THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL ECONOMY, BUDGETS AND ADMINISTRATION
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, May 19, 2022
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met with videoconference this day at 11:30 a.m. [ET], pursuant to rule 12-7(1), consideration of financial and administrative matters; and, in camera, pursuant to rule 12-7(1), consideration of financial and administrative matters.
Senator Sabi Marwah (Chair) in the chair.
(The committee continued in camera.)
(The committee resumed in public.)
The Chair: Good morning. My name is Sabi Marwah, I am a senator from Ontario and I have the privilege to chair the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration.
Today we are conducting a hybrid meeting with some senators participating virtually and others in person. The meeting began in camera, and we are now continuing with the public broadcast.
I would like to introduce the senators who are participating in this meeting. Senator Pat Bovey, Manitoba; Senator Yvonne Boyer, Ontario; Senator Larry Campbell, British Columbia; Senator Dennis Dawson, Quebec; Senator Tony Dean, Ontario; Senator Éric Forest, Quebec; Senator Raymonde Gagné, Manitoba; Senator Elizabeth Marshall, Newfoundland and Labrador; Senator Lucie Moncion, Ontario; Senator Rosemary Moodie, Ontario; Senator Donald Plett, Manitoba; Senator Raymonde Saint-Germain, Quebec; Senator Judith G. Seidman, Quebec; Senator Larry W. Smith, Quebec; Senator Scott Tannas, Alberta.
Welcome to all those viewing these proceedings across the country.
Honourable senators, the first item is the approval of the public minutes from May 5, 2022, which are in your package.
Are there any questions or changes? Can I have a mover for the following motion:
That the Minutes of the Proceedings of Thursday, May 5, 2022, be adopted.
Senator Bovey moves the motion.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion? If any senator wishes to oppose or abstain, please raise your hand. Seeing no objections, I declare the motion carried.
Colleagues, moving to item 7, which is a report from the Artwork and Heritage Advisory Working Group. Tamara Dolan, Curator, Heritage and Curatorial Services will now join the meeting by video conference as a witness. As usual, the presentation will be followed by time for questions.
It is my understanding that Senator Bovey, who is chair of the working group, will make opening remarks and that Tamara will assist in answering questions.
Hon. Patricia Bovey: Colleagues, it is my pleasure to update you, and I have a few items for approval as well. Our committee has been very busy.
Our group has endorsed the 2022-23 budget for purchase, disposal, repair and restoration of heritage assets and works of art. We are now seeking approval from CIBA to extend that budget of $110,000, which has already been approved. As I said, given it has been approved, it has no impact on Senate Administration, because the monies are already included in our Heritage and Curatorial Services budget.
The first item I want to talk about is furniture selected for restoration. Those selections are made based on their condition, the current requirements for use, anticipated future use, and, thus, each year funds are allocated to the ongoing care of this heritage furniture. When the Senate rises for the summer, a condition assessment will be completed to determine the needed scope of work.
During the pandemic, heritage furniture was used less actively than before. Therefore, the decision was made to increase the allocation of funding to artwork conservation and decease the allocation of funding to heritage furniture restoration. The artwork selected for conservation treatment is based on the condition of the pieces and future display plans. This year, the planned conservation treatment includes four portraits of former Speakers in the Senate and a large royal portrait.
I want to focus on the portrait of King Edward VII. Its quote for restoration, I’m sure, seems high. It is being quoted at $30,000, and I would like to address this.
When Centre Block closed, most of the royal portraits from Centre Block were placed in storage. As the royal paintings had not received any conservation treatment for many years prior to the building’s closure, last year, the Artwork and Heritage Advisory Working Group endorsed the recommendation to conserve one royal portrait per year while Centre Block is closed. The Department of Canadian Heritage’s Canadian Conservation Institute, or CCI, as we affectionately call it, was asked to advise on the treatment of the portrait of King Edward VII, and they were asked to advise on the treatment that was proposed by outside conservators.
The CCI does promote and advise on the conservation of heritage collections across Canada through its expertise in conservation science, treatment and preventative conservation, including the determination of greatest concerns, and they recommend treatment methodologies.
CCI’s review noted that the risk of further deterioration of the portrait of King Edward VII and all other portraits while in storage is low, but all royal portraits need to be conserved before they are reinstalled. That supports our committee’s recommendation to treat the portraits while Centre Block is closed for rehabilitation.
The Senate uses private artwork conservation companies to complete treatment. While CCI does do conservation treatments, given their national mandate for all public collections, they do not do conservation treatments for the Senate. They, as I said, have provided advice and support in the past to ensure our Senate collection is prudently cared for.
I believe you have the condition report and proposed treatment for this work in your package. The conservation work itself is not difficult, but it requires a huge heat table because of its size, and there are very few heat tables of this size. Its restoration is not complicated, but its size is.
I would be happy to discuss any questions you and the committee have before we vote on this matter.
We do have a contingency budget of $9,000 for unplanned work and during the fiscal year, new damage may be identified requiring immediate treatment. This contingency is used for those situations and any additional costs required for the planned work. If these funds are not required, they will be relocated within the Heritage and Curatorial Services budget for other projects.
The pandemic does continue to have an unpredictable impact on on-site work and sourcing materials. If approved, work will start on these four works, including the portrait, in the spring of 2022. Work not completed because of the pandemic in the 2022-23 fiscal year will be completed in the next fiscal year.
At present, there are no forecasted expenses either for purchases or for disposal. However, if this changes, we will certainly seek approval from CIBA in the future report.
Other items for information, colleagues, is our Cultivating Perspectives project. We’re now in the second year where we have invited curators from across Canada to write about artwork and artifacts in the Senate. This new content will be published on the Senate’s website starting in the fall of 2022, and most of those essays are now in.
As you know, in 2021, Greg Hill, the Audain Senior Curator of Indigenous Art at the National Gallery of Canada, provided us with strategic recommendations for proper representation of Indigenous art in the Senate and in this room, the Indigenous Peoples Committee Room that we’re meeting in now. We had hoped to have a Nova Scotian Indigenous artist installed very soon and had agreed to a loan from the Art Gallery of Nova Scotia of Dozay Christmas; however, the quote we got for the shipping fees are exorbitant, and I am not going to ask for your support. I will update you at a later date and can assure you we are looking for another resolution.
We had decided for our Museums at the Senate project’s second installation to invite a museum from Nova Scotia. However, in light of the shipping costs we have just had for the one small work, we’ve had other ideas with them. My thought is that we’re going to have to revisit this decision and have a museum closer to the Senate for the next Museums at the Senate.
With Honouring Canada’s Black Artists, our next invitation will be to artists from Quebec, and we are under way right now in selecting those two artists. As you know, so far, we’ve displayed works from Vancouver, Winnipeg and Toronto, and this will be the first time this program will display francophone artists, so we’re moving forward on that.
We have just installed Visual Voices — Artists and the Environment, with the work of Roberta Bondar and Ed Burtynsky, which mirrors our discussions in the Senate on climate change. The feedback has been incredible and, as a result, with tours beginning, we have decided to extend the display from September to next March. Given the longer term, we will have to increase the fee to the artists of $175 each to meet the CARFAC recommended schedule, and this is within budget.
We’ve worked with many artists and curators across Canada over the last few years through the pandemic, and as a thank you, we’re planning to organize a reception in the fall of 2022 to be funded from our individual offices, so I won’t be coming to you for committee budgets for this. I do worry about budgets, you can see.
At our last meeting, I want to say that the family of the late senator Josée Forest-Niesing offered her ribbon skirt that she designed and selected the materials for, which was made by her mother, after her passing. The family offered this ribbon skirt as a gift to the Senate of Canada. We have agreed in principle and are now seeking installation quotes and will update you when we have received those potential costs.
On behalf of our advisory working group, I extend my sincere thanks to Senator Forest-Niesing’s family.
Colleagues, I thank you. Please ask me whatever questions are on your mind about what I’ve said and where we are going. Tamara is here to answer questions I can’t. Thank you.
Senator Marshall: Thank you very much, Senator Bovey. That was excellent.
What room is the artwork displayed in? There is some here.
Senator Bovey: Yes.
Senator Marshall: I know there is some in the two rooms downstairs and where we go into the Senate. Is there anything on display anywhere else? I want to make sure we do not miss anything.
Senator Bovey: We are doing what we can with the pennies and dollars that we have available.
This room that we are in now, the Aboriginal Peoples Committee Room, is designated for the installation of art by Indigenous artists. Our goal is to make sure this work properly represents Canada, which it doesn’t yet. We have a plan.
Room B30 is our first installation of Museums at the Senate, and that is the Inuit work from Nunavut and the Winnipeg Art Gallery, and it is up until this fall. That is the installation we seek to cover with either Nova Scotia, if the prices come down, or closer to home.
We had originally wanted to do B45 as well, but the budget that our group was given allowed for one committee room to be installed, not two. There is that space for future dreams.
Right now, Honouring Black Artists is in the foyer of the Senate of Canada Building itself. Last year it was in the antechamber to the foyer of the Senate, which is where we now have the two works by Roberta Bondar and Edward Burtynsky.
As you know, the portraits of the Speakers of the Senate are in several places in the foyer and hallways of the building. Honestly, now that we are back, we will be doing an assessment of what other spaces there are.
I can tell you one member of my committee has asked that we, quite rightly, see what we can do about exhibiting a few works by Canadian Asian artists, which I think is a great idea. We haven’t designated a space yet.
As far as the ribbon skirt of Senator Forest-Niesing, rather than go into a lot of detail, I’m looking at how we can do it vertically. I will be consulting with conservators I have worked with before with textiles and, whether we do it in this room or elsewhere in the Senate, those are discussions our committee has to have.
Senator Marshall: Is somebody keeping track? We have a significant amount of artwork. I did an audit of the artwork for the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador a number of years ago. There were several pieces we couldn’t find. Is somebody keeping track?
Are the works of art are self-insured? The government self-insures?
Senator Bovey: Yes. In terms of the insurance, you’re right. Tamara will correct me if I’m wrong on this, but when we moved out of Centre Block and moved some work over here into the Senate of Canada Building, and/or into the new storage facilities, there was an inventory done on the collection at that point.
I agree with you; it’s really important. As you know — and as approved by this committee — our committee has updated the policies and procedures. The procedures include this really important administrative aspect of it.
Now that we’re back and able to go places, I would love to take our committee to the storage area. As you know, I gave a report on the storage area in a statement in the Senate a couple of years ago. All these things have to come together. I’m very encouraged by the way it’s coming together.
Yes, Tamara is on top of it all.
Senator Marshall: Thank you.
Senator Moodie: Chair, I am letting you know that we’re hearing French on the English channel. It was popping in and out.
The Chair: It has just been corrected. I advised them and I believe it’s working correctly now.
I see no other hands up. Senator Bovey moves the following motion:
That the $110,000 be approved for restoration and repair of the Senate’s Artwork and Heritage Collection for the 2022-23 fiscal year.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion? Seeing no objection, I declare the motion carried.
Colleagues, the next item covers options to provide mental health support and counselling services to witnesses invited to provide testimony on sensitive or traumatic topics to Senate committees.
Toni Francis, Chief Human Resources Officer, Human Resources Directorate; and Shaila Anwar, Clerk Assistant, Committees Directorate, will join the meeting by video conference as witnesses.
Shaila, please begin.
Shaila Anwar, Clerk Assistant, Committees Directorate: Thank you.
Good morning, senators. As many of you know, Senate committees often tackle a variety of sensitive or difficult subject matters. The witness testimony at such meetings can sometimes be sensitive, disturbing and difficult to hear for all participants and for those who are following our proceedings.
Although we have an Employee and Family Assistance Program for senators and Senate employees, there is no formal system in place to offer similar supports for committee witnesses. Recently, some committees have approached CIBA to express a need for such supports.
I am here today with my colleague Toni Francis, the Chief Human Resources Officer, to seek your direction about implementing a pilot project for a more formal process to provide mental health support and counselling to witnesses invited to provide testimony on sensitive and traumatic topics to Senate committees.
Toni Francis, Chief Human Resources Officer, Human Resources Directorate, Senate of Canada: Good afternoon, senators.
Sharing one’s lived experience, when that experience is traumatic — even for those who share it willingly — does not necessarily come without impact. The safest of spaces, far less before parliamentarians and the public, can result, for some, in additional harm or post-traumatic stress. Past measures used to reduce the potential trauma-inducing aspects of such testimony do exist and may continue to respond to the needs of some of our witnesses.
For your information, we can share that the House of Commons recently established a program to provide on-site support to witnesses before and after committee appearances. They provide crisis management services to designated people following a victim impact statement given during committee meetings.
Shaila will take you through our options.
[Translation]
Ms. Anwar: We looked at three possible options for your consideration.
Option A proposes that the Senate offer mental health services or other culturally appropriate counselling services as an eligible expense for witness reimbursement.
In this scenario, a witness could select the therapist — an individual of their choice — or other culturally appropriate counselling and could claim up to $500 for support services. This amount was determined based on the rate of $175 per hour for three hours of counselling services, more or less the amount provided to employees for counselling services under the employee and family assistance program.
The witness would be required to submit a reimbursement request with receipts and would be reimbursed in accordance with established procedures for witness expenses.
Option A requires no initial investment. Spending would vary based on the number of requests submitted.
[English]
Ms. Francis: Option B would refer witnesses to specific agencies or service providers qualified to provide mental health services and/or culturally appropriate support, such as with elders, on a contract or honorarium. Should this option be selected, a formal request for proposals would be launched to select or identify qualified service providers. The cost of this option is estimated to be between $25,000 and $35,000 annually.
Under option C, the Senate would obtain on-site services through a witness support program from a service provider, such as the Senate’s current EFAP program. In this scenario, witnesses would have access to on-site clinical support, including direct mental health support and resources before and after committee appearances. Should this option be selected, the cost is estimated to be $113,300. The last two options may be most suitable for witnesses without any established supports in place.
It’s important to consider that not all witnesses will need support or request support. We should not dismiss the possibility that witnesses may have access to an existing support person or service provider.
Witnesses already in care or who have an established and trusted relationship with an elder, a therapist or a support person may find it difficult to access services from someone new, someone who may need to hear their story from the start, yet again.
Regardless of the option selected, consideration must be given to ensuring the protection of any private health information of our witnesses.
Ms. Anwar: Based on our analysis, we recommend that CIBA consider directing the Committees Directorate to implement option A in the short term on a pilot project basis.
A pilot project would be quick for us to implement, it can be funded from the existing budget envelope for witness expenses and would allow us to track and monitor claims and report back to CIBA in a year’s time.
It also allows witnesses to be in charge of choosing their preferred therapist, counsellor or support person. Choosing option A right now will also not preclude a more complex or embedded option for the longer term. This will allow committees to work with HR to further examine, evaluate and consider some of the more complex options to see if they are feasible for the Senate in the longer term.
[Translation]
Thank you very much. We’re both available to answer your questions.
[English]
The Chair: Just to clarify, colleagues, we are not recommending option B or C. We are recommending option A, which is a pilot program at $500 per witness at the maximum. The maximum annual cost is $25,000, so there is a cap on it. HR and the Committees Directorate will evaluate options B and C and come back and see if that’s a more viable option or better option or not, and we can decide on that in a year from now.
Senator Plett: I’m a little disappointed, chair, that this item wasn’t brought up in camera. I really think this is an issue that should be discussed in camera, not in a public meeting. I would request that we get the presentations that have been made here for us, in writing, so that we can look at them over the next week or two and that this be brought back at the next CIBA meeting in an in camera portion.
The Chair: Senators, is that your wishes? Is everybody comfortable with deferring this to the next time we meet in camera? All right, we shall do that.
Senator Tannas, you had a question. Is there anything you wish to raise in the meantime?
Senator Tannas: I’m fine, chair. That is a good idea. Thank you.
The Chair: Okay. Let’s move on to the next item.
Colleagues, the next item is the request for proposal for senators and Senate Administration office furniture and furnishings. I will note that going forward the administration has initiated a new one-page template to summarize key information on the RFP for us, the decision maker. This is clearer and more succinct than a three-page briefing note and to me, it is a good initiative because all the information is there and it is consistent. I congratulate Caroline and Pascale for this initiative.
Caroline Morency, Director General, Property and Services Directorate will be joining us. She is here by video conference as a witness. Caroline, you can take the briefing note and the one page as read. Is there anything you wish to add?
Caroline Morency, Director General, Property and Services Directorate, Senate of Canada: Thank you, honourable senators. Today I appear before you to seek your approval to proceed with this competitive process to establish a new standing offer for the provision of office furniture and furnishing for senators and Senate Administration offices for a term of two years with three one-year options.
The existing standing offer will expire on October 31, and although there is a one-year option that remains, we will have reached its maximum value by that date. We are, therefore, seeking your approval to launch a competitive request for proposals aimed to obtain the best price for the procurement of furniture and furnishings, and also to ensure that we have a mechanism in place on or before the expiry date of the current standing offer.
The standing offer is not a contract but rather an offer from a supplier to provide goods and services at predetermined prices. There is no obligation for the Senate to purchase a fixed number of items or a dollar amount. A call up is made only when a requirement is identified.
As the chair mentioned, in your bundle you have the competitive procurement process request form for this item. In terms of the value, the value of the proposed standing offer is being sought for a maximum amount that could be spent, and by no means is it a mandate to spend this full amount.
Traditionally, yearly expenditures for furniture and furnishing have varied from one year to another as we apply the just-in-time inventory management strategy where assets are procured only when they are required.
[Translation]
Given current pricing pressures in the supply chain, we expect annual spending to be higher than in recent years. In addition, if not for the adjustable desks we purchased in 2021-22 to accommodate staff working remotely, we would not have reached the maximum amount of the existing standing offer because we spent less during the pandemic than we traditionally spend each year.
Closing this standing offer will therefore have no impact on the Senate’s funding requirements, as expenditures related to furnishings can be accounted for within existing Property & Services Directorate budgets.
This concludes my presentation. I’m now ready to answer your questions. Thank you.
[English]
The Chair: Before we open it up for questions, I wish to remind senators that if we are discussing this request for proposals in public, please do not refer to dollar amounts, your personal opinion on suppliers nor the selection criteria as this could influence the bidding process. If you do have any questions on this front, we should discuss that in camera when we get there. With that, I’ll open it up for questions.
Senator Marshall: I have a question, but I don’t know if you would prefer that I ask it in camera. I wanted to talk about the furniture. I am kind of surprised that we’re acquiring new furniture. I just think of my own office. Somebody went to some storage place and picked out some furniture and used that. Is there really a need for new furniture? I can understand the furniture that we bought for the staff working remotely, but I would think that there is sufficient furniture in storage that we would not need to be going out and buying much.
The Chair: I think we can address this one in public. Caroline, do you care to address it?
Ms. Morency: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair and Senator Marshall. Indeed, we do have some furniture in the warehouse, but we’re running out of stock. The condition of the assets or the furniture has precipitated us to dispose of some of them. We’re running out of stock, basically.
Historically, we have been keeping furniture for over 15 years. We have a certain number of items, but we are running out of some items. That would be mainly for senator offices.
Senator Marshall: So would that be things like furniture with fabric on it? Most of the wooden furniture in the Senate is absolutely gorgeous. Can you just give me an idea as to what we would be buying?
Ms. Morency: Absolutely. So for example, a set of furniture for senators’ offices, which includes all of the elements or the items that we find in an office of a senator. Those could be examples of that. It could be anything from a chair to a desk to a bookcase, lamps, things like that, depending on the needs.
Senator Marshall: Thank you.
The Chair: Seeing no questions, colleagues, we will approve this formally in camera because we can say the dollar amounts at that time.
Colleagues, for the next item, Pierre Lanctôt, our Chief Financial Officer, will join the meeting by video conference as a witness.
Again, it is my honour to present the fifth report of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure concerning the proposed amendments to the Senators’ Office Management Policy regarding senators’ points of departure and arrival.
Following a discussion of this matter on April 7, steering did discuss the matter again and we also heard from Pierre. Steering concluded that the departure and arrival location in a senator’s province or territory should be limited to the official declared provincial-territorial residents. The subcommittee felt strongly that the rules for travel in SOMP allow for clear and consistent application by all senators.
In making our recommendation, the subcommittee took into consideration the complexity of implementing a new process and the reputational risk to the Senate. Steering is, therefore, recommending that CIBA approve their proposed amendments and adopt the report. With that, I’ll open it up for questions for Pierre or for any members of steering.
Senator Marshall: I have just one question. Pierre, in reference to the staff, it says it’s really for staff for itineraries starting and ending in Ottawa and the senator’s provincial-territorial residence. But you wouldn’t have a staff at the senator’s provincial-territorial residence.
If somebody required their staff to come to their home province for whatever reason, you wouldn’t link them up with the senator’s residence, would you? I would think they would usually stay in a hotel or a B & B or something of that nature. You wouldn’t say they have to travel between Ottawa and the senator’s residence?
Pierre Lanctôt, Chief Financial Officer, Finance and Procurement Directorate, Senate of Canada: Thank you, Senator Marshall. The reference to the provincial-territorial residence is for the senator and dependents only.
Senator Marshall: In the little box, table 7.1, is that the existing? It says:
“For senators, designated travellers, dependents, and staff for itineraries starting and ending in Ottawa and the senator’s provincial/territorial residence . . . .”
The Chair: I think that’s only referring to the points, Senator Marshall.
Senator Marshall: Oh, okay. That’s only for travel points.
The Chair: That’s referring to the points, I think. Am I correct? I thought Pascale mentioned that’s for the points. But I can assure you the staff will not be from provincial or territorial residences. We can clarify that when you do the final rules.
Senator Marshall: If you could, please. Thank you.
The Chair: Colleagues, can I have a mover for the following motion:
That the Fifth Report of the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be adopted.
Senator Plett moves the motion. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion? Seeing no objections, I declare the motion carried.
Colleagues, the next item concerns a new composition for the Joint Interparliamentary Council. Jeremy LeBlanc, Clerk Assistant and Director General, International and Interparliamentary Affairs; and Marie-Ève Belzile, Principal Clerk, Parliamentary Exchanges and Protocol, International and Interparliamentary Affairs will now join the meeting by video conference as witnesses.
Colleagues, as a bit of background, you will recall that at our March 24 meeting, we agreed that I write a letter to the Chair of the Board of Internal Economy in the House seeking their agreement to change the composition of JIC so that all Senate groups and parties are represented.
I’m happy to report that at this meeting of May 12, the Board of Internal Economy considered this matter and agreed to a change that would allow the representation for all recognized parliamentary caucuses and groups while maintaining the usual 30%-70% ratio between the Senate and the House of Commons.
With that, I’ll open it up for questions for Jeremy or Marie-Ève.
Senator Tannas: Chair, I have a motion to make when questions are done.
The Chair: Okay.
Senator Dawson: Senator Tannas’s motion might answer my question. I would hope that we name somebody soon because we have upcoming meetings, and the sooner the better.
The Chair: That is part of the motion, Senator Dawson. I’ll get to that in a minute. Seeing no questions, can I have a mover for the following motion:
The Joint Interparliamentary Council shall be composed of:
one member of each recognized party or parliamentary group in the Senate, but no fewer than three Senators, appointed by the Standing Senate Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, one of whom will be appointed by that Committee to serve as the Senate Co-Chair;
members of the House of Commons appointed by the Speaker in such numbers as is necessary to reflect the 30-70 split between both Houses, consisting of: a Chair occupant who shall serve as the House of Commons Co-Chair; the Whip of each of the recognized parties or their designate; representatives of Association Chairs and/or Vice-Chairs and/or the Board of Internal Economy, appointed to reflect the relative party standings in the House.
Senator Bovey moves the motion. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion? Agreed. Carried.
Senator Tannas, please go ahead with your motion to appoint someone.
Senator Tannas: I move:
That the Honourable Senator Downe be named as the fourth member of the Joint Interparliamentary Council, representing the Senate.
The Chair: All agreed, colleagues? Carried.
Colleagues, is there any other public business?
This ends the public portion of the meeting. If there are no other questions, we’ll go briefly in camera for five minutes to approve the RFP.
(The committee continued in camera.)