THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL ECONOMY, BUDGETS AND ADMINISTRATION
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, November 1, 2018
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met this day at 8:30 a.m., in public and in camera, pursuant to rule 12-7(1), for the consideration of financial and administrative matters.
Senator Sabi Marwah (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets, and Administration.
My name is Sabi Marwah and I have the privilege of serving as chair of this committee. For the benefit of those who are following us on the webcast or on the phone, I would ask each of the senators present to introduce themselves.
[Translation]
Senator Dawson: Good morning. Dennis Dawson, senator from Quebec.
Senator Forest: Éric Forest from the Gulf region, in Quebec.
[English]
Senator Mitchell: Grant Mitchell, senator from Alberta.
[Translation]
Senator Moncion: Lucie Moncion from Ontario.
[English]
Senator Plett: Senator Don Plett, Manitoba.
Senator Tannas: Scott Tannas, Alberta.
[Translation]
Senator Saint-Germain: Raymonde Saint-Germain from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Marshall: Elizabeth Marshall, Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator Tkachuk: David Tkachuk, Saskatchewan.
Senator Batters: Denise Batters, Saskatchewan, deputy chair.
Senator Munson: Jim Munson, Ontario.
The Chair: Thank you.
The first item on the agenda is the minutes from October 25. They are in your package. Are there any questions or changes?
If not, can I have a motion to adopt the minutes? It is moved by Senator Saint-Germain that the minutes be adopted. Agreed? Carried.
The next item is a report from the Joint Interparliamentary Council. I invite Colette Labrecque-Riel, Clerk Assistant and Director General, International and Interparliamentary Affairs Directorate to the witness table. I guess you are already there.
Senator Plett, you are there and you’re going to address us. Please, over to you.
Hon. Donald Neil Plett, Senator, Senate of Canada: Thank you very much, chair, and good morning, colleagues.
As the Senate co-chair on the Joint Interparliamentary Council, I am pleased to present the Joint Interparliamentary Council: Parliamentary Associations’ Activities and Expenditures Report for the 2017-18 fiscal year.
As senators know, this annual report details the activities and expenditures of the 13 parliamentary associations. You have already introduced Colette, chair. She is the clerk of the council and her team is responsible for producing this report.
I wish to provide you with a general overview of the work of the associations during the last fiscal year, as described in this report, after which I will be pleased to try to answer questions and Colette will be able to answer anything that I can’t.
During the 2017-18 fiscal year, the 13 parliamentary associations carried out 86 travel activities in 50 countries, and they welcomed 53 delegations from abroad, both in and outside of Ottawa. The number of travel activities has increased, as has the number of travelling participants per activity.
The total budget for parliamentary associations for 2017-18 was a little over $4.5 million, an increase of about $1 million over the previous three years. Total expenditures amounted to $4.1 million, of which $1.4 million went towards contributions or membership fees and $2.7 million was spent on actual activities.
These expenditures represent a 91 per cent budget utilization with unspent funds amounting to $424,095. When compared to the previous fiscal year, these expenditures represent a 28 per cent increase, which was expected given the increased budget.
In terms of the Senate’s participation in association activities, colleagues will note that 103 delegates were senators, representing 31 per cent of the total of the parliamentarians travelling. Of those 103 senators, while it is not provided in the report, I can confirm that 24 were from the ISG, 46 were Conservative and 33 were Senate Liberals.
Finally, those 103 senator spots were filled by 38 different senators. As for funding, given that the Senate provides 30 per cent of the funding, 31 per cent participation is well in line with that funding.
For detailed information regarding each of the 13 associations, I refer you to section 3 of the report. Information for participants, transportation, accommodation, per diems, hospitality and working meals, miscellaneous and finally registration fees is provided for each activity conducted during that fiscal year.
In conclusion, chair, parliamentary associations’ expenditures and activities during the 2017-18 fiscal year show an increase over the previous year and reflect one of the most active periods compared to the last five years.
I remind colleagues that this annual report, once reviewed here, is presented in the Senate Chamber and then published to the web. Thus, this information is made available to the public.
That, chair, concludes my remarks and we are now prepared to take any questions.
The Chair: Are there any questions for Senator Plett and Colette?
Senator Marshall: First, I thought the report was excellent. It’s well laid out and it was easy to read. I have three questions.
First, on page 3, the five-year review, did we see that? Can you refresh my memory?
Colette Labrecque-Riel, Clerk Assistant and Director General, International and Interparliamentary Affairs: The subcommittee didn’t conduct a five-year report. As senators may know, the council is mandated to conduct a review every five years. A subcommittee was struck at the beginning of this Parliament and presented its report last March. The Joint Interparliamentary Council is still reviewing those recommendations and actioning some of them — some of them which it may not wish to action. It remains a working document.
Many of those recommendations you will see come before this committee in terms of, for example, one of the recommendations was to update the financial guide that we use to govern the expenditures of associations. It is being updated and will be reviewed by the council and brought to this committee for approval.
The report itself is very much a working document for the council at this point, but, as I said, many products stemming from that report will come before this committee.
Senator Marshall: That’s reassuring because I couldn’t remember seeing it and that’s because we haven’t seen it, but we will receive it?
Ms. Labrecque-Riel: This is a question for the council. Whether or not it wishes to simply share the report when it’s done its consideration, the council will make that determination shortly.
Senator Marshall: Okay. I’ll take that up with Senator Plett. Will this be followed up with a request for additional money? There was additional money approved last year or the year before.
Senator Plett: We ask for money every year. This is the report of what we did and it’s not relevant to our asking for additional money.
Senator Marshall: It stands on its own?
Senator Plett: Yes.
Senator Marshall: Lastly, for some of the associations, when you look at expenses, the five-year summary, expenses as activities are broken down but then there are contributions. Are contributions what we pay as fees?
Senator Plett: No, contributions are what we pay to belong to IPU or different organizations.
Senator Marshall: That’s what I thought. Okay. Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: I have a question about the budget. The report is excellent. It is very clear. Congratulations! I was looking at the amount of travel done by senators in 2014-15. Fewer senators travelled in 2017-18. But there is still a big difference from the total budget. Is that related to the fact that more travel was done abroad? Does that explain it?
Ms. Labrecque-Riel: There were a number of factors. Senator Plett alluded to them in his comments earlier. We had an increase in the number of activities undertaken by associations. They participated in more activities and travelled more. In addition, they increased the number of participants in every activity. So the average number of participants is also higher.
Associations, over the course of the previous fiscal year, had their budget increased, which explains the big difference between this fiscal year and the previous one. The budget had an additional $1 million, which represents a high percentage in terms of available funds. Associations used those funds to increase the number of activities abroad. They also received more delegations in Canada, but not necessarily in Ottawa. They increased the number of participants per activity.
Senator Forest: The good news is that we still remained within the budget and the allocated funding.
Ms. Labrecque-Riel: Associations and the council never exceed their budget envelope. That is simply not an option.
[English]
The Chair: Any other questions for Senator Plett?
Senator Marshall: Could I just follow up, not for Senator Plett. The five-year review that Colette answered my question on, I would like to see that when it’s completed. I don’t know if that’s a decision of JIC or of Internal Economy, but I would be interested in reviewing that.
The Chair: I will follow up with Senator Plett after the meeting and put it in the minutes.
Senator Plett: I will make sure that’s on our agenda for our next council meeting, Senator Marshall.
Senator Marshall: Thank you.
The Chair: Any other questions for Senator Plett or Colette? If not, we need a motion to table this report in the Senate.
The motion reads: That the report from the Joint Interparliamentary Council: Parliamentary Associations’ Activities and Expenditures for fiscal year 2017-18 be tabled in the Senate.
Is it agreed to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried.
The next item is a verbal update on the work of the Subcommittee on Human Resources.
[Translation]
Senator Saint-Germain: It is my pleasure to present to you, on behalf of the subcommittee members, the situation following the decision made by the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration to adopt the first report of the Subcommittee on Human Resources concerning mandatory training on harassment prevention. The Senate hired the firm ADR Education to provide training after looking into the possibilities with various companies that specialize in that area.
We kept two companies for comparison’s sake. Finally, the ADR Education firm was hired, mainly because of its expertise and the better value it offered us. Every session will last three hours. The first sessions with Senate managers took place on October 26 and will continue on November 2, tomorrow, and on November 16. There will also be sessions for all senators, subject to today’s passing of a motion in the house that the chair will put forward.
The first sessions for senators will be held on Tuesday, November 20, in the late afternoon. Sessions will be organized by caucus and by group. We will also organize a second session for the senators who won’t be able to attend the November 20 session. That session will be held on November 27 and will be mixed — in other words, bilingual — and different representatives or caucus members and groups will be together, unless the number is high enough for us to be able to organize one or two simultaneous sessions.
The training is similar to the one provided by the House of Commons, but it has been customized for the Senate and senators in our specific context. The training is interactive, and that is part of the customization. There will be a certain number of scenarios that are adapted or presented at the core of those sessions, but it will also be possible for senators to suggest scenarios and to participate in them in a concrete manner.
Training for employees, in compliance with the decision of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, on the recommendation of the subcommittee in its first report, will follow as of January 2019. It should be finished by the end of March 2019. Afterwards, there will be an initial session for new employees and new senators at a rate that may vary from one to two times a year, depending on the numbers.
That concludes the first part of my report concerning the training.
I would like to specify that the Senate wants to be an exemplary employer and, more specifically, promote a healthy and positive work environment. The training is intended to help people acquire skills and knowledge needed to effectively identify — we are talking about prevention here — potential situations of harassment at work in all its forms. In our capacity as leaders and parliamentarians of an institution that considers itself to be democratic and exemplary, this training will help us play an even more positive and effective role in the maintenance of a workplace that is really conducive to development and effectiveness at all levels. Thank you.
[English]
The Chair: Any questions for Senator Saint-Germain? If not, thank you very much. I shall be tabling that in the Senate today.
Senator Saint-Germain: Yes.
The Chair: Honourable senators, there’s one issue under other matters that I would like to update you on, and that’s the request for a security briefing that some of the senators raised at last week’s meeting.
In consultation with the Speaker, it has been arranged that Chief Superintendent Jane MacLatchy, the Director of PPS, will appear on November 22 for an in camera session to provide further information in relation to three incidents. In addition, His Honour has agreed to provide this committee with a security briefing annually or on any material matters as they arise. I hope this addresses the concerns from senators.
Senator Tkachuk: Yes, you should thank His Honour for that.
The Chair: I will convey my thanks.
Senator Batters: I have another matter. I didn’t think it was a good time to bring it up during the very capable report that the Joint Interparliamentary Council had today, but Tuesday night there was a Canada-NATO Parliamentary Group meeting. Some of us here attended that meeting, and I’m wondering if Colette Labrecque-Riel, who is with us today and who is Clerk Assistant of the Joint Interparliamentary Council could return to our committee next week so that we could ask her some questions about that.
The Chair: Is Colette still here? She’s not.
Senator Dawson: The JIC will be studying that question next Tuesday, so she will be up to date. As an organization, the subject was brought up at the JIC meeting yesterday but there was no program of witnesses. So next Wednesday there will be an analysis of the issue by the JIC.
Senator Batters: Great. Then she will be up to date for questions here.
The Chair: Let’s say she comes on Thursday, but if there is further work to be done, let’s wait for the work to be completed and then she can come to update us, depending on what stage it is at next week. I don’t know, I’m not aware of the issue at all.
Senator Plett: I would second that motion, chair. We ran out of time entirely yesterday. We very much wanted to discuss the issue yesterday and, of course, there were bells ringing in the other place, so we needed to adjourn at five o’clock after we had just gotten into it. It was actually an eleventh hour kind of thing. We don’t meet every week. We meet typically once a month, but we decided to have a special meeting next week to discuss, as Senator Dawson says, only that issue.
Now, we may have a resolution, but I think if we’re wanting a report from Colette, I insisted very strongly that we could not wait until after the break to deal with it at JIC, so we aren’t. We’re doing it the first available opportunity, but simply Colette giving us a report would be sufficient if it was done the week after the break.
The Chair: So week after the break is fine with everybody? I will tell Pascale to make sure Colette appears the first week after the break. If not, that brings us to the end of other matters and we can go in camera.
(The committee continued in camera.)