Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Privileges, Standing Rules and Orders
Issue 1 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Thursday, November 18, 1999
The Standing Committee on Privileges, Standing Rules and Orders met this day at 11:35 a.m. to organize the activities of the committee.
[English]
Mr. Gary O'Brien, Principal Clerk, Committees Branch: Honourable senators, as your clerk, it is my duty to preside over the election of your chair. Are there any nominations?
Senator Joyal: I nominate Senator Austin.
Mr. O'Brien: Are there other nominations?
It is moved by the Honourable Senator Joyal that the Honourable Senator Austin do take the Chair of this Committee. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Mr. O'Brien: I ask Senator Austin to take the chair.
Senator Jack Austin (Chairman) in the Chair.
The Chairman: Thank you, I think. It is so easy to take on responsibilities and sometimes so very hard to discharge them properly. I will do my best. I do believe that this is an important committee. It is critical to the way our institution functions and, if we are successful in functioning, to the image of the institution in the community at large. I hope we can all make a difference in my term as your chair.
With your approval, I would move to Item No. 2 on our agenda. Is there a nomination for the position of deputy chair?
Senator DeWare: Mr. Chairman, I move that Senator Grimard be elected as the deputy chair.
The Chairman: Are there other nominations? Hearing no other nominations, is it agreed that Senator Grimard be elected as deputy chair?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. I look forward to working with you, Senator Grimard.
The Rules of the Senate provide for a steering committee of three people. That being so, the chairman would entertain the following motion:
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 by the Chairman after the usual consultations and that the quorum be two members; and
That the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be authorized to meet in camera.
Senator Joyal: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. Senator Pépin, would you be willing to serve on the steering committee?
Senator Pépin: Yes, I would. Thank you.
The Chairman: Even though the quorum is two members, Senator Grimard, I know you are here a great deal. I have no intention of letting you off the hook from attending these meetings. I will make a suggestion later as to a time when the three of us can meet informally that suits our agenda.
I would move to Item No. 4 on our agenda.
Senator Grimard: Mr. Chairman, I move:
That the Committee print 200 copies of its proceedings for distribution to Senators, MPs, officials and others.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Senator Pépin: Mr. Chairman, I move:
That the Committee ask the Library of Parliament to assign Research Officers to the Committee; and
That the Chairman, on behalf of the Committee, direct the research staff in the preparation of studies, analyses and summaries.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Senator DeWare: Mr. Chairman, 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 agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Our next agenda item is entitled, "Budget Application ($5,000)". Perhaps our clerk would address that item briefly.
Mr. O'Brien: Honourable senators, traditionally, this committee has met on Wednesdays from 12:00 noon to 1:30 p.m. In past sessions, we have asked for a modest budget to allow us to bring in sandwiches to assist the committee to meet in that time slot.
The Chairman: It seems that, if permission is granted, our colleagues are all willing to sit on Tuesdays between 4:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. If permission to sit at that time is not forthcoming, we will have this discussion again.
If that time slot is acceptable, all we will need is coffee, tea and soft drinks. However, I think we should ask for the budget because we may, on occasion, hold dinner meetings. They will not be scheduled, but committee members may agree to sit later to conclude a meeting. This committee does have some rather interesting and, in some cases, time-consuming discussions. Completion of the draft report of the previous committee will take some time.
I would entertain a motion for a budget application of $5,000.
Senator Joyal: I so move.
The Chairman: Is it agreed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
I would now move to a discussion of the business of the committee and, in particular, the priority that should be given to the items before us.
Presently, the committee has before it the question of privilege raised by Senator Andreychuk which relates to a breach of confidentiality in the Aboriginal Affairs Committee. We also have the question of privilege raised by Senator Kinsella before us. We must also deal with the working group draft report on the revision of the Rules of the Senate; the restructuring of Senate committees; and the reprinting of the rules. We must also consider the suspension of fees in connection with the private bill introduced by Senator Taylor related to the Moravian Church. There is also a question, and I will use informal language, regarding the status of senators who have been convicted of an offence under the Criminal Code. That discussion will take some time.
My suggestion to colleagues is, if there is no disagreement, that we deal with the private bill waiving the fees at our next meeting. Is that satisfactory?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: We will do that next Tuesday.
The clerk and I have spoken to Senator Andreychuk. The remedy she is looking for is a statement of the proper behaviour of senators, the staff of committees and the staff of the Senate. She is not asking for an investigation into the details of how the breach of confidence took place. She is looking for, and I endorse this, a strong statement of policy at this time, with stated sanctions, should it happen again. There has been a laxity of behaviour in a number of ways in following the Rules of the Senate. One of our most important rules relates to confidentiality and privacy in the work of committees. It should be made very clear to our colleagues and staff what is expected, and what sanctions will be imposed if a breach is proved.
I would suggest that we also deal with that at the next session. Senator Andreychuk is prepared to attend our committee meeting and put on the record what she is asking the committee to do. I believe I have accurately stated what she will request.
Then, as a committee, we will consider the remaining matters related to the rules, and ask our research team to put together a draft report. We will then present that as a separate report to the Senate.
Senator Joyal: On that very point, Mr. Chairman, would it be possible to ask Senator Andreychuk to bring with her a statement of what she intends to submit to this committee, so that, when we have the privilege of hearing her, we will have that document to refer to, as we have, what I am sure will be, a very useful discussion with her?
The Chairman: I can certainly ask her to do that. It is a bit optimistic to ask her to draft the provisions that she would like to see. I would prefer that our staff draft the provisions after a discussion in committee. You know as well as anyone that drafting is difficult work. Writing is the hardest work there is.
Senator DeWare: Mr. Chairman, I am pleased with the method by which she is approaching the committee with this matter. It is very timely, because we often become lax in our committee work. Perhaps we all need to be reminded of the importance of drafting reports.
The Chairman: Recently, there have been a number of examples of that which I am sure all of us could cite. I think it is time that committees and the Senate are clear about is expected in this area.
I was a member of that committee, and I was offended to see a draft report, which had not been discussed and had not been approved by members of the committee, out in the media. That is the greatest abuse of our work that one can imagine. You can never pull back. You cannot then change the public impression that has been left. It is impossible.
I will not get into a debate about that now, but when I commented on it in the Senate, Senator Fraser thought that I was referring to the newspaper as being in breach of privilege. Technically, I suppose that could be the case. However, I have no intention of pursuing anyone beyond our immediate authority. In this day and age, freedom of the press has been more widely defined than anyone can imagine.
We will do that at the next meeting. The clerk will invite Senator Andreychuk to appear next Tuesday. I will have to ask for permission that the committee may meet. I know my colleagues are more familiar with this than I am -- although I used to know the rules and I will catch up -- but under our rules, can a committee be given what might be called "standing" permission, or must I apply for permission every time the committee wants to meet?
Senator DeWare: The Foreign Affairs Committee was given permission to sit at a certain time every week until further notice, I believe.
The Chairman: If it is agreed in this committee, I will ask for permission to cover the next four meetings, which should take us to the end of the year. Then, when we resume in February, we can consider our schedule.
Senator Rossiter: Will you be doing that today, Mr. Chairman?
The Chairman: I should do that today, yes.
Senator Rossiter: Notices will have to go out.
The Chairman: We now move to the question raised by Senator Kinsella. It is with regard to a witness who appeared before the Agriculture Committee. I have not had an opportunity chance to talk to Senator Kinsella to see what remedies he is seeking. Can you advise us?
Senator DeWare: Senator Maheu and I both spoke to staff when this matter was raised, and they were directed to prepare information for us. That witness spoke at two sessions, one was the meeting before our committee, and one was before the House of Commons committee. We asked staff to retrieve the blues for us, and to make suggestions to us about who should be called as witnesses. Once that information is pulled together, we intend to bring it to this committee and plan our strategy from there. That is as far as we have gone.
The Chairman: Thank you.
Senator Rossiter: Did he not attend a third public meeting, not necessarily a committee meeting? I know that, at the Agriculture Committee, the witnesses testified under oath.
Mr. Jamie Robertson, Researcher, Library of Parliament: Dr. Chopra, who is employed by Health Canada, did appear on the rBST study on two occasions before the Senate Agriculture Committee. He subsequently appeared at a meeting on employment equity that was held outside of the Senate or the House of Commons, a public meeting. He was allegedly disciplined as a result of his participation in that meeting and his identification at the meeting as being an employee of Health Canada. That is the complaint that he took to Senator Kinsella and which Senator Kinsella raised in the Senate.
The Chairman: Is it clear that the disciplining does not stem from his appearance before the Senate, or is that an issue?
Mr. Robertson: That is the issue. His allegation is that the department took the opportunity of his appearance at this other meeting to discipline him, and that the real reason, the true reason, for disciplining him was because he had appeared before a Senate committee to contradict the department and the minister. We have no evidence at this point as to the department's point of view or position, but I presume their position would probably be that their disciplining of him had nothing to do with his appearance before the committee or the Senate, but that it had to do with other matters.
Senator DeWare: You might want to discuss it with Senator Kinsella.
The Chairman: I will. As we proceed, we will have a conflict-of-evidence situation.
Senator DeWare: I think we have to be cautious. We do not want to get into a conflict with our colleagues in the other place. We want to be very discreet about this particular situation.
The Chairman: Shall we proceed? I will discuss this with Senator Kinsella and see how he wants us to proceed.
Senator DeWare: You can then meet with the steering committee.
The Chairman: Of course. I have not had the opportunity to talk to Mr. Robertson about this issue either, so I have to catch up on the factual background. We will refer this to our next meeting, after I have had the discussions I have outlined.
Our next item on the agenda relates to the working group on the revision of the Senate rules. I have here a draft report. Perhaps the clerk could bring us up-to-date on this.
Mr. O'Brien: Towards the end of our last session, it was agreed that the Chair of the Rules Committee, Senator Maheu, send a letter to all senators asking for suggestions on amendments to the rules. It was also agreed that a working group be established to work over the summer. That was established with a representative from Senator Joyal's office, Senator Maheu's office, Senator Lynch-Staunton's office, and Senator Graham's office. Mr. Robertson and I assisted this working group, who met two or three times over the summer, and came up with a draft report that has not yet been signed off, but which deals with a number of issues on which they would like to see amendments to the rules. The issues were on such things as tributes, the length of speeches, and so on. That is still outstanding.
The Chairman: At our next meeting, if time permits, we should begin a discussion on the draft report. Colleagues will all have a copy, and by then I will have read it and discussed it with the staff.
Senator Joyal, were your suggestions to be included in this report or in a separate motion?
Senator Joyal: Normally they would be included in the report; however, there was no discussion of the option that would have been preferred at that time.
The Chairman: May we take up your comments next week in the same context?
Senator Joyal: Yes.
The Chairman: We will decide at that time whether it should be included in the subject matter of the working group, or whether we should proceed by way of another motion.
The next item relates to the restructuring of Senate committees. I do not believe that will be a hasty discussion.
Senator DeWare: We should set aside a whole day for that.
The Chairman: We will set aside a whole session for that. I should like to have at least one discussion on that subject before we adjourn for Christmas. Then we can make this an important priority when we come back in February. One or two senators have expressed some agitation in this regard, but I will have a chat with all the independent senators to canvas their views. I did speak to Senator Lois Wilson briefly, and she said she would like to talk to me about that matter.
Senator Grimard: Senator Prud'homme, too, I imagine.
The Chairman: I will not need to talk to him. He has been at me, and he will be at me.
Senator DeWare: He will be at the next meeting.
The Chairman: Senator Lawson also has something to say, but whether he actually wants to be on a committee remains to be seen.
If there is no other business we wish to deal with this morning, we have then set our agenda for the next three or four meetings. I will tell Senator Taylor we are ready to proceed with his matter.
The committee adjourned.