THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL ECONOMY, BUDGETS AND ADMINISTRATION
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, June 1, 2023
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met with videoconference this day at 9:01 a.m. [ET], in camera, pursuant to rule 12-7(1), to consider financial and administrative matters, and, in public, pursuant to rule 12-7(1), to consider financial and administrative matters.
Senator Lucie Moncion (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
(The committee continued in camera.)
(The committee resumed in public.)
The Chair: Good morning. My name is Lucie Moncion. I am a senator from Ontario and I have the privilege of chairing the Standing Senate Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration.
The meeting began in camera and we will now continue with the public meeting.
I would like to go around the table and have my fellow senators introduce themselves.
Senator Forest: Éric Forest, senator for the Gulf region of Quebec.
Senator Saint-Germain: Raymonde Saint-Germain, from Quebec.
Senator Loffreda: Tony Loffreda, from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Boehm: Peter Boehm, Ontario.
Senator LaBoucane-Benson: Patti LaBoucane-Benson, Treaty 6, Alberta.
Senator Boyer: Yvonne Boyer, Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Audette: Michèle Audette [Innu-Aimun spoken] from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Smith: Larry Smith, Quebec.
Senator Tannas: Scott Tannas, Alberta.
Senator Seidman: Judith Seidman, Montreal, Quebec.
Senator Plett: Donald Plett, Manitoba.
[Translation]
Senator Carignan: Claude Carignan, from the Mille Isles division in Quebec.
The Chair: I would like to welcome our three new members: Senator LaBoucane-Benson, Senator Boehm and Senator Audette.
I’d like to take this opportunity to thank Senator Dean and Senator Gagné, who is now Speaker of the Senate, for their valuable contributions over the past few years. I welcome all those who are following our deliberations across the country.
Honourable senators, the first item on the agenda is approval of the minutes of the public meeting of May 11, 2023, which are in your bundle.
Are there any questions or amendments to the minutes?
I need someone to introduce the following motion:
That the minutes of Thursday, May 11, 2023, be adopted.
Senator Saint-Germain moves the motion.
Does it please you, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Okay.
The Chair: Motion carried.
The next item on the agenda is the report from the Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets on Committee Budgets.
Shaila Anwar, who is clerk assistant at the Committees Directorate, will now join us as a witness.
I understand that Senator Forest will make opening remarks and that Ms. Anwar will help answer questions.
As usual, this presentation will be followed by a question and answer period.
Senator Forest: Honourable senators, on behalf of the subcommittee chair, I’m honoured to present the 16th report of the Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets, which includes recommended allocations for two committee budgets.
Before reviewing each budget request, I wanted to provide some context: for the current 2023-2024 fiscal year, the total funds available for committee expenses will again be $2.2 million, less $320,820 for witness expenses, leaving $1,882,000 for release for individual committee budgets.
This is the fourth allocation for committee budgets for the current fiscal year. You may recall that CIBA has already approved five travel activities (for the agriculture, fisheries and foreign affairs committees) and one general expenses budget (for the Indigenous peoples committee) with a total release to date of $528,131.
The subcommittee met last week to review three budget requests.
The subcommittee met with the chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, or AGFO, who presented a revised budget request with a proposed expenditure of $134,764 for one fact-finding mission to Rome, Italy, in relation to the committee’s study on the status of soil health in Canada; it includes funds for four senators and two parliamentary staff to travel.
You may recall that a similar activity was included in AGFO’s previous budget request in the amount of $66,940 so that two senators and two staff could participate in meetings with representatives of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. However, the committee’s intended trip dates in July were only a few weeks after the annual plenary session of the Global Soil Partnership. The subcommittee recommended that the committee reconsider this activity so that members could attend the plenary session, to add more value to this activity.
The subcommittee was therefore pleased to see that the committee did take our recommendations into consideration and has withdrawn their previous request so that those funds can be returned to the pool of available funds for other committee activities. The revised request from AGFO now includes travel dates that align with the plenary session, which will allow the committee to meet with experts on this topic from around the world. The committee also intends to conduct additional fact-finding while in Italy.
However, the subcommittee notes that the revised budget has added travellers and travel dates to this activity, which has correspondingly raised the overall amount. We also understand that for budgeting purposes, committees often present budgets that include maximum costs for certain items that have variable rates such as airfare and hotels.
Typically, however, the actual expenditures are normally considerably below the total amount budgeted because of the efforts made by committees to find additional savings and secure more competitive rates. It is important also to remind senators that all expenses will be proactively disclosed. Any funds remaining at the conclusion of a travel activity will be clawed back and can be made available for allocation to committees for other activities.
Your subcommittee reviewed the request with these realities in mind, and after careful consideration recommends the release of funds for Activity 1, in the amount of $134,764.
However, this recommendation is conditional on the committee taking steps to ensure that their overall expenditures for this activity are reduced by 35% (so expenditures would be expected to be closer to $88,000).
Your subcommittee also met with the chair of the social affairs committee, or SOCI, who presented a budget application which contained the proposed expenditure of $110,450 for one fact-finding mission to New Brunswick and PEI, in relation to the committee’s general mandate to study issues relating to their study topic on temporary and migrant workers in Canada, including funds for eight senators and seven parliamentary staff to travel.
Your subcommittee reviewed the request, and after careful consideration recommends the release of funds for Activity 1, in the amount of $110,450.
Today’s recommended release of $245,214 brings us to a total for the current fiscal year of $737,345 for six committee travel activities, one conference and one general expenses budget, leaving $1,444,655 for the remainder of the fiscal year.
Unless there are further questions, colleagues, I recommend that the report be adopted.
Should you have any questions, I recommend you direct them to Ms. Anwar.
The Chair: Are there any questions or comments?
Senator Saint-Germain: My question concerns the appropriateness of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry travelling to the FAO, a United Nations organization of which governments, not parliaments, are members.
I found the agenda for the annual meeting on July 12 and 13 on the FAO website. The FAO headquarters are in Rome. I don’t see any specific Canadian presentation. I understand that this study is relevant, as the documentation is available. I wonder if we’re not setting a precedent if a full Senate committee goes to a meeting of a United Nations organization. Incidentally this meeting is held every year.
I question this expense, whether it’s reduced or not. Were talking about a parallel program; I assume it’s very intensive and already confirmed, with relevant authorities, and that we’re able to see the serious intent of this travel? That’s my question.
Senator Forest: It’s an important question. We learned during our discussion with the representatives of the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry that, on the one hand, they had been invited. Two of their members had been invited to meet people from the UN, and we realized that there was a general assembly taking place a few weeks before. We approached them and said, “you’re travelling to Rome a few weeks after the UN General Assembly, so why not kill two birds with one stone?”
Senator Saint-Germain: Of the FAO.
Senator Forest: Of the FAO, sorry. Why didn’t you consider adjusting your trip to take into account the dates of the FAO general assembly? That was the reasoning. Other committee members may wish to add something.
The Chair: Does that answer your question, Senator?
Senator Saint-Germain: It does.
[English]
Senator Plett: First, Senator Forest, I would second the motion to adopt your report, but I do have one question in regard to the Social Affairs Committee part of the trip to Eastern Canada. I thought there were a number of senators that we actually approved. Maybe it was translation, but the translation was “seven staff and a certain number of senators.” I struggle with us putting “a certain number of senators” into a report. Was there not an exact number of senators?
Senator Forest: The exact number of senators is eight.
Senator Plett: Thank you. I think that should be on the record, “eight senators,” not “a certain number of senators.”
Senator LaBoucane-Benson: When will the Social Affairs Committee be travelling? Will it be during a sitting week or a non-sitting week? In July? Thank you .
Shaila Anwar, Clerk Assistant, Committees Directorate: It is actually going to be in September but before the Senate returns.
Senator LaBoucane-Benson: Thank you.
Senator Boehm: This is more of an observation than a question, and it relates to the visit to the FAO in Rome for the soils conference.
We all need to keep a close eye on expenses. Airfares have increased exponentially and certainly during peak periods. For Europe, that is the summertime. We’re finding it difficult in the Foreign Affairs Committee, which I chair, in terms of planning our trip for September. We’re actually looking at reducing costs by not endorsing a business class proposal for senators, or if they want that, they can use their own points and top it up or whatever.
I’m saying that we should make it incumbent on committee chairs and committees to see how much they can save. Otherwise, that won’t be a good look, and that’s a potential Globe and Mail story.
The Chair: Thank you for the comment. It was a concern of the committee members when the discussions were happening.
Senator Moodie: I have a question regarding the point about the cost of travel internationally.
Have we ever, as a committee, thought about placing a threshold on that? Because as things rise, should we be thinking about, if things go beyond this point, your committee cannot travel, at least not to the numbers. How can we manage that?
The Chair: Do you want to answer the question, Senator Tannas?
Senator Tannas: As a member of the committee, I can assure you that this is on the mind of the subcommittee. We’ve suggested reduced numbers of senators going so that not everybody goes, a smaller group goes, they then bring the document and the learnings back.
We also suggested — and I don’t think we did for Foreign Affairs — there is a very large delta between one of our national carriers and the other of our national carriers and they are both flying to Europe. There was an instruction made that there should not be a default to one carrier over another, that they should actively shop in order to try to obtain the best rate. That was not necessarily always happening. As a Westerner, I’ll add that with a smile. Thank you.
Senator Boehm: I want to respond to what Senator Moodie and Senator Tannas said. Based on my own experience, it was a decision of this committee that the Foreign Affairs Committee should go on a reduced number on its study. We’ve made those decisions. The steering committee very helpfully left it all to the chair, and it was difficult. At the end of the day, while every senator is equal and has merit, we want to ensure that the groups are represented and that we have a good balance, as well, in terms of gender. Eventually, it came down to geography as well, because for me that became an easier decision by saying we would have a couple from Atlantic Canada, a couple from Central Canada and also from the West.
If that is the approach we’re going to follow in the future and certainly for the Foreign Affairs Committee, which, by its name, suggests that it will travel from time to time — it has not very often — then these decisions will be increasingly difficult, especially if we’re doing it in other committees. Putting a threshold on top when prices are changing and things are developing would be difficult, but you can look at other carriers, as Senator Tannas has said, including some that offer charter services, for example.
The Chair: Thank you for the comments. Please stay on the report and the topic. I think this conversation is important.
Senator Plett: In reference to what Senator Moodie and Senator Boehm have said, clearly I’m part of the subcommittee that approves this. The Agriculture Committee was given some very clear instructions to bring the cost of their flights down, as Senator Tannas said, in different ways. The threshold is there. They are not allowed to go and spend more money than the money that has been allotted. Whatever the mechanism is that we use — and you’re suggesting, Senator Boehm, that you may be encouraging your members or instructing your members not to fly business class, use points for that — AGFO has been instructed to reduce the cost of their initial request.
They did what most committees do. They got one quote for the purpose of budgeting. Over the years — I’ve been here since 2009 — I don’t think any committee has ever reached the max of what they asked for. It’s always either senators aren’t going or the prices are coming down. I agree with you that Europe is astronomically expensive at that time of the year, but their budget was cut to say you cannot use that number. It’s got to be a lower number. I think they will do their due diligence to do just that.
Senator Loffreda: I am an observer on the SEBS committee, not a member. I do know we have a global budget. Not specific to committees, but do we ever contemplate allocating to committees a percentage of those budgets as a maximum — with exceptions, obviously — and therefore they would have a goal or a target. At this point we have a global budget, but not specific to the committees. Do you see the point?
Senator Plett: Specific to this committee.
The Chair: He’s asking if there’s a percentage.
Senator Loffreda: At the beginning of the year, for example. Here’s a global budget and here is per committee how much they can spend maximum, so the committee knows what they can work with and come in within that number. It’s just an idea. In the corporate world, each division had a budget. We had a global budget. The danger there is one committee could come in and say, we’ve got an important project, and take up 30% of the budget. The other committees — well, it’s a timing issue too.
The Chair: Agreed.
[Translation]
Ms. Anwar: I really have nothing to add about this.
[English]
Are you asking me if that has been considered? There have been various proposals over the years that have been considered in terms of how funds would be allocated, including asking all committees to submit their budget requests at the start of a fiscal year so that the subcommittee can look at the full allocation. The problem with doing that is with variable costs, if a committee wants to travel in February and they’re submitting a budget after April 1, it would be very hard to predict what flight and hotel costs might be several months later. We tend to take a seasonal approach.
Certainly CIBA has, in the past, made specific policy decisions that are time limited or temporary to say, for example, there can be no international travel or a suspension on international travel or only 50% of the members can travel, that kind of thing. Those options still exist.
The next item on the agenda is about establishing a financial policy for committees. These are among the things that we can certainly discuss. But for the purposes of this budget report, we went with the existing rules and practices.
Senator Loffreda: Looking in global for the future, maybe the danger is there. One committee takes up 35% of the budget for one trip. Maybe one committee might have an important issue or a trip, even two senators, there’s no budget for it at the end of the year.
Ms. Anwar: Generally speaking, every year we lapse money in that global budget. Because of the lack of time and the inability to travel because of the parliamentary schedule, in 17 years we’ve never come close to lapsing the total amount of funds.
Senator Loffreda: Last point. Every budget is based on historical trends, current rates, so I’m not —
Ms. Anwar: When budgeting, we have to plan for a worst-case scenario and we budget based on prices from Ottawa. Obviously, just to give a clear number, we don’t know when we start budgeting who will travel. There’s always some variability in the costs. We usually seek four quotes for things like flights, but we have noticed airline costs have gone up tremendously and the summertime in particular is high season for them. When we look to book flights, we’ll be looking at not just cost savings, but the itinerary has to be efficient also. Some of the discount flights that we did look at require 32 hours of travel to get to the destination with stops in four different airports. Sometimes those don’t help either or they’re on fixed dates where you end up having to pay for extra nights at hotels. We have to weigh all of those factors in once we have travel dates. The budget is the maximum. We can’t go over that amount. However, in reality, most expenditures come in at about 40% of what’s budgeted.
[Translation]
The Chair: This is your last turn, Senator Carignan, as we must move on to the other items on the agenda.
Senator Carignan: To answer Senator Loffreda, you have to trust our committee and our subcommittee to judge these items, because some committees never travel — like the committees I sit on — but that’s okay. Having an amount per committee will signal that maybe we should take a trip, because we have money and will lose it if we don’t spend it.
By their very nature, certain committees have to make trips, such as the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade, the Standing Senate Committee on National Security, Defence and Veterans Affairs. By their very nature, some committees have to make more international trips, and we have to trust our subcommittee in this respect when it comes to judging these elements. I’ve sat on this committee before, and I know its members take everything seriously.
The Chair: Senator Forest moves:
That the 16th Report of the Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets be adopted.
Does it please the honourable senators to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Motion carried on division; thank you.
[English]
The next item is a report from the Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets concerning the financial policy for committees. Shaila Anwar, Clerk Assistant; Maxime Fortin, Principal Clerk; and Joëlle Nadeau, Principal Clerk, will now join us as witnesses. As usual, the presentation will be followed by time for questions. It is my understanding that Senator Forest will make opening remarks and that Shaila, Maxime and Joëlle will assist in answering questions.
Senator Forest, you may begin your presentation.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Honourable senators, on behalf of the subcommittee chair, I’m honoured to present the 17th Report of the Subcommittee on the Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets, which proposes that a financial policy for Senate committees be adopted.
In your bundle of documents for this week, you will find a copy of our report and our recommendations, as well as a copy of the draft policy and a supporting document summarizing the key changes in the policy.
I won’t read out the report or the supporting document, but I want to emphasize that the proposed policy is not a revision of an existing policy, but rather a consolidation of long-standing internal economy committee policy decisions, practices and guidelines that apply to Senate committees in the areas of financial management and committee budgets.
The bulk of the proposed policy simply consolidates these various measures into one comprehensive document and it will be familiar to senators who have participated in committee travel activities before.
When the Committees Directorate first asked the subcommittee to authorize the drafting of the comprehensive policy for our consideration, it presented a supporting document that summarized the key changes proposed in the draft policy.
The changes were split up into four categories: technical or administrative changes; current practices and guidelines; grey areas or ambiguity between existing policies; and a few new proposals based on real situations encountered when committees were travelling.
A copy of the supporting document is attached to this report to help you explain some of the proposals and specific changes.
However, I will read you one important part:
Your subcommittee has reviewed the proposal and the draft policy, and recommends that CIBA adopt the financial policy for Senate committees and that the chair be authorized to request Senate approval to make certain related amendments to the Rules of the Senate and the Senate Administrative Rules, as further explained in our report.
As I mentioned before my presentation, I am joined today by the Committees Directorate management team, who are available to you to answer any technical or specific questions about the policy. We have Shaila Anwar, clerk assistant, Committees Directorate; Maxime Fortin, principal clerk, Committees Directorate; and Joëlle Nadeau, principal clerk, Committees Directorate.
Unless you have questions, I recommend that the report be adopted.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator Forest. Are there any questions or comments on the financial policy for senators? I have to tell you that I’ve had a close look at it. I had an initial meeting with the staff. It’s a policy that’s been recast based on the clerks’ experience when committees travel. Are there any questions or comments?
[English]
Senator Boehm: This is a very good draft policy, as I see it. I wanted to focus on international travel, particularly — this is on page 13 — 1.5.5.50, “Senators’ staff members are not entitled to travel with a committee outside of Canada.”
First, I do have a difficulty with the word “entitled.” I think “eligible” works much better. Entitled can also have another meaning. I wanted to explore the possibility of adding a sentence here, because in practice this has, in fact, happened. Why not add a sentence saying, “However staff of committee chairs and deputy chairs are eligible for exceptions to this rule.” I mention that because in the past this is what has happened. If it’s a particularly complex visit abroad, as is sometimes the case, this would allow for some latitude, of course subject to approval. Otherwise, if you state it so bold-faced, at some point in the future someone will say, that’s the policy and you cannot have a staff member from your office go with you. All I’m suggesting is a sentence like that would add some flexibility and would not necessarily manacle the chair or the committee in terms of the international travel aspect.
That’s the first one. I also wanted to ask — and maybe our clerks will have a better idea — about the advantage of using the special passport. In my role now, four-and-a-half years as a senator, I have a green passport, as do many. It says “special” on it, it makes you feel special to have it, but it certainly doesn’t have the weight of the red passport, which I had in my previous life where you sometimes get a separate line and that sort of thing. I wonder what that confers in terms of any additional heft as you’re travelling internationally. Those are my two points.
Ms. Anwar: With respect to your first point, senator, that provision is a long-standing one based on a CIBA policy decision from a long time ago. What we tried to do in the policy is to replicate things that are already in rules, policies, guidelines or practices. Certainly, in the beginning of the policy it says exceptions may be granted by CIBA, and so through the budget process, if a committee were to want to include the chair and deputy chair’s staff, it could be included in the budget application and it would be something that would be reviewed by the subcommittee, then approved by CIBA, then by the Senate. I think the review process already exists. I don’t see the proposed provision as a barrier to that.
Senator Boehm: What about “entitled” versus “eligible?”
Ms. Anwar: If the committee is agreeable to making that change, I don’t see that as a difficult thing. We can certainly do that.
With respect to the green and red passports, I don’t have too much information on that. Off the top of my head, I know that for international travel we have certainly taken the step of getting green passports. It depends on where the committee is travelling. In some countries it does expedite entry into the country, and in some countries it actually acts as a delay because they don’t have anybody to staff it. We play that by ear. For the red passports, I think there are eligibility requirements and that committee travel in and of itself may not qualify for. I know some senators do have the red passports, but we typically, I don’t think, ever request red passports. The green ones are on a case-by-case basis.
Gérald Lafrenière, Clerk of the Senate and Clerk of the Parliaments, and Chief Legislative Services Officer, Senate of Canada: With respect to the green passports, some countries require it. Basically, if you’re travelling for government-related business, and Senate work would be considered in that basket, I’m not going to name the countries, but they require it. The other advantage of the green passport is at times you don’t need a visa for a country if you have a green passport, so it can be efficient in those purposes.
That’s the reason sometimes we ask that it be used. Does it give a lot of advantages in the airports and stuff like that? I would agree that it doesn’t unless you have a red passport, where then you’re considered part of the diplomatic class, which would provide you with additional advantages.
Senator Loffreda: First of all, I support the report; well done. I do have confidence with the subcommittee that we have in place. I was an observer and I can contemplate and say that they do great work.
I agree with Senator Carignan in the sense that if you give every committee an amount, they will be obliged to spend that amount. To clarify that point, given the airfares, which are increasing, I’m saying for the future — not for today, I agree with this report — something to contemplate and put on the table and think about is putting in a maximum. I’ve seen some of the reports come in, and with the airfares increasing, we’re seeing that these trips are getting more and more expensive. Maybe put a maximum. It’s always subject to approval by the subcommittee, obviously. It’s not that if you have a maximum per trip or per committee, you would say, “We have to spend this maximum,” because it’s subject to approval. At least they would know what they can work with as a maximum. So they can say, “Instead of bringing eight senators, according to the maximum per trip or per our annual allocation, we should contemplate three or four because we will be faced with those difficulties going forward.”
This is just to clarify the point. We have confidence in the committee. Like I always say, “Let managers manage. Let the committees manage.” The confidence level is there. It would just be as a guideline because, in the reports, we’ve seen that the air travel has increased substantially. We’ve seen that we had to cut some of those requests. I was witness to that from a number of senators. We say, “No, that’s too many senators. We have to cut it in half,” and what have you. A guideline could maybe be considered going forward. I just put that thought out there, something to consider in the future.
I agree. Not every committee should have a budget if they’ve never travelled. Budgets are based on the trends and on the actual historical numbers and not just on allocating any number arbitrarily.
The Chair: I will bring something in when we vote on the motion on this. Considering the message from Senator Loffreda, I think it’s an item that should be looked at. We could agree to the report and the policy, the way it has been corrected, with the recommendation to look at this, to look at maybe bringing a threshold at another committee, once we look at this, so that we can move forward on this. That would be coming at another meeting.
Senator Loffreda: Rather than threshold, I would use the word “guide” — kind of an instruction — so they don’t come in with 12 senators, when we know the guide or the recommended guideline is a maximum of 10% of the total budget.
The Chair: Senator, you will be taking care of that when you chair that committee. That is when you will be able to bring these comments forward.
For the good of the committee, are we in agreement with this, this morning?
Colleagues, it is moved by the Honourable Senator Forest that the seventeenth report of the Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets be adopted and that we look at guidelines on maximum airfares for future travel.
Is it your pleasure, colleagues, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried. Thank you.
For the following report, we have about nine minutes left.
[Translation]
Senator Carignan: When we adopt policy changes, would it be possible to get the original with the changes added? That would be very helpful. Sometimes we have the notion, the principle, but it can be hard to find them because of the way the whole thing is written up.
Ms. Anwar: Absolutely, Senator. In this case, there was no old version of the policy. This is the first version. That’s why we prepared a table, to essentially indicate the changes to our practices.
Senator Carignan: In the future?
Ms. Anwar: In the future, certainly; no problem.
[English]
The Chair: We have six minutes left. Can we postpone the long-term for two weeks? If we don’t present and you agree with the report and recommendation, that can be done quickly. I don’t want to take away your time.
Senator Tannas: Let’s postpone, chair.
The Chair: Thank you. Senator Saint-Germain, item 11.
Senator Saint-Germain: I would suggest we postpone because this may lead to a discussion that we need to have.
The Chair: Very well. David, you are on deck. We are at item 12.
[Translation]
Honourable senators, the next item on the agenda is the service level agreement with the House of Commons. We have with us David Vatcher, Director of the Information Services Directorate.
David, you can give us a brief overview of the recommended changes to the policy, and after that, we may have questions for you.
David Vatcher, Director, Information Services Directorate, Senate of Canada: Good morning, Madam Chair and honourable senators.
The purpose of this annual briefing note is to illustrate the increased costs tied to our service level agreement with the House of Commons, which is ending this fiscal year.
This special agreement gives us the ability to identify the concerned parties and define the associated services and costs.
Lastly, agreements under which the House of Commons previously paid for certain items are expiring. In those cases, the Senate will have to pay its share when the agreements are renewed.
For this fiscal year, there is an increase of 15%, or $316,000, over the initial amount from four years ago. You’ll find a detailed breakdown in the note.
The agreement covers salaries, House of Commons technicians, ParlVu, as well as network equipment maintenance and software contracts. There is a small increase of $67,000 over the amount approved in the main estimates, and an internal budget reallocation will cover that. No new funding is currently being sought. Thank you, and I would be happy to answer your questions.
The Chair: Does anyone have any questions for David? Seeing none, I will ask for a senator to move the following motion:
That Appendix II (Summary of Services and Costs) of the master Service Level Agreement between the Senate and the House of Commons be approved for a total of $2,468,879 for 2023-24.
Can I have a mover? Senator Loffreda? I’m trying to change it up. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: I declare the motion carried. Thank you very much, David.
[English]
The next item is concerning the membership of the Artwork and Heritage Advisory Working Group. Senators, with the departure of Senator Bovey on the working group, there is a vacancy.
[Translation]
Senator Audette would like to move the following motion:
It is moved by the Honourable Senator Audette: That the Honourable Senator Cardozo be named as member of the Artwork and Heritage Advisory Working Group.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
[English]
The Chair: Carried.
Colleagues, are there any other items that you would like to discuss in the last four minutes that we have left?
[Translation]
Senator Forest: For the important discussion we are going to have on travel costs, I think it would be helpful to have a list of all the rules. For example, next week, I’m taking part in a fact‑finding mission. Our travel agency — which I’m not too impressed with, by the way — found me a flight that was absolutely unreasonable. I checked with my own travel agency, which found me the same trip at a lower cost and with a reasonable flight itinerary.
Here’s an option. Say the travel agency proposes an itinerary, but we are able to find the same trip cheaper on our own. If there are ways to save money, it would be helpful because, as we all know, flights are extremely expensive. The Senate’s travel agency does pay attention to cost, but sometimes the trip is more expensive because we have to spend two days, a day at the airport on the way back and the other day, so there’s the cost of staying another night. It would be useful to have all of the rules for that discussion, to improve how some things are done. There are things we have control over and can change.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator Forest. That’s an excellent point.
Senator Saint-Germain: We have to ask the Joint Interparliamentary Council, because we use the travel agency recommended by the council. I will put the question to the council.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator Saint-Germain. We have a minute left, so I would like to thank everyone who made sure the meeting ran smoothly. Thank you to our interpreters, all the staff members and the technicians. Thank you, senators. You are always very accommodating, so it’s a pleasure to chair the committee’s meetings. Thank you, and have a great day.
(The committee adjourned.)