the approval of steering in order to exercise that. By doing so, the Senate, in terms of capacity, time and effort in doing that — and, historically speaking, senator, it's typically the same companies that go to tender and are obtained via the procurement process.
But there have been no issues for the past first three years with the contract and the suppliers. Therefore, we sought the approval of the committee to continue.
The Chair: On the room issue, no decision was taken. We raised a lot of questions when the presentation was made. From my point of view, I was quite concerned with maintaining the integrity of this room, which has been so successful. It is one of the rooms that is multi-functional. We asked them to look at various monitors that are appropriate or contemporary.
I don't think anyone has raised the question that you raised. In terms of the timeline, maybe that makes no sense. Maybe we should stay with what we have. We wheel in TV screens when we need them. They are in storage.
That's a good point. Thank you for raising it.
Senator Furey: I'd like to add that no decision has been made, as the chair has said. When they return with some more proposals, they will be brought to this committee before any finalization of the decision.
The Chair: Senator, what was your third point?
Senator LeBreton: My third point was the accountability through corporate reporting and the performance reports being made public on a regular and timely basis. I was wondering if there's been a specific timetable and what the plan is there.
Jill Anne Joseph, Director, Internal Audit and Strategic Planning, Senate of Canada: Senator, ideally, our business plans for a given year would be posted by April 1 of that fiscal year. Ideally, the performance reports for the past fiscal year would be posted, say, within 90 days — by September; when you get back, we'd like to have it up.
Posting the business plan will be a new development for us, and next year we hope to post the performance report, as well. We have approval to post the business plan. We still haven't posted it, because we're working with Communications on a bigger package that we want to bring forward to steering and to the full committee. When we do post, we don't plan to do it with a lot of fanfare, so we don't expect there will be a lot of attention to it.
The Chair: Any other questions from senators?
Senator Marshall: I have questions on four of the items. I'll do them one at a time. All of my questions relate to funding and money.
For the first one, the Blueprint Public Relations item for the $150,000, could you refresh our memory as to the source of that funding? I believe we discussed it at our last meeting before we adjourned for the summer.
Mr. O'Brien: As we said in June, we would have a better idea come the fall of the exact nature of any projected surplus from within the existing funds. These relate to many issues, including how committee budgets are going and some of the initiatives the administration has taken with respect to delaying staffing actions without impacting too much on services given to senators.
It was a program that was suggested to us by steering. It was a wonderful idea. It has resulted in significant savings. It is a program that will continue at least until December. So we are comfortable that from within the existing budget that we can find monies for the Blueprint contract as well as for the scanners.
Senator Marshall: That's the Senate, that's the Blueprint. The second one is the contract for furniture. I find it odd that we always approve something at a cost that will exceed $100,000. That could mean $2 million.
What is the estimate for the contract for the furniture? How much money are we talking about? I wanted to know if that was included in the budget.
Ms. Oueriemmi: Thank you, Senator Marshall. Yes, the contract for furniture, as noted earlier in Senator LeBreton's question, is for all of the furniture used within the Parliamentary Precinct. Largely we do look at our budgeting, because Building Services has the budget for furniture and equipment. It is a large portion of our budget.
That being said, in 2009 when we had several nominations, we were able to outfit the remaining offices that were vacant. We were pretty much equipped for full house following 2009-10.
This is renewal of furniture which is maintained over the years. I try to keep our expenditures either on demand or as required, so we plan our expenditures and we have life cycle systems in place.
For the next two fiscal years we forecast approximately $180,000. It depends on requirement.
Senator Marshall: Each year?
Ms. Oueriemmi: Yes, but that will fluctuate depending on requirements and needs. As I said earlier, in 2009 that was the maximum of our expenditures where we needed to equip vacant offices to accommodate the newly nominated senators. We are on a ''maintain'' at this point.
Senator Marshall: That $180,000 is included in our budget already?
Ms. Oueriemmi: I forecast that, yes, it is within my budget. It can go up or down; it depends. The main expenditures were done in 2008-09. That's forecast at this time, senator.
Senator Marshall: The third question is on video conferencing. How much are we talking about there? Bearing in mind the response you gave to Senator LeBreton, I am still wondering how much money we are talking about.
Mr. O'Brien: The class D estimate that was provided to steering was $49,350.
Senator Marshall: Okay. Is there money budgeted for that? Or is that just —
Mr. O'Brien: Yes.
Senator Marshall: That is budgeted for.
Mr. O'Brien: Yes.
Senator Marshall: My last question is the x-ray detection system. Again, we use that phrase ''greater than $100,000,'' so I'm wondering about a better estimate. Also, during the conversations we have had, somebody indicated that we have found funds. Can someone tell me what we're talking about, in dollars?
Gilles Duguay, Director General, Parliamentary Precinct Services, Senate of Canada: What we wanted was to get the RFP going. After the authorization to get the RFP going, everything is based on availability of funds. So as the fiscal year evolves, I'm monitoring my budget, and if and when money becomes available, then we want to purchase the scanners.
Senator Marshall: How much are the scanners? We say greater than $100,000. Are we talking about a million dollars?
Mr. Duguay: No, if I remember correctly, the ballpark is about $300,000.
Senator Marshall: That would be for the current fiscal year if we go ahead.
Mr. Duguay: That's right.
Senator Marshall: The money is not budgeted for it.
Mr. Duguay: That's right.
Senator Marshall: It depends whether we find it.
Mr. Duguay: Exactly.
Senator Runciman: I have a follow-up to Senator Marshall's question with respect to the $150,000 contract. I am curious; I believe we were all asked if we had suggestions to submit them to the committee, to Senator Housakos or through a member of the committee. I am wondering about the process in terms of selecting the firm that won the contract.
How many names were submitted and were they all forwarded to procurement or were they whittled down by someone or some group? How did that process work?
The Chair: Thank you, senator, for the question. As a member of the committee, Senator Dawson, please proceed.
Senator Dawson: We asked individually, we asked collectively for senators to submit names. Of the names that were submitted, let's say 12 to 15, all of these firms were contacted. Of those firms, 10 came back to the procurement people of the Senate, because it was done in cooperation with procurement. Of those 10 firms, six submitted proposals, five were analyzed and after a first point system, it was brought down to three. The committee then selected amongst the three firms that were retained — again on a point system — the firm that has been contracted, which is Blueprint.
Senator Runciman: I raise the question because the firm that I submitted to Senator Batters — and she indicated was submitted as well — advised us they were never contacted.
Senator Dawson: I have to admit that I don't know who you are talking about, but we basically all sent the names to Senator Housakos and to procurement and what happened after that, I have to admit that I couldn't give you a reliable answer. If you want to, after, I can check to see what happened. But we did have open appeal to as many firms as possible.
Senator Runciman: I will give the name to you after.
The Chair: I can report that Senator Housakos, the chair of the working group, did issue, in the spirit of transparency, a communication last week announcing exactly what was done.
Senator Marshall: Who oversaw the process of selection? Was it done by the staff, officials within the Senate?
Mr. O'Brien: Yes.
Senator Marshall: Which directorate would look after that?
Mr. O'Brien: Finance. Nicole Proulx was very much involved, as well as our procurement officer.
Senator Marshall: Thank you.
The Chair: There are no further questions on that, we will move to Item No. 4, report on the 2014 Senate Page Program and the recruitment campaign. We have before us the Black Rod, Greg Peters, and our Director of Human Resources.
[Translation]
Greg Peters, Usher of the Black Rod, Senate of Canada: Good morning, honourable senators.
[English]
It is a pleasure to be here with Mr. Darshan Singh from Human Resources as well. As per the review of the 2011 Senate Page Program, today we are here to provide an annual update to the committee on the 2014 Senate page recruitment campaign.
[Translation]
As you know, the Senate is seeking to strike a balance among representatives — men and women, anglophones and francophones, visible minorities, Aboriginals and disabled groups. This is a testament to its ongoing desire to establish greater regional representation, so that as many provinces and many territories as possible would be represented among the 15 pages selected each year.
[English]
Darshan Singh, Director of Human Resources, Senate of Canada: An ongoing challenge faced during the recruitment campaign is to ensure a representative pool of qualified candidates exists in any given province and territory given that candidates must be functional in both official languages; be completing their first degree at the undergraduate level; be enrolled in one of the four universities in the National Capital Region; and, lastly, meet the essential qualifications.
[Translation]
This year, the Senate carried out numerous campaigns to provide information to potential applicants. The Office of the Usher of the Black Rod will continue to work with human resources to explore new possibilities to improve and expand on its awareness-raising activities.
Mr. Peters: This year, we are proud to announce that the Senate has received 207 applications. About 100 candidates were invited to an evaluation, and 9 of them have been selected to join our current page staff. This year, at least one application was received for most of the provinces and territories not represented by the 15 pages.
[English]
The 2014-15 page team has a representation of eight female and seven male pages. The team has nine pages whose first official language is English and six pages whose first official language is French, with the remainder that are fully bilingual.
I am going to hand it over for questions now. One thing I do want to highlight, senators, is the incredible support of the honourable senators on outreach. You will see in the package of information in the briefing note on the outreach program by Human Resources and by the Office of the Black Rod, but your tweets, your websites and your work in the provinces has been greatly appreciated. It has played a huge role in the success of our candidates this year.
Senator LeBreton: I had the pleasure of meeting the pages this summer when they were preparing for the session of Parliament and was most impressed, not only by the group that was returning but by the new recruits. They were all excellent. They asked good questions and we had a very frank discussion.
I do believe you've already answered my question by the quality of people you have chosen, but can you confirm that there are now new measures in place to make sure, with proper background and security checks, that as an institution we're not confronted like we were a few years ago by a particular page? At our meeting, we even discussed this with the returning pages and the new pages but, for the assurances of the senators, I want on the record that very stringent security background checks were done in order to avoid a situation like that ever happening again.
Mr. Peters: Thank you very much for the question. I am just coming up on one year in the position as Usher of the Black Rod and since my arrival that's been a key issue.
One of the key points with the page program in engaging the pages is getting to know them, working closely with the application process, and we've really done a 360 working with Human Resources. When you look at the initial letter when they apply to be a page we go through a vetting process. We start with 207 and then we get down to 100. The reason we have such a large drop is because for those core competencies we pick up markers in the letters that indicate potential issues down the road. We are able to go down to 100 and then work down from there.
However, I think it's getting to know the pages, it is the interview process, picking the right team, the right board and asking the right questions. In essence, you smoke out, as it were, any issues and concerns in the interview process.
We also work very closely with Senate Protective Services in identifying any security issues and risks. It's a constant process in getting to know the pages. There has to be an open door process for the Black Rod to engage with the pages as they face their studies and other challenges throughout the year. But I can assure you that we're certainly very cognizant of that.
The other point I will make is the day they sign the contract at the end of training week and I spend time with them during training week when they sign the contract. The Clerk and I also take the oath of allegiance following that signing of the contract. We do a further ceremonial event later on in the fall, but it's very important that we link the signing of the contract to the oath of allegiance, what their mandate is, and the elephant in the room, that previous event, we do raise. As the Black Rod, I point to the door and advise them that if they have any intentions and are looking at something in the future that they're not divulging to us, then they should leave the program now.
Senator LeBreton: Thank you.
Senator Furey: I want to congratulate you on the great job you do with the page program. I believe all of my colleagues would agree that the quality of candidates selected is and continues to be outstanding. You are to be congratulated for that.
I think we've had this discussion before and I'm not sure if it was during your tenure or your predecessor's, but why are we restricting qualified candidates to the four universities in the National Capital Region? Why we not expanding that to other post-secondary institutions?
Mr. Singh: Thank you, Senator Furey. The reason for this is that we want to ensure that the page program, the actual employment, is complementary to the studies being taken. Given that we are currently in the National Capital Region, it is very difficult for us to employ someone from a different region and then also offer them employment at the same time.
The Black Rod works very diligently with each page to ensure that there's a good work-life balance in ensuring that the study component is well met. And that is something that is monitored by the Black Rod and Human Resources as well.
Senator Furey: I appreciate that, Mr. Singh, and I thank you for your comments. However, I would ask in future you look to other post-secondary institutions in the National Capital Region. If that's a restriction I can understand that geographically. I can't really understand why we don't include other post-secondary institutions, if it's just on the basis of what's being studied.
Mr. Peters: Senator, I appreciate that comment and it's something that we will look into.
Senator Furey: Thank you.
The Chair: If the chair might have the opportunity to add to that. There's always something that might be looked into, Black Rod, and that is a student anywhere across Canada in the 96 universities are able to do a transfer year. For example, if somebody is a student at Dalhousie in Halifax, arrangements can be made that they do that year of study at Carleton or Ottawa or someplace else for credit at their home university. That might help to deal with what Senator Furey is raising about not restricting spots to students doing their four or five years at Ottawa or Carleton.
Also, there are two other universities in Ottawa. There's the Dominican University College and St. Paul's University, but also of course we have a very sophisticated community college or a technical institute at Algonquin and others. It is a good point that maybe a little research could be done on it.
Senator Downe: I want to follow up on the point Senator LeBreton made. The security and the background checks and interviews are very important, but the key is — and you covered this briefly in your remarks but I just want to emphasize it, Black Rod — to be in touch with the individuals through their time in the Senate, what's going on in their lives, what are they hearing at university, what groups are they involved in and so on. I think that open-door policy may not have been there in the past to the degree it is now.
The other comment I want to make, you have done an excellent job and the people before you, Blair Armitage, when he was in the role on an ad hoc basis, in opening up the process across Canada. It has been my experience — I keep emphasizing this — that the young people are somewhat interested in the program when you explain it to them. They're not sure what it involves, but the parents are extremely interested when they hear about the $15,000 a year and they're highly motivated to get their young people to apply.
My point today is if you have the time you may want to speak individually to the senators who are not here today from the provinces and the territories that had no applicants last year to highlight the program to them and the opportunities for somebody from their area.
Like others, I send out tweets and notices about it, and people are interested but you have to work at it. Overall, though, it is far better than it was in the past and I thank all those involved for that.
Senator Wells: I wanted to do a follow-up on the comments made by Senator Furey and, of course, you, Speaker, on the exclusion of essentially all universities and educational institutions outside the four that were named. I know that Memorial University in St. John's has co-op programs that place students on work terms. For students who have an interest in governance, political science or any of the programs that are offered, this would be an ideal opportunity. To essentially have them excluded from our national institution bears a re-look for sure.
Mr. Peters: Thank you for that comment, senator.
Chair, certainly from my perspective, all ideas are on the table. With the creativity of the Human Resources team, there are opportunities that exist. I would assure you we will look into those and report back to this committee.
Senator Munson: I want to put on the record that, being an Ottawa senator — and I'm sure Senator LeBreton feels the same way — for this open discussion, Algonquin College and Cité collégial — I was at both places yesterday. They are vibrant spots with great students — thousands of them there. Those should be considered, as well. I don't see why they should be excluded. They're diploma-granting programs and they teach practical ways of life. Perhaps they should be involved in this.
The Chair: Thank you, senators. I am sure the Black Rod and his team will study the good suggestions that have been made.
We can turn to Item No. 5: Membership for the joint advisory working group on Canada 150. Honourable senators, Canada 150 is coming at us quickly.
Senator L. Smith: I guess I'm not sure where we are with the process. Do we have an existing group on the 150? Who are they?
Mr. O'Brien: We have an agreement with the House of Commons to create this joint group.
Senator L. Smith: Right.
Mr. O'Brien: They are suggesting five senators. I thought three from your side and two from Senator Furey's side.
Senator L. Smith: Senator Furey, have you had a chance to figure out a couple people from your side?
Senator Furey: Yes, but if we want to get together and talk about it, I have no problem, but I have two.
Senator L. Smith: I wouldn't mind doing that.
Senator Furey: Okay. We have two names for our side.
The Chair: We will table this and let's deal with it next week.
The art advisory working group is Item No. 6.
Charles Robert, Principal Clerk, Procedure and Chamber Operations, Senate of Canada: There are two items before the committee that were presented to you by the art advisory working group. The first has to do with an offer of a gift of a painting by Senator Nancy Ruth. It is a painting by Shirley Cheechoo and involves a landscape with a wolf and some rabbits. The senator bought it some years ago and has decided she would like to give it to the Senate to add to the collection that we have in this room.
The artwork was reviewed by the working group. They recommend that the gift should be received and accepted.
That's the first item.
The Chair: Procedurally, honourable senators, it is for this committee to concur with accepting a gift of art. Are there questions for Charles Robert?
Senator LeBreton: When the Senate as an institution accepts a gift like this, what are the tax implications? Is it a permanent gift?
The Chair: Thank you for raising that, because we have delved into this issue of whether the Senate is able to issue a receipt on gifts for tax purposes. Our legal counsel, who we congratulate on his commission, can you speak to this?
Michel Patrice, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, Senate of Canada: There's no tax implication. The Senate is not an organization that can issue a tax receipt for a donation. It is not entertained under the Income Tax Act.
Senator LeBreton: Was there a value placed on it? We can see here beautiful artwork in this room.
Mr. Patrice: I'm sure they're all valuable art pieces, but in terms of tax implication, in terms of the donor of the artwork, it has no tax benefit whatsoever.
But I don't know the value of the art piece itself.
Mr. Robert: The senator indicated when she bought the painting some 30 or 40 years ago, she paid just over $700 for it. I did research through Artnet through friends I have in Montreal, and there have been some items of her work that have come up on the market recently. The maximum price that has been paid for any work by her was just over $1,700. The lowest price that has been paid has been just over $850.
I think she's in the range where this piece might perhaps be worth $1,500, but you would have to test it with the market.
Senator Marshall: So how do we keep track of the artwork that we have? Who decides where it will be placed, and who does periodic checks to make sure that the pieces are still hanging where they're supposed to be?
Mr. Robert: There is an inventory that is kept. It is maintained by the Parliamentary Precinct Services. There is a review made from time to time to make sure that nothing has suddenly disappeared. That has not yet happened. We don't think it will happen.
For the parts that belong to the Crown collection, there's an inventory that usually takes place every year or every two years.
The Chair: I will mention that a recommendation was received through Lynn for an exhibition of the portrait of Queen Victoria that is in the Senate foyer. The steering committee respectfully declined the invitation to have that painting leave the building.
Item No. 2. Go ahead, Charles.
Mr. Robert: As senators must know, we are now in the centenary of the outbreak of the First World War. Some time ago, the War Museum contacted me to meet with an Anglo-Irish photographer who has been very interested in the First World War and has taken artistic photographs of the battle scenes throughout the geographic areas of the First World War — not simply the front in France, but also in Russia and the Middle East.
The purpose really was to demonstrate how battlefields have become lands of peace by photographing how nature has recovered the battle scenes that were so famous during the First World War. The intent behind that is to promote the ideas of peace through these large photographs that are meant to be displayed in public areas.
A year ago, the Palace of Westminster, if I remember correctly, displayed some of these artworks. Last spring in Paris, at the Senate and the gates of the Luxembourg Gardens, over 40 of the photographs were hung from the fence as part of the public art display.
Every year, in November, towards the anniversary of the Armistice, the Senate holds a ceremony to commemorate Canada's participation in various wars. The idea would be to display on this special occasion some of this photographer's artwork in the Hall of Honour during the week of that commemorative event. This is easily done because, as it happens, the War Museum had a display of this man's work several years ago, and they have within their inventory upward of 40 photographs of his work. We could choose, if we wish, up to 20 that could be displayed in the Hall of Honour for the period of one week.
The 20 easels that we would need could be commercially rented for $100 a day. There would be no damage done to the fabric of the building, and the artwork would be displayed. It is easily mounted. The vignettes are already prepared. It is just a question of whether there is a will to cooperate with the House of Commons — presumably we would have to do that, since we're talking about the Hall of Honour — to mount an exhibition, however temporary, to demonstrate Parliament's recognition of the anniversary.
The Chair: Any comments, honourable senators? I think it's a great initiative, given the fact that in the Senate Chamber we have paintings marking the Great War, the hundredth anniversary of which we are marking. By way of footnote, I would note that, for the Hall of Honour, we don't have to seek squatters' rights from the Senate. The Hall of Honour is space of the Senate. Obviously we enjoy collaborating with our friends in the other place, but I would recommend that this be a Senate initiative and that we are going to be using our Hall of Honour, which is why we had instituted the Thursday long parade that comes down through the Hall of Honour. This is a bicameral Parliament and we are in a central part of it.
Thank you. There's agreement on that.
Under ''other business'' — and I know we're about to conclude — I'm quite upset about what we have discovered recently relating to the Government Conference Centre. Some of our colleagues from this committee had paid personal visits to the Government Conference Centre as we were developing our suggestion that it was saving hundreds of millions of dollars for the chamber during the renovations of the Centre Block. On the fifth floor, those who went there went there will remember, we had identified the kitchen where a very important part of modern Canadian history took place. That's where Roy McMurtry, the Minister of Justice, Attorney General of Ontario; Roy Romanow, of Saskatchewan; and Jean Chrétien, the federal minister, met and salvaged, during that constitutional period, the Canada patriation of our Constitution. They guaranteed us that they would preserve this kitchen because of its historical importance. I trust those who were there with me remember that.
We were advised the other day that they have demolished the kitchen. It annoys me if nobody listens to us but other senators were there. Do you want to share with the senators what we learned last week? Public Works Canada sometimes doesn't listen to us the way I believe they should be listening to us.
Brigitte Desjardins, Director Real Property Planning, Senate of Canada: Good morning, honourable senators. I believe that when Ms. Chahwan, the assistant deputy minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, appeared before you last April, Senator Munson asked the question as to what was happening with the kitchen in the Government Conference Centre. She explained at the time that there was a flood on the upper floor, and that that area had been affected by the flood, and due to the fact that there is also asbestos in that building, they had to strip out some of the materials. The kitchen is no longer the kitchen that was there before the flood.
Senator Munson: Who are the ''theys''? Who are they? Was this something signed off on destroying this kitchen? If my kitchen was flooded, I'd get it fixed; I wouldn't destroy it.
Ms. Desjardins: It is the department that basically undertook to strip out the materials.
Senator Munson: Politics aside, this is historic. This was a part of Senator Tkachuk's life in Saskatchewan.
Ms. Desjardins: The material had to be removed.
Senator Tkachuk: Not a happy part of my life.
Senator Munson: This is pretty serious. What can be done now? Can there be some kind of plaque recreating that kitchen? A flood is a flood. This is serious business.
Ms. Desjardins: The department has proposed a commemorative plaque.
Senator Downe: It raises serious concerns, and it goes back to what the chair said originally when he had concerns about when we come back here, what space we'll have, and so on. You have, to your credit, red flagged this trust factor. We now have a prime example of what we are getting into with Public Works.
Setting aside the kitchen for a moment, the question is how do we protect ourselves as ironclad as we can on a go- forward basis? The purpose for going down there to the GCC, as we all know, is to save this massive amount of funds. If we end up with Public Works ignoring what we're suggesting, putting lavish accommodation for future use not of the Senate but of their own purposes for the building 18, 20 years hence, we're going to wear it. How do we protect Canadian taxpayers, our instructions and what we want and not have Public Works simply ignore what we're doing?
Having identified the problem, I would turn it over to the legal people to see what they can do to solidify these agreements before we go much farther down the road with this bunch. This is a prime example of what we're into. We're into a mess.
The Chair: Senators, I wanted to simply place the matter on the record. That's a good suggestion, Senator Downe. I know the Clerk will have a meeting with the assistant deputy minister of Public Works to express the views that have been shared publicly in this committee.
Thank you very much for your time.
Senator Downe: On behalf of the committee, I assume you or someone else will send a thank-you letter to Senator Nancy Ruth for her kind donation.
The Chair: Indeed.
Meeting adjourned.
(The committee adjourned.)