Proceedings of the Standing Committee on
Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration
Issue No. 5 - Evidence - September 29, 2016
OTTAWA, Thursday, September 29, 2016
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, pursuant to rule 12-7(1) of the Rules of the Senate, met this day at 9 a.m. for the consideration of financial and administrative matters.
Senator Leo Housakos (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Colleagues, good morning. I'd like to start off by welcoming everyone back from our summer break, and I look forward to continuing our productive work.
I also want to welcome to the committee Senator Wallace, our newest addition. Welcome to the committee, senator.
I want to welcome Senator Mockler, who is replacing Senator Batters this morning. I also see Senator Cowan, who is replacing, I believe, Senator Jaffer. You're always welcome, and glad to see you.
We'll get right to business with Item 1, Adoption of the Minutes of Proceedings of the meeting of June 16, 2016.
Has everyone had an opportunity to review those minutes? Do you have any questions?
There are no questions. Does anyone want to move a motion passing those minutes? It's moved by Senator Munson, seconded by Senator Cordy.
Any objections? So they're passed.
Item 2. Colleagues, we have an introduction to Internal Economy of our new HR director. We announced the hiring a few weeks ago in public, but we have with us today Mr. Luc Presseau.
Mr. Presseau has over 20 years of leadership experience in human resources management. Throughout his career, he has been recognized as a strong leader and a skilled negotiator with an ability to find solutions.
Before joining the public sector, he led HR functions in health care and education, including Director of HR at Algonquin College; Director of HR at the Religious Hospitallers of Saint Joseph's in Cornwall; and Vice President, Human Resources Development and Employee Service, at the Hawkesbury and District General Hospital.
More recently, Luc was the Director of Workplace Management, Data and Systems Branch, with the Parks Canada Agency. In this role he provided leadership and advice on significant issues such as the Deficit Reduction Action Plan in 2012, as well as the Phoenix pay system implementation.
Luc is a Certified Human Resources Professional and holds an MBA in Executive Management from Royal Roads University, Victoria, British Columbia.
He was also thoroughly vetted by our subcommittee on HR, which unanimously recommended him.
I welcome him to his new post and look forward to working with him. I thought it would be a good opportunity for him to introduce himself to steering.
[Translation]
Welcome, Mr. Presseau.
Luc Presseau, Director of Human Resources, Human Resources Branch, Senate of Canada: Thank you for the warm welcome.
[English]
I accept this role with great honour and humility. I thank you for entrusting me to carry out this important mandate. I would like to thank all members of the Advisory Working Group and the selection committee that put me through my paces to get here.
My objective is to make a meaningful contribution to the discussion on rethinking human resources in this changing environment and examining ways to better adapt it to the needs of senators as we move forward.
My duties are clear, as set out by the Advisory Working Group, and centre on responding to the unique needs of senators.
My experience, as you have clearly stated, is outside of government generally. The vast majority of my time was spent in the semi-private sector, in hospitals and in education. I hope that this helps me bring a different approach to a variety of interesting challenges.
I'm very lucky and pleased to have a strong team around me, who are experienced professionals that are helping me navigate these hallways. I'm very pleased to be here, and I appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the administration of the Senate. Thank you.
The Chair: Any questions or comments, colleagues?
Senator Marshall: The Phoenix system has been in the news a lot lately. Have we been having any problems with the Phoenix system?
Nicole Proulx, Chief Corporate Services Officer and Clerk of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, Senate of Canada: Phoenix has been a challenge for all organizations that deal with it and that had to convert to this new system. In the Senate, we have had some challenges, but we've been very good, if I may say so, to address them.
There have been salary advances provided in situations where we could see that there would be issues. Also, to assist and mitigate risk, we have hired an additional pay person to help, and we intend to keep that position. Actually, we're looking for an extended period of two years just to make sure we get through all the wrinkles as we move along through the new system as well for the finance and human resources system.
In general, it's being managed. The pay staff, they're checking to see that everybody is getting their pay, and if not, then looking up and making sure that no one is in hardship.
[Translation]
Senator Smith: What would be your biggest strength in your new role?
[English]
Mr. Presseau: I would say my biggest strength is probably the ability to find creative solutions to problems, and probably closely linked to building relationships.
As you know, when you negotiate collective agreements, when you have important issues such as the ones that were referred to in DRAP in 2012, the ability to build a relationship with the employees' representatives and any other stakeholders is key. I would suggest that those would be the two areas.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you once again, Mr. Presseau. We wish you good luck in your new role. We want you to know that we are always at your disposal.
[English]
I want to welcome Senator Eaton, who is replacing Senator Lang.
I also want to welcome Senator Mitchell, the Government Whip, who has been embracing us with his presence at every meeting.
We will go right to Item 3, which is the Fifth Report of the Subcommittee on Budgets, Post-Activity Expenditure Reports of the Senate Committees 2014-15, and I will turn the floor over to Senator Tannas to give a report on that.
Senator Tannas: Colleagues, I have the honour to table the Fifth Report of the Subcommittee on Committee Budgets.
You will recall that last session the Internal Economy Committee agreed that the post-activity expenditure reports of Senate committees should be tabled in the Senate in order to increase transparency and the public's understanding of committee budgets and expenditures.
As the chair of the subcommittee, I am often asked to explain why, when presenting our recommendations on the release of funds for committees, committee budgets appear to be quite high.
It is worth reminding the committee that it is well established that although we normally approve funding for all committee members to travel, full participation is not practical, rarely occurs, and that our committee clerks work diligently to ensure that they use every opportunity to reduce fare costs and unnecessary expenses.
So although we recommend budgets that seem high, we also know that actual expenses are much less than the approved amounts and any surplus funds are clawed back and returned to the central committee budget upon completion of these trips.
Post-activity reports are an important tool in allowing our committees to report back to CIBA on the results of their trips, both in terms of what objectives were met as a result of their travel, along with providing a final accounting of their expenditures.
Post-activity reports are normally prepared for review by each committee chair and deputy chair a few months after the completion of travel to allow sufficient time for all expenses to be submitted for review. Once all expenditures have been accounted for, committee chairs are asked to review and explain any variances that might exist between the amounts approved in their budgets and their actual post-activity expenditures.
Committees also provide details on the objectives set out for their trip, along with the key results that were achieved. Once reviewed and attested to by the committee chair and the deputy chair, these reports are submitted to your subcommittee for further review.
In 2015, however, this process of review was interrupted by the October election. Although the information had been collected, analyzed and reviewed by each individual committee prior to the dissolution, it was not possible for the Subcommittee on Committee Budgets to report the information to you prior to the general election.
Our subcommittee was not struck again until March 2016 and was dealt a very busy spring agenda, with multiple requests for committee budgets and other questions that were put before the committee, such as the role of Communications working with committees and the question of senators' staff travel.
Our report today contains all of the post-activity reports from the 2014-15 fiscal year, and the last three or four paragraphs essentially acknowledge that this report is a little late. Although we did our best to review the extensive data in the spring, it was not possible to bring this report to you until now.
Your subcommittee has now carefully reviewed the reports from nine committees, totalling 20 different trips that occurred in 2014-15 and report as follows: We were pleased to see that each committee identified the objectives and results of the activity as well as accounting for their expenditures. It is clear that committees are demonstrating prudent stewardship of public funds, and as we indicated, expenditures were significantly below the allocated budgets.
If one looks at the trips collectively, the total amount approved for committee budgets in 2014-15 was $1,942,684. The expenditures amounted to $845,574 or 43 per cent of the approved budgets. Therefore, the surplus funds totalled $1,097,110, or 56 per cent of the amounts approved, and these surplus funds were eventually clawed back and returned to the central budget for committees.
The details of each committee's budget and expenditures are included in the appendix to the fifth report, and copies of the appendices have been provided to the clerk. Pursuant to a decision of March 27, 2014, they will be tabled in the Senate as reports of the Committee for Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration. Once tabled, the report, along with each committee's individual expenditures, will be posted on the CIBA website.
We are confident, colleagues, that providing this information in this format is an important step in the accountability and transparency of the activities of our committees, and we welcome your feedback.
Senator Wells: Thank you, Senator Tannas. I have no issue with any of the numbers and I think the committee is doing a good job.
Can you talk about any of the timing or scheduling issues, getting late requests sometimes? I think committees get late notice of the possibility to travel or the late opportunity. Can you talk a little bit about the timing of requests and the turnaround time that your subcommittee has?
Senator Tannas: I suspect you're referring to trips this fall?
Senator Wells: Yes.
Senator Tannas: We have had some issues around the timing specifically because we had a large bunch of requests that came as a result of the new Parliament and we've been working our way through those, never wanting to go over budget or over-allocate funds. We wanted to keep ourselves within the envelope, so we wanted to approve trips as we saw money coming back in that were waiting for funds to be freed up. That's about the only thing I can say about potential delays.
But frankly, even that, I don't think there are any instances where there has been a last-minute approval on our part. If there have been some late notices given on committee travel, we'll look into it and see if that was our problem and our lack of response — I don't believe it was — or whether perhaps there was something on the committee side. We'll do that and I'll undertake to report back to you.
Senator Wells: Thank you. I wasn't suggesting there was any deficiency on the subcommittee side.
Do you meet regularly or on an as-needed basis?
Senator Tannas: As needed.
The Chair: Are there any other questions or comments, colleagues? If not, can I have someone move the motion that this post-activity report and its appendix be tabled in the Senate as the Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets, and Administration?
Senator Tkachuk: So moved.
The Chair: Moved by Senator Tkachuk, seconded by Senator Marshall. I assume we're all in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Colleagues, Item 4 on our agenda is the report from the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. They are travelling this week, so Senator Runciman isn't available to make a presentation. Furthermore, Senator Batters and Senator Jaffer also expressed to me an interest that they want to discuss this issue. So with everyone's agreement, can we defer this item to the next Internal Economy meeting?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Item 5 is an update on the dispute resolution process. I have asked our law clerk, Michel Patrice, to give us a brief overview on where it's at.
Michel Patrice, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel and Chief Parliamentary Precinct Services Officer, Senate of Canada: Essentially, it's to confirm or say that the RCMP has finished their review of the named senators in the AG report, and everything has been closed and no investigation is warranted. So that is in relation to the RCMP review of those files.
In terms of the seven former senators, our outside counsel is currently gathering the required information to prepare the Statements of Claim in terms of those seven senators. Obviously those senators still have access to the arbitration process should they choose to use it.
The Chair: Any questions or comments, colleagues, on this issue?
Senator Tkachuk: You're talking about the seven senators who still owe money?
Mr. Patrice: That's right.
Senator Tkachuk: Even though they may not have taken advantage of the initial arbitration process, they still have an opportunity because the possibility of charges has been removed?
Mr. Patrice: Exactly.
Senator Tkachuk: That's a good thing. I was hoping that would be the case.
Senator Tannas: Have any of the seven senators gone through the process with Justice Binnie?
Mr. Patrice: Not at this point, no.
Senator Tannas: Do we have any indication that any of them are refusing or just totally —
Mr. Patrice: I have the sense that some will not want to use that process.
Senator Wallace: So with each of the seven former senators who did not pay as requested, the decision has been made that action will be commenced against them? I took from what Michel had to say, the pleadings and the Statements of Claim and so on are now being prepared?
Mr. Patrice: That's right, as our outside counsel is gathering information to prepare those statements.
Senator Wallace: Any sense when the actions may be commenced?
Mr. Patrice: Not at this time. I could not say in terms of a timeline, but it will be reported back to steering before these are initiated and presumably to Internal Economy.
Senator Mitchell: I may have missed this in previous meetings because I haven't been to all of them, but I'll just ask a question for information. Has any assessment been made as to whether or not it pays to do this, or are the legal costs maybe so prohibitive that it's not worth doing?
Mr. Patrice: It's part of the mandate that has been given to the outside counsel.
Senator Mitchell: And what do we expect with that?
Mr. Patrice: I won't commit to a timeline because they are still in the process of gathering the required information and documentation for it.
Senator Campbell: Before we go forward on this, will we be advised what the expected costs are going to be?
The Chair: There will be a full report.
Senator Campbell: Secondly, will we be going after their estates when they die?
The Chair: There will be a full report —
Senator Campbell: It's a legitimate question. We're going after them. No one is a spring chicken anymore. Are we prepared to go that far?
The Chair: Very legitimate questions, and those are questions we are seeking guidance from our outside legal counsel on. Before a decision is taken, the advice from legal counsel will be brought to Internal Economy for a full decision, rest assured.
Senator Downe: I was wondering if you could advise what the cost has been to date for outside legal counsel pertaining to these seven senators.
Mr. Patrice: I will gather that information and come back to you.
The Chair: I will move to Item 7, because if I understand correctly, for Item 6, the Update by HR Advisory Working Group, Senator Tannas is going to be making a request to go in camera.
Could you explain why?
Senator Tannas: Colleagues, some of the narrative that I want to present touches on human resource matters within the administration, and it just makes sense to have that discussion in camera.
The Chair: Colleagues are in agreement. What I would like to do is proceed to Item 7 under our public format and move Item 6 after that, and we'll go in camera if there's agreement.
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you, colleagues.
Item 7, Information on Decisions by Steering.
I do apologize. This document was provided to you just now because steering did not have an opportunity to meet last week or a few days earlier, our traditional Tuesday slot. We met at 7:30 a.m. this morning; thus they could not distribute it until it was approved.
It is not a long document. I will give everyone a few minutes to peruse it. If you have any questions, I would be more than happy to answer them. I apologize again for the delayed distribution of it.
Colleagues, is it all right that we proceed to questions?
Senator Marshall: The four items on the second page all reference over $100,000 or exceeding $100,000. Could you give some indication as to how much each of those exceeds $100,000? Are we talking about $1 million or $500,000? What dollar value are we talking about for those four items?
Ms. Proulx: There are some that refer to IT. For IT right now, it's just actually to secure laptops and material for possible new senators. The proposal is around $150,000.
Mr. Patrice: In relation to the other ones, none of them actually exceed $100,000, but we expect that some may exceed. For example, regarding the furniture contract, we are asking for an extension for a year to go under the current contract, because we're reviewing our requirements in terms of furniture because of the upcoming move to the Government Conference Centre, and also the Chambers Building; but at this time they don't exceed $100,000. We expect that they will exceed $100,000, because there may be the need for $140,000 in terms of new furniture.
In terms of the paper contract, right now it's $66,000. We expect that over the course of the year, it will exceed that. That's why we're going for another competitive process for five years.
For the cleaning products, over a five-year period of time, we expect that the expenditure will be $125,000, so $25,000 per year.
Senator Marshall: For the furniture, are you expecting a lot more than $100,000? Are we looking at a half a million dollars?
Mr. Patrice: For this year, I believe the estimate is about $140,000, because we're getting offices in the East Block that used to be for the House of Commons. We'll have to put furniture in those offices.
Senator Marshall: This will be a combination of senators' offices and administration offices?
Mr. Patrice: It's mostly senators' offices, frankly.
Senator Downe: I have no problem, given that explanation, for the extension over $100,000, but I think it would be wise to cap it. Because I heard nothing over $200,000, my view would be over $100,000 and up to $200,000 max.
The Chair: We can easily do that if the committee so wishes.
Senator Manning: Senator Downe and I are on the same wavelength.
The Chair: Great minds think alike.
I have a motion to cap the expenditures on these particular issues to a maximum of $200,000.
Any other questions, colleagues?
Are there any other items before we go in camera on the HR Advisory Working Group? If there aren't, I will take a minute to go in camera.
Senator Tannas: Before we go in camera, I would like to thank Linda Dodd, on behalf of all of us, for the work that she did as the interim HR director.
Linda, thank you very much.
(The committee continued in camera.)