Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Agriculture and
Forestry
Issue 1 - Evidence of November 18, 1999
OTTAWA, Thursday, November 18, 1999
The Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry met this day at 9:07 a.m. to organize the activities of the committee.
[English]
Mr. Blair Armitage, Clerk of the Committee: Honourable senators, as clerk of the committee, and conforming to rule 88 of the Rules of the Senate, it is my responsibility to preside over the election of a chairman to this committee.
I am ready to accept nominations to that effect.
Senator Fairbairn: I nominate Senator Gustafson to be chairman of this committee.
Mr. Armitage: Are there any other nominations?
Not seeing any, it was moved by the Honourable Senator Fairbairn that the Honourable Senator Gustafson be chairman of this committee.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Mr. Armitage: I declare the motion carried.
I invite the Honourable Senator Gustafson to take the Chair.
Senator Leonard J. Gustafson (Chairman) in the Chair.
The Chairman: I will not belabour you with a long speech, but thank you, honourable senators.
The next order of business is the election of a deputy chairman. Do we have a motion?
Senator Spivak: I move that Senator Fairbairn be deputy chairman of the committee.
The Chairman: If there are no other nominations, is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I declare the motion carried.
The third order of business relates to the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure, also known as the steering committee. I understand that that can be appointed by the deputy chairman and myself.
Senator Stratton: I move:
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be composed of the Chair, the Deputy Chair and one other member of the committee to be designated after the usual consultation;
That the subcommittee be empowered to make decisions on behalf of the committee with respect to its agenda, to invite witnesses and schedule hearings; and
That the subcommittee report its decisions to the committee.
The Chairman: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I declare the motion carried.
The next order of business relates to the printing of our proceedings. Do we have a motion?
Senator Stratton: I move:
That the committee print 160 copies of its proceedings and that the Chair be authorized to adjust this number to meet demand.
Mr. Armitage: We have a standing requirement for about 154 copies of the proceedings of committee, and another six for my own archives. The motion gives the chairman the authority to adjust the number according to demand. Because we have on-demand printing, we do not need to speculate high to ensure that we have enough copies. We should speculate low, to ensure that we do not have too many left over, and let the chair meet demand.
Senator Spivak: In the House of Commons, I understand have they gone totally electronic; in other words, they do not print any committee proceedings. Is that correct?
Mr. Armitage: That is right.
Senator Spivak: Are we moving in that direction?
Mr. Armitage: We are exploring that issue. I am supposed to meet this month, on behalf of the directorate, with an advisory council of librarians across Canada to listen to what they have to say about their experience with the House of Commons policy. Early indications are that, because they are no longer providing printed copies of proceedings, the House of Commons is no longer receiving the kind of exposure in the libraries they once had.
Senator Spivak: I do not know if this is the proper forum in which to raise this issue, but I will raise it in any event. I have been told by various people that it is difficult to access the Senate transcripts of its committees. It is not easy, I can tell you that.
Mr. Armitage: The entire Web site for Parliament Hill is being revised and should be up and running within a matter of days or weeks. The issue to which you refer was one of the largest they had to deal with.
The Chairman: Did someone move that item on the agenda?
Mr. Armitage: Item No. 4 was moved by Senator Stratton.
The Chairman: Do we have a mover for Item No. 5, which relates to the authority to hold meetings?
Senator Spivak: I move:
That, pursuant to Rule 89, the Chair be authorized to hold meetings, to receive and authorize the printing of the evidence when a quorum is not present, provided that a representative of the government and a representative from the opposition are present.
The Chairman: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I declare the motion carried.
May I have a mover for Item No. 6 on the agenda.
Senator St. Germain: Honourable senators, I move:
That, pursuant to Rule 104, the Chair be authorized to report expenses incurred by the Committee during the last session.
The Chairman: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I declare the motion carried.
Next, we need a motion regarding research staff.
Senator Stratton: I move:
That the Committee ask the Library of Parliament to assign research officers to the Committee;
That the Chair be authorized to seek authority from the Senate to engage the services of such counsel and technical, clerical and other personnel as may be necessary for the purpose of the Committee's examination and consideration of such bills, subject matters of bills and estimates as are referred to it.
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to retain the services of such experts as may be required by the work of the Committee; and
That the Chair, on behalf of the Committee, direct the research staff in the preparation of studies, analyzes, summaries and draft reports.
The Chairman: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I declare the motion carried.
May I have a mover for Item No. 8 on the agenda.
Senator Spivak: Honourable senators, I move:
That, pursuant to section 32 of the Financial Administration Act, authority to commit funds be conferred on the Chair or, in the Chair's absence, the Deputy Chair; and
That, pursuant to section 34 of the Financial Administration Act, and Guideline 3:05 of Appendix II of the Rules of the Senate, authority for certifying accounts payable by the Committee be conferred individually on the Chair, the Deputy Chair, and the Clerk of the Committee.
The Chairman: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I declare the motion carried.
May I have a mover for Item No. 9, which deals with travel.
Senator St. Germain: Honourable senators, I move:
That the committee empower the steering committee to designate, as required, one or more members of the committee and/or such staff as may be necessary to travel on assignment on behalf of the committee; and
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to:
1) determine whether any member of the committee is on "official business" for the purposes of paragraph 8(3)(a) of the Senators Attendance Policy, published in the Journals of the Senate on Wednesday, June 3, 1998; and
2) consider any member of the Committee to be on "official business" if that member is: (a) attending a function, event or meeting related to the work of the committee; or (b) making a presentation related to the work of the committee.
The Chairman: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I declare the motion carried.
The next item relates to travelling and living expenses for witnesses. I need to have the following motion moved:
That, pursuant to the Senate guidelines for witnesses expenses, the Committee may reimburse reasonable travelling and living expenses for one witness from any one organization and payment will take place upon application, but that the Chair be authorized to approve expenses for a second witness should there be exceptional circumstances.
Did you wish to speak about that motion, Mr. Armitage?
Mr. Armitage: I was explaining to Senator Gustafson that the Senate is looking for ways to reduce overall expenses. In particular, it has identified expenses of witnesses coming before committees. The policy as passed by Internal Economy is that no more than two members per organization have their expenses paid. However, each committee is being asked to consider, at its organization meeting, making it one member per organization but authorizing the chair, should he or she feel the situation warrants a second person, to approve expenses for a second person.
Senator St. Germain: The present policy is two people; correct?
Mr. Armitage: That is correct.
Senator Oliver: What kind of money are you looking at, per year, for an extra person? It sounds like a small number to me.
Mr. Armitage: It is larger than it ever has been. In this last year, it spiked well above expectations. Our global budget was in the neighbourhood of $75,000 to $80,000, and we are expecting expenses, even with the prolonged prorogation and the summer adjournment, of over $100,000.
Senator Oliver: That is just for witnesses?
Mr. Armitage: That is correct. That amount is for all committees.
Senator Oliver: What percentage of your agriculture budget is for witnesses?
Mr. Armitage: We do not budget for witnesses any more. Our expenses for this committee were extraordinarily high compared with our past patterns. In fact, it was about triple what we normally spend on witnesses because we held extensive hearings both on rBST and on farm income. The groups that were involved in those two issues were not well endowed with financial resources, and the committee agreed to bring in quite a number of them at its expense.
Senator Oliver: My view, Mr. Chairman, is that the most important work of the Senate is done in committees. The good work of committees can only become better if you have quality witnesses. In my opinion, we will limit ourselves if we agree to pay the expenses of only one witness when, in fact, there may be three from whom the committee may need to hear. The rule is foolish, and one that does not do justice to what the Senate should be doing.
The Chairman: That is a good point, especially in the Senate Agriculture Committee. We have all heard about the crisis situation. I have received letters on genetically modified foods; I suspect that we will have a busy winter.
Another problem is that farm groups that like to appear usually have a broad base of representatives to put forward as witnesses.
Senator Stratton: Where possible, we can have one witness. There will be instances where we must show some cooperation with respect to the budget; if at all possible, we should follow the guidelines. I understand the predicament in which we find ourselves. An organization usually wants to send two witnesses but, wherever we can, we should be trying to follow the order of the Senate to bring just one witness before the committee.
Senator St. Germain: This order gives the chairman the flexibility to bring in a second witness. It is up to the chairman to decide that matter. I think what is before us is more like a motherhood statement than a hard and fast rule -- or am I misreading it?
Senator Fairbairn: No, I think that is fine. There are occasions when we have had groups come here with five witnesses, and that is probably not necessary.
Senator Oliver: Would you pay for five witnesses?
Mr. Armitage: No; only for two. I let them know in advance.
Senator Fairbairn: That has not changed, then.
The Chairman: I do not know how this applies to other committees, but it certainly does apply to the Agriculture Committee. Many of the witnesses who come here reside in Ottawa. For example, the Federation of Agriculture or the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool might bring in one witness from the prairies and that witnesses will be accompanied by a couple of people who work out of offices here in Ottawa.
Mr. Armitage: It is targeted at the interest groups that do not have funds, so that they will not bring their chief executive officer and senior policy person at the expense of the Senate.
Senator Spivak: This means that the chair must look at ability to pay, where necessary, and that is great. However, does that also mean that the chair has the ability to authorize expenses for three people?
Mr. Armitage: No. That would be beyond the policy of the Senate.
Senator Stratton: I so move the motion, Mr. Chairman.
[Translation]
Senator Gill: Perhaps you have already addressed the issue, but when an important matter of interest to the regions is under consideration, I would imagine that it is the committee, and not the witnesses, that does the travelling.
If, for example, an issue arises that concerns the Prairie provinces, why should residents of this region have to travel, when the committee could just as well do it?
I do not know if this relates to the motion on the table, but often, we get a better feel for a situation when we travel to the region as such. I do not know if there is a connection. I would imagine that it is customary for committees to do this kind of travelling.
[English]
The Chairman: That is a good point. In fact, we did that with the Canadian Wheat Board bill and it worked well. We held meetings in six different cities. It worked out well. The response was good.
Senator Spivak: However, that does not save money.
Senator St. Germain: No. In fact, it costs more.
The Chairman: It is much more effective.
Senator Spivak: Yes, it is. Perhaps the rule could be changed so that the committee members could use their points to travel, because no one ever uses up all their points. I do not think I have used all my points since I have been in the Senate. If we could use our travel points on occasion to travel, that would really help matters.
Mr. Armitage: As an employee of the Senate, I have been directed not to budget that way.
Senator Spivak: I understand that. I am just offering that idea, if they are looking to save money, as an alternative to cutting down on witnesses. However, of course, they budget for those extra points.
Mr. Armitage: That is right. It costs money. This way, it is more transparent.
Senator Spivak: I understand what you are saying.
The Chairman: Is there any further discussion on Item No. 10?
In that case, is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I declare the motion carried.
Item No. 11 concerns electronic media coverage for public meetings.
Senator St. Germain: I move:
That the Chair be authorized to seek permission from the Senate to permit coverage by electronic media of its public proceedings with the least possible disruption of its hearings; and
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be empowered to allow such coverage at its discretion.
The Chairman: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: I declare the motion carried.
The next item is with respect to time slots for regular meetings.
Mr. Armitage: This committee has Tuesday afternoons when the Senate rises and Thursday mornings at nine o'clock. What has changed is that, unlike last year, a committee will meet in this room in the time slot following us on Thursday mornings. Last year's arrangement allowed us to hear many witnesses in large chunks. On occasion, we were able to meet until one o'clock on Thursdays. We will not be able to do that this year.
Senator Fairbairn: We will have to tighten up.
[Translation]
Senator Gill: When scheduling conflicts arise, members look into this before they tender their resignation. If a senator sits on three or four committees, then I would image that his resignation would be accepted.
I do not see any need to change the time slots for meetings. I think everyone tries to coordinate their respective schedules. I guess the only solution for us is to pick those committee on which we truly want to serve.
[English]
The Chairman: We have been flexible with people who had certain interests. Senators come and sit in on meetings, and generally we are open to giving them an opportunity to speak to a subject or question a witness. It has worked well. However, there is always the problem of conflict of committees because some senators sit on different committees.
We will have to see how things work out. This committee always works well together.
The committee adjourned.