CIBA - Standing Committee

Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration

Past Session: Past Session:
39-1 39th Parliament, 1st Session (April 3, 2006 - September 14, 2007)
Select a different session
Download as PDF

STANDING COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL ECONOMY, BUDGETS AND ADMINISTRATION

MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS

 

OTTAWA, Thursday, March 24, 2022
(5)

[English]

Pursuant to the order of the Senate of November 25, 2021, the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met this day in room C128, Senate of Canada Building, and with videoconference at 11:30 a.m., the Chair, the Honourable Sabi Marwah, presiding.

Members of the committee present: The Honourable Senators Bovey, Dawson, Dean, Marwah, Moncion, Saint-Germain and Tannas (7).

Members of the committee present by videoconference: The Honourable Senators Boyer, Campbell, Forest, Gagné, Housakos, Marshall, Moodie, Seidman and Smith (9).

Other senators present: The Honourable Senator Dalphond (1).

Participating in the meeting: Pascale Legault, Chief Corporate Services Officer and Clerk of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration; Gérald Lafrenière, Interim Clerk of the Senate and Clerk of the Parliaments and Chief Legislative Services Officer; Philippe Hallée, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel; senior Senate officials and other support staff.

WITNESSES:

The Honourable Senator Scott Tannas, Chair, Subcommittee on Long Term Vision and Plan;

The Honourable Senator Lucie Moncion, Chair, Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets;

Nathalie Charpentier, Comptroller and Deputy Chief Financial Officer, Finance and Procurement Directorate (by videoconference);

Josée Labelle, Director, LTVP & Accommodation, Property and Services Directorate (by videoconference);

Julie Lacroix, Director, Corporate Security Directorate (by videoconference);

Pierre Lanctôt, Chief Financial Officer, Finance and Procurement Directorate (by videoconference);

Caroline Morency, Director General, Property and Services Directorate (by videoconference);

David Vatcher, Director, Information Services Directorate (by videoconference);

Jeremy LeBlanc, Clerk Assistant and Director General, International and Interparliamentary Affairs (by videoconference);

Marie-Eve Belzile, Principal Clerk, International and Interparliamentary Affairs) (by videoconference).

Pursuant to rule 12-7(1) of the Rules of the Senate, the committee continued its consideration of financial and administrative matters concerning the Senate’s internal administration.

The chair made a statement.

The chair introduced all senators that were present.

CIBA/2022-03-24/051(P) — Adoption of Minutes of Proceedings from February 10, 2022 (public)

The committee considered the Minutes of Proceedings from February 10, 2022 (public).

The Honourable Senator Campbell moved that the Minutes of Proceedings of Thursday, February 10, 2022 (public), be adopted.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

CIBA/2022-03-24/052(P) — First Report from the Subcommittee on Long Term Vision and Plan — Senate Long Term Accommodation Plan

The chair of the Subcommittee on Long Term Vision and Plan, the Honourable Senator Tannas, presented the subcommittee’s First Report as follows:

Thursday, March 24, 2022

The Subcommittee on the Long Term Vision and Plan of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration has the honour to present its

FIRST REPORT

Your subcommittee, which was authorized by the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration (CIBA) to study and report on the program of work for the Long Term Vision and Plan for the parliamentary precinct, now presents its first report.

Senate Long Term Accommodation Plan

Background

In April 2021, your subcommittee advised CIBA about a potential change to the Senate’s Long Term Accommodation Plan. As a part of this plan, some senators in leadership positions moved their offices from Centre Block into the Senate of Canada Building (SCB), while other senators were relocated to offices in the Chambers Building at 40 Elgin. The rest has remained in offices in East Block and Victoria Building. East Block is also undergoing the first phase of significant rehabilitation work right now.

According to the 2012 long-term plan, a new development on the City Block, directly across from Parliament Hill called “Block 2” is being planned, which will transform multiple aging buildings and two vacant parcels of land located on both sides of the former US Embassy, now known as the Indigenous Peoples space, which will become an integrated complex. Although we tend to think of Block 2 as one building, it is important to remember that this redevelopment will involve the construction of two new main buildings, integrated with most of the existing buildings within the Block. When complete, the complex is expected to include an office tower on the eastern corner of the block which would include a substantial number of senators’ offices and some committee rooms.

The 2012 accommodation plan also called for the occupants of East Block to be relocated to the east tower of Block 2 in in a few years from now, so that East Block can be fully rehabilitated. Once construction on Parliament Hill is completed, it was expected that all senators in the SCB, Victoria Building and 40 Elgin would then be relocated to new accommodations in a rehabilitated Centre Block and East Block and into a third building on the eastern side of Wellington Street (most likely in the Block 2 complex). This would accomplish one of the Senate’s long-term goals: to relocate all senators East of the Peace Tower and in close proximity to Centre Block.

However, in April 2020, Public Works and Procurement Canada (PSPC) approached your subcommittee with a new proposal about the status and condition of Victoria Building, along with a corresponding opportunity to temporarily relocate all senators’ offices from the Victoria Building to 40 Elgin, which would allow the rehabilitation of the Victoria Building to be integrated into a single phase of the Block 2 redevelopment project. This new proposal would change the sequence of the accommodation strategy by advancing the rehabilitation of the Victoria Building by a few years ahead of East Block.

At that time, your subcommittee had several concerns about PSPC’s rationale for proposing the advancement of the rehabilitation of the Victoria Building, due to additional moves that this proposal would generate, the potential domino effects and the new facts associated with the condition of the Victoria building. Your subcommittee asked PSPC for a more comprehensive costing and schedule for the various move sequences being proposed, along with documentation on the conditions of the East Block, Victoria and Confederation Buildings, in the interests of ensuring the responsible and economical use of public funds. Your subcommittee also asked PSPC to look at other potential scenarios, such as advancing the rehabilitation of East Block, considering that significant work on that building is already underway and considering that advancing these renovations could advance the completion of the overall work involving the buildings to be occupied by the Senate on Parliament Hill.

Based on your subcommittee’s recommendation, CIBA approved for PSPC to pursue the opportunity to lease all additional available space (including parking) at 40 Elgin to use as a space for senators’ accommodations, until the major rehabilitation projects on Parliament Hill are completed; and instructed your subcommittee to continue to examine the various timing and sequencing options for construction and rehabilitation of other Senate-occupied buildings.

Advancement of Victoria Building

In August 2021, officials from PSPC appeared before your subcommittee with various options for the timing and sequencing of moves for Victoria Building, East Block and 40 Elgin. Your subcommittee also received further information about the status and condition of the Confederation Building, which contains the most MP office suites in the precinct.

Your subcommittee was told that the Confederation Building is in the most urgent need of repair, which we understood to be one of the factors driving PSPC’s recommendation to advance Victoria Building over East Block. In addition, the inclusion of the Victoria Building in the Block 2 redevelopment will allow PSPC to realize construction efficiencies and substantial savings, which have been validated by a third party.

However, at that time senators still had questions about costs, temporary and permanent spaces for the Senate, the logistics for the rehabilitation of the Confederation Building and the recommendation to advance Victoria building, relocation timelines and the sequence of moves, and confirmation that the East area of Block 2 will be entirely dedicated to the Senate over the long term.

Your subcommittee met on January 24, 2022, with PSPC and Senate Administration officials to receive an update on the accommodation plans.

First, Senate Administration officials provided us with an overview of a preliminary plan to fit up 40 Elgin to add 45 Parliamentary Office Units (POUs) over five floors (in addition to the 18 POUs that are currently there on two floors) as a temporary accommodation for senators with estimated timelines, along with the relocation of several Administration floors in consequence. Your subcommittee has no issues with this plan in principle, with the understanding that there are still numerous elements and details to review and approve.

Regardless of whether the Senate decides to advance Victoria or East Block, your subcommittee can confirm that 40 Elgin is the planned temporary space for 63 Senator POUs while either Victoria or East Block is emptied and rehabilitated. Going forward your subcommittee expects to be updated on the plan and timelines and intends to ensure that inconveniences and disruptions for senators are minimized.

PSPC’s recommendation regarding Victoria Building

Officials from PSPC confirmed that it is still the intention to have East Block occupants move to a new East Tower in the Block 2 complex.

PSPC advised your subcommittee that using 40 Elgin as a temporary space for senators’ offices would allow Victoria Building to be emptied sooner than originally planned. This would allow them to incorporate the Victoria Building rehabilitation into the redevelopment of Block 2, which would optimize a major development project, reduce a number of construction-related risks and result in a significant cost savings of approximately $200 million.

Although this revised plan is not without some risks for the Senate, your subcommittee feels that there is some merit to the proposal to advance the rehabilitation of the Victoria Building. Accordingly, we consulted with the Speaker’s Office, along with senators from all recognized parliamentary parties and recognized parliamentary groups. Your subcommittee also made the following observations for your consideration:

Subcommittee Observations

House of Commons: Your subcommittee is of the opinion that one of the primary beneficiaries of advancing Victoria Building would likely be the House of Commons. Developing the west side of Block 2, along with the rehabilitation of Victoria Building is part of the decanting strategy for the Confederation Building. It will be important for your subcommittee to resume consultations with its House of Commons counterparts as there may be other issues that could be leveraged in discussions with them that could be advantageous to the Senate (such as the selection of enhanced tunnel options).

Financial Information: Although the department stated that there are important cost savings involved, it was not immediately clear to your subcommittee that these savings would be attributable to the Senate, per se, given that Victoria is not going to be a Senate building in the end state. Your subcommittee has asked the department for more precise details on the financial data that explains these savings.

Efficiency: Nevertheless, there may be other efficiencies in choosing to vacate Victoria sooner. It could: minimize the need for work to take place at off-peak times as there would be no concerns about disruption to senators’ and staff; reduce the costs related to keeping the building operational longer; and eliminate the need to protect the building against the impact of being surrounded by construction. The advancement of Victoria would also reduce the overall complexity of the Block 2 redevelopment project by allowing Victoria Building to be rehabilitated while the Block 2 redevelopment is already underway, rather than as separate development projects. This would allow PSPC to mobilize one construction team for the entire Block 2 complex as opposed to mobilizing two separate construction teams if Victoria were addressed in a later phase. Additionally, your subcommittee was assured that the East Tower construction would not be delayed or impacted by the development of the West Tower and/or Victoria.

Timelines: The space at 40 Elgin will become available in phases over the next few years. One of the advantages of advancing the Victoria Building is that this would allow the Senate to achieve its end-state accommodations at least five years earlier than if East Block were advanced instead. Regardless of which option is chosen, we can expect over the next 10 years that all senators will at some point have to move buildings: those in SCB (along with some senators currently in 40 Elgin) will move back to Centre Block, and if Victoria is advanced, those occupants will move into 40 Elgin, East Block will move into Block 2 and then when East Block is completed, 40 Elgin occupants will move to East Block.

Construction disruptions: Your subcommittee remains concerned about the potential for disruption for some senators who may have to undergo multiple moves, while others will have to remain in offices adjacent to construction zones for longer than anticipated. However, your subcommittee was told that remaining in Victoria Building would mean that a minimum of 12 Senators offices would have to be relocated to an undetermined location (there is no space currently available within the Senate’s geographic boundaries) because of their close proximity to disruption from the Block 2 construction (40 Elgin can’t accommodate all of East Block and 12 or more offices from Victoria Building).

Conclusion

In weighing these various factors, your subcommittee concludes that on balance, advancing the Senate’s move out of Victoria Building presents fewer risks for the Senate.

Advancing Victoria Building reduces the number of senators who may be significantly impacted by being immediately adjacent to the construction surrounding Block 2. Although the current occupants of East Block will have to remain in a construction adjacent zone for longer than previously anticipated, the Administration will continue to implement measures to mitigate these impacts.

Additionally, the potential risks and cost differentials, along with anticipated timelines are, in the view of your subcommittee, more favorable to the Senate if we advance the decanting of Victoria.

RECOMMENDATION

Your subcommittee therefore recommends that the Senate advise PSPC to proceed with the decanting of Victoria Building ahead of the East Block, along with the fit-up of Chambers Building which will be used as a temporary accommodation for senators, until the completion of the East Block rehabilitation.

Your subcommittee has also appended to this report several visual images of the Block 2 development and the sequence of moves.

Respectfully submitted,

SCOTT TANNAS

Chair of the Subcommittee

The Honourable Senator Tannas made a statement and, together with Caroline Morency, answered questions.

After debate, the Honourable Senator Tannas moved that the subcommittee’s First Report be adopted.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

CIBA/2022-03-24/053(P) — Second Report from the Subcommittee on Long Term Vision and Plan — Committee Rooms and Parliamentary Office Units

The chair of the Subcommittee on Long Term Vision and Plan, the Honourable Senator Tannas, presented the subcommittee’s Second Report as follows:

Thursday, March 24, 2022

The Subcommittee on the Long Term Vision and Plan of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration has the honour to present its

SECOND REPORT

Your subcommittee, which was authorized by the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration (CIBA) to study and report on the program of work for the Long Term Vision and Plan for the parliamentary precinct, now presents its second report.

Centre Block Rehabilitation — Committee Rooms and Parliamentary Office Units

Background

Your subcommittee reported to this committee as far back as 2016 that one core requirement for the Senate is to occupy three buildings (Centre Block, East Block and Block 2) in the end-state, within close proximity of the Senate Chamber. Other key Senate requirements included space for a total of 118 Parliamentary Office Units (POU), 10 broadcast-capable committee rooms and a multi-purpose room, to be located within those three core buildings. As part of the Centre Block Rehabilitation Program, the Senate had originally requested that a minimum of 25 POUs, the Speaker’s suite, offices for the key legislative functions, 6 broadcast-capable committee rooms and the multi-purpose room be included in the Centre Block and the new Parliament Welcome Centre (PWC).

Over time, your subcommittee was advised that various constraints such as the available space, heritage considerations and modernization requirements (e.g. fire code, base building systems, universal accessibility and sustainability) would make it difficult to satisfy all the program requirements from various parliamentary partners for the Centre Block and PWC. The Senate, along with its parliamentary partners, were asked to reassess all requirements to see where efficiencies could be incorporated.

Based on initial design plans from Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) that only included 22 POUs, key legislative functions, plus the Speaker’s suite in Centre Block (instead of the 25 POUs requested), in July 2020 CIBA asked PSPC to consider a partial infill of the Centre Block’s East Courtyard to provide an additional 6 POUs, for a total of 28 POUs in Centre Block. This report also expressed the Senate’s requirement for a separate and secure East Senate business entry point to the PWC. The Senate’s original requirement for 10 broadcast-capable committee rooms was first adopted by CIBA in May 2019. This requirement was further refined in September 2020 to specify that 6 rooms be included in the Centre Block Rehabilitation Project, with 3 rehabilitated rooms in Centre Block and 3 newly constructed rooms in the PWC.

However, in May 2021 the Minister of Public Services and Procurement Canada sent a letter to the Speakers of the Senate and the House of Commons as well as the Chair of CIBA, informing them of the elimination of three important physical elements for the Senate. Specifically, the Senate was informed that the previously approved partial infill of the Centre Block’s East Courtyard to create 6 additional POUs, all three committee rooms in the PWC and the East entrance to the PWC, were not being included in the department’s planned project-cost-scope announcement, as these three elements were deemed to be “of greatest concern from a cost perspective” by the Minister.

Recent Developments

Last summer, your subcommittee met with the Parliamentary Secretary for Public Services and Procurement Canada and with our counterparts in the House of Commons. In addition to those consultations, extensive collaboration between PSPC, Centrus, parliamentary partners and the Senate Administration over the past several months has led to a consensus on a campus-based office and committee room strategy which will allow the Senate to retain some of its original requirements within the existing space constraints, without negative heritage impacts, and in greater alignment with PSPC’s project cost and scope.

This consensus was achieved in part due to all parliamentary partners, more particularly the Library of Parliament, for reducing their space requirements. This includes the Senate Administration who agreed to displace POUs, a committee room, some operational and material handling functions (approximately 875m2), that will require accommodation elsewhere within the Precinct, in close proximity to the Centre Block/PWC. These compromises will enable one medium and one medium-plus sized Senate committee rooms to be accommodated in the PWC, instead of the three originally requested. The Senate would still retain a multi-purpose room in the PWC, which will also alleviate some of the pressure on the use of our committee rooms for special events. It also allows the schematic design to remain within the 32,600 m2 footprint for the PWC approved by Parliament in summer 2020 and eliminates the need for a partial infill of the East Courtyard.

It should also be noted that there is a list of Senate functions that have not yet been incorporated into the design plans for which the Senate Administration awaits a solution, notably support spaces for Senators such as researchers pods and additional private offices.

Recommendation

Your subcommittee believes that this approach will permit the Senate to achieve an optimal balance between the institution’s future requirements and the existing space constraints, heritage impacts and the respective requirements of our parliamentary partners. Finally, your subcommittee is pleased to report that the Senate can expect the finalized schematic design for all senator-occupied spaces in the end-state to include the following:

  • Centre Block: 22 POUs, spaces for key legislative functions, the Speaker’s suite and 3 small committee rooms;
  • PWC: 2 committee rooms, a medium and a medium plus, as well as a multi-purpose room;
  • East Block: minimum of 42 POUs and up to2 medium committee rooms;
  • Block 2: 54 POUs and up to 4 committee rooms (see Annex 1).

Your subcommittee is confident that this revised strategy will ensure that the Senate can achieve two core requirements in the end-state: 1) to have all 118 senators’ offices, and 2) 10 broadcast-capable committee rooms and one multipurpose room, all in close proximity to the Senate chamber. Accordingly:

Your subcommittee therefore recommends that the Senate advise PSPC that it accepts a new design strategy for the Centre Block and PWC, provided it includes at least 2 broadcast-capable committee rooms, including one medium and one medium plus-sized and a multi-purpose room in the PWC, with 22 POUs and 3 small-sized, broadcast-capable committee rooms in Centre Block, while keeping the Senate in the three core buildings (Centre Block, East Block and the Block 2 East tower) in the end state.

Respectfully submitted,

SCOTT TANNAS

Chair of the Subcommittee

The Honourable Senator Tannas made a statement and, together with Caroline Morency, answered questions.

After debate, the Honourable Senator Tannas moved that the subcommittee’s Second Report be adopted.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

CIBA/2022-03-24/054(P) — Report from the Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets — House Officers Budgets for 2022-2023

The chair of the Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets, the Honourable Senator Moncion, presented the subcommittee’s First Report as follows:

Thursday, March 24, 2022

The Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets (SEBS) of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration (CIBA) has the honour to present its

FIRST REPORT

The Senate Main Estimates for the fiscal year 2022-23 were approved by CIBA at its meeting of November 25, 2021. This budget contains a total amount of $4,896,100 for caucuses and parliamentary groups. However, neither SEBS nor CIBA concluded on the allocation of the budget to the various caucuses and parliamentary groups. In the absence of an approved allocation of the budget to the various caucuses and parliamentary groups, the provisions of the Senate Administrative Rules should apply for the fiscal year beginning April 1, 2022, which will create variances compared to the budgets of 2021-22.

Your subcommittee was asked to review and provide recommendations regarding the allocation of the overall budget for caucuses and parliamentary groups for the 2022-23 fiscal year.

In order to prepare for this discussion, a correspondence was sent to all leaders of the Senate asking for their feedback about the allocation of ressources for their own caucus or group. All leaders in the Senate supported that SEBS recommend the status quo for the fiscal year 2022-2023, therefore allocating the same amounts to each group and caucus as in the fiscal year 2021-2022. The leaders’ responses were shared with members of the SEBS.

After careful review, your subcommittee recommends the following allocation of the overall budget for caucuses and parliamentary groups for the 2022-23 fiscal year, which represents the same amounts to each group and caucus as in the fiscal year 2021-2022:

Groups / Caucus

Anticipated Members at April 1, 2022

2021-22 Allocated Budget and Proposed
2022-23 Budget
$

GRO

3

1,308,154

ISG

42

1,308,154

OPP

16

1,279,792

CSG

12

500,000

PSG

14

500,000

 TOTAL

4,896,100

Your subcommittee also recommends that the allocation of the budget to the various caucuses and parliamentary groups form part of the review of the next main estimates process.

Respectfully submitted,

LUCIE MONCION

Chair

The Honourable Senator Moncion made a statement.

After debate, the Honourable Senator Moncion moved that the subcommittee’s First Report be adopted.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

CIBA/2022-03-24/055(P) — Report from the Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets — Impact of Inflation on Senators’ Budgets

The chair of the Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets, the Honourable Senator Moncion, tabled the subcommittee’s Third Report as follows:

Thursday, March 24, 2022

The Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets (SEBS) of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration (CIBA) has the honour to table its

THIRD REPORT

BACKGROUND

During the 2017—18 Main Estimates process, the Senate approved the concept of an annual increase, for future years, of the Senators’ Office Budget based on the inflation rate.

During the 2022—23 Main Estimates process, the former Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates recommended that CIBA increase the Senators’ Office Budget by the inflation rate, which is consistent with the decision made during the 2017—18 Main Estimates process. Although CIBA approved the proposed 2.0% increase in the 2022—23 individual senator’s office budget, this rate was questioned by committee members because the most recent monthly inflation rate published by Statistics Canada when the meeting took place on November 25, 2021, was 4.7%. Therefore, CIBA requested that the SEBS assess the impact on the individual senator’s office budget for 2022—23 of the updated inflation rate available closer to the month of March 2022.

ANALYSIS

The current practice to determine the annual increase in the individual senator’s office budget is to apply the inflation rate of the Consumer Price Index (CPI-trim) available when preparing the Main Estimates, which is the first quarter of the fiscal year.[1]

For the 2022—23 Main Estimates process, the inflation rate used was 2.0%, increasing the individual senator’s office budget from $234,940 to $239,640.

Since the 2022—23 Main Estimates were prepared, the annual inflation rate has risen to 3.7%, as of December 2021.

The difference of 1.7% between the most recent annual inflation rate (3.7%) and the rate used to increase the individual senator’s office budget during the 2022—23 Main Estimates process (2.0%) amounts to $3,995.

Other factors were considered and discussed by SEBS:

Inflation currently volatile: The high inflation rates currently experienced in many world economies have not been seen for decades. Many economists, central bankers and others believe these high rates are the direct result of the pandemic and should stabilize in the coming months. However, nobody can predict whether inflation will remain high, increase or decline to the 1.5% to 2.0% range that most industrialized countries have experienced over the last few decades.

Economic increases for senators’ staff: The decision on the economic salary increases for senators’ staff for fiscal year 2022—23 has not yet been made. Therefore, the budget required to cover these increases is unknown. It might be prudent to wait before increasing the individual senator’s office budget by more than 2.0%, as salaries account for approximately 93% of senators’ office expenses.

Limited proportion of senators’ expenses affected by inflation: Only about 7.0% of senators’ budgets are spent on non-salary expense categories that are subject to inflation. The remaining 93% is used to pay salaries, which are based on economic salary increases approved by CIBA. The rate of economic salary increases for fiscal year 2022—23 has not yet been approved, but based on trends, it will be about 2.0%.[2] Therefore, the additional 1.7% for inflation applied to non-salary expenses would represent a budget increase of $280.

Based on this information, SEBS recommend not to make any changes to the Senators’ Office Budget at this time but will continue to monitor the impact of the inflation on senator’s individual office budget and discuss this matter on a regular basis at its future meetings.

Respectfully submitted,

LUCIE MONCION

Chair

The Honourable Senator Moncion made a statement.

CIBA/2022-03-24/056(P) — Report from the Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets — Quarterly Financial Reports (Q2 & Q3)

The chair of the Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets, the Honourable Senator Moncion, tabled the subcommittee’s Second Report as follows:

Thursday, March 24, 2022

The Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration has the honour to table its

SECOND REPORT

Your subcommittee received the financial highlights for the second and third quarters for the fiscal year 2021-22.

In conducting its study, your subcommittee raised concerns about the levels of resources available to support the work of parliamentary committees in order to increase the number of concurrent meetings. Although not an immediate issue, your subcommittee believes that this topic needs to be addressed before it becomes a problem.

Your subcommittee also raised questions about the competitiveness of the Senate in the labour market and wonders if the Senate salary and benefit package provided to employees allows it to acquire and retain the desired level of talent, especially at the senior levels.

After debate, your subcommittee has approved and now tables the attached Quarterly Financial Report of the Senate of Canada for the quarters ended September 30 and December 31, 2021.

Respectfully submitted,

LUCIE MONCION

Chair

The Honourable Senator Moncion made a statement.

CIBA/2022-03-24/057(P) — Services provided by Public Services & Procurement Canada (2022-2023)

Caroline Morency made a statement regarding services provided by Public Services and Procurement Canada.

After debate, it was moved by the Honourable Senator Dean that the Senate Administration be authorized to continue proceeding with sole-source contracts with Public Services & Procurement Canada for the provision of base-building maintenance, equipment rental fees, and standard accommodation construction projects for the 2022-2023 fiscal year, for which aggregated costs are estimated at $232,000.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

CIBA/2022-03-24/058(P) — Additional Joint Interparliamentary Committee Membership

The chair made a statement and answered questions regarding the composition of the Joint Interparliamentary Council.

After debate, it was moved by the Honourable Senator Bovey that the Chair of CIBA, who is supported by the Speaker, write to the Chair of the Board of Internal Economy of the House of Commons, seeking the board's agreement to change the composition of the Joint Interparliamentary Council ensuring representation from all recognized parliamentary groups and parties in the Senate.

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

CIBA/2022-03-24/059(P) — Report from the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure — Decision reported to CIBA

The Honourable Senator Marwah tabled the Second Report of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure on decisions taken on behalf of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration.

Thursday, March 24, 2022

The Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration has the honour to table its

SECOND REPORT

Your subcommittee wishes to report on the following decisions taken on March 10, 2022.

  1. Members of the Joint Interparliamentary Council (JIC)

It was agreed that the Honourable Senator Saint-Germain, the Honourable Senator Dawson and the Honourable Senator Plett be named as members of the Joint Interparliamentary Council (JIC) representing the Senate; and that the Honourable Senator Saint-Germain serve as the Senate Co-Chair.

  1. TechExcel Licenses

It was agreed that a sole source contract for the acquisition of 58 additional TechExcel ServiceWise licenses, and their prorated support and maintenance fees, in the current fiscal year at an estimated cost of $65,946 be approved.

It was also agreed a one-time budget transfer of $54,576 from Property and Services Directorate to the Information Services Directorate be approved to cover the cost of the licenses.

  1. Sole Source Contract — LinkedIn

It was agreed that a sole-source contract with LinkedIn for a 1-year period be approved, with the option of four 1-year options, for a total amount of $60,000.

Respectfully submitted,

SABI MARWAH

Chair

The Chair and David Vatcher answered questions regarding the report.

CIBA/2022-03-24/060(P) — Annual Ongoing Software and Support and Maintenance Service Contracts

David Vatcher made a statement regarding the annual ongoing software, support, and maintenance service contracts.

After debate, it was moved by the Honourable Senator Forest that approval be granted for the renewal of the following software, maintenance and/or support service contracts, for fiscal year 2022-23:

  • Blackberry valued at $65,396
  • Microsoft valued at $60,788
  • Blancco Technology Group at $15,800
  • Druide Informatique at $5,367
  • Global Publishing $38,040
  • Just Systems $18,615
  • LogMeln $20,104
  • Netaphor $22,963
  • Sliq Media Technologies $9,070
  • Softchoice $61,841
  • TechExcel $76,173
  • Teramach Technologies $8,934
  • TerraNova Worldwide $9,365
  • Umbra LTD $6,270
  • Zoom Video Communications $22,100

The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.

CIBA/2022-03-24/061(P) — Other Matters

The chair made a statement regarding the matter he took under advisement during the February 10, 2022 committee meeting concerning the interruption of services provided to the food services in the Senate of Canada Building due to the demonstration and circulation challenges take took place in downtown Ottawa in February as well as the food services suspension in the East Block building.

The chair reconfirmed the decision of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure to maintain the East Block cafeteria closed until further notice.

At 12:27 p.m., the committee suspended.

At 12:29 p.m., the committee resumed in camera, pursuant to rule 12-16(1).

At 12:45 p.m., the committee adjourned to the call of the chair.

ATTEST:

Pascale Legault

Chief Corporate Services Officer and Clerk of the Standing Committee on
Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration

Keli Hogan

Recording Secretary

[1] “Indicators of Capacity and Inflation Pressures for Canada”, Bank of Canada, https://www.bankofcanada.ca/rates/indicators/capacity-and-inflation-pressures/.

[2] Major wage settlements by sector and year, Employment and Social Development Canada.

Annexes to First and Second Report of the Subcommittee on the Long Term Vision and Plan of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration.