Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
National Finance
Issue 15 - Evidence - March 14, 2012
OTTAWA, Wednesday, March 14, 2012
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met this day at 6:45 p.m. for the consideration of a draft budget for the study on the potential reasons for price discrepancies in respect of certain goods between Canada and the United States, given the value of the Canadian dollar and the effect of cross-border shopping on the Canadian economy; and for the consideration of draft reports on Supplementary Estimates (C) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2012, and on the expenditures set out in the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2013.
Senator Joseph A. Day (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: I call this meeting to order.
We brought down some pizza for those who did not know we were in room 705. It is our intention to have the Wednesday night meeting, the pre-dinner meeting, in room 705, to avoid the confusion that takes place in the room downstairs here. The clerk had done that this time, to meet the comments of a number of senators last week, but I forgot. I did not look at my message or something. I did not read my email.
We have two items of business, and then anything else you want to add.
The first is that because this is the fiscal year end, we are required, as our clerk lets us know, to have a new budget and to start as of April 1. Apparently, we do not need a budget for our normal business. It is only for the special study that we need the budget. What we have circulated to everyone is the same budget that we had submitted and had adopted by Internal Economy and by the Senate as a whole previously. We have not spent any of it yet. Does anyone want to make a motion to adopt this budget?
Senator Ringuette: If I look at general expenses, there is communication consultant, $300 a day, for 50 days. Why?
The Chair: This is the same budget we did, and this is the same discussion we had on this previously.
Senator Ringuette: I know, but as a constant member of this committee, I have never noticed that we have a communication consultant.
The Chair: We felt that to write the report and to help us with promoting the report, that we would include that amount. That was discussed at Internal Economy, and they felt it was okay for us to do that as well.
Senator Ringuette: This is strictly on the pricing issue?
The Chair: That is right, the special study only. We do not need a budget for our normal business. All we have is meals and witnesses, and that money comes out of another account.
This communications consultant is only with respect to that, if we decide — and that would be steering committee — to determine whether we want to do that.
Senator Neufeld: It gives us the leeway. It went through once and we should not have any problem getting it through again.
The Chair: Senator Buth, you were not here the last time we did this.
Senator Buth: No, so I will ask all the questions.
The Chair: You can ask all kinds of naive questions.
Senator Buth: What is the purpose of the fact-finding trip to Toronto, Niagara Falls and Buffalo?
The Chair: This is the special study on price discrepancies.
Senator Buth: What would we do, though?
The Chair: We would meet with the people who are working on the border, talk with some shop owners and businesses on the other side of the border, find out what is going on, maybe go to the Walmart in Buffalo and ask if they ever see Canadians down here and why they come.
Senator Neufeld: We might buy something on each side of the border, too. We will let the chair sneak it back.
The Chair: We will be in a small bus.
Senator Buth: That is kind of anecdotal evidence. If we are looking in a store, it is one store. You do not know what the issues are in terms of stores across the border, all across the country. I just question everything in terms of spending money.
The Chair: We felt this would add more credibility to our report, having been there and seen this, and having talked to the people at the border, rather than doing it all out of this glass bubble that we are in up here.
Senator Neufeld: This is actually the busiest border crossing too, if I remember correctly. Senator Runciman talked about that. We looked all across Canada. There is not much sense going all the way to Vancouver and going across the border when we can do it closer to home. Senator Runciman suggested to us that this was the busiest border crossing in all of Canada, so we thought that would be the one we should go to.
Senator Runciman: Perhaps the most reasonable in terms of cost as well. The other thing is we are listening to academics, business folks and bureaucrats, and we felt that it would be appropriate for us, as a committee, to meet people on the front lines who are actually dealing with these issues on a day-to-day basis.
The Chair: I think the other point is that we would not be doing this until late in the study, so that we would have identified a lot of the issues, and we are going there to confirm them.
Are there any other questions? Does someone want to move the adoption of this report? Senator Peterson, thank you.
No further questions? All those in favour say "yea."
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Contrary-minded? Motion carried. Thank you.
The next step is for the chair and deputy chair to take this to the Internal Economy Committee at their leisure. They will let us know when they want us?
Jodi Turner, Clerk of the Committee: Yes. We will submit it. The submission for deadline is this Friday, to Heather Lank, and then the subcommittee will call chairs.
The Chair: We will be called and we will go in at that time. You will let us know?
Ms. Turner: Yes.
The Chair: We do not have to do anything further on that at this stage. You do, but we do not.
Ms. Turner: Yes.
The Chair: We will now go in camera. Could I have a motion to allow staff to remain?
Senator Neufeld: So moved.
The Chair: Thank you. All those in favour?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Contrary-minded? Motion carried.
(The committee continued in camera.)