THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL ECONOMY, BUDGETS AND ADMINISTRATION
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, October 23, 2025
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met with videoconference this is day at 8 a.m., pursuant to rule 12-7(1), to consider financial and administrative matters; and, in camera, pursuant to rule 12-7(1), to consider financial and administrative matters.
Senator Lucie Moncion (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Good morning and welcome to the members of the Committee on Internal Economy. My name is Lucie Moncion, and I am an Ontario senator. It is my privilege to chair the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration.
[English]
Before we begin, to support the smooth operation of the committee proceedings, the following guidelines must be observed by all participants to help prevent audio feedback. Consult the cards on the table for guidelines to prevent audio feedback incidents. Always keep your earpiece away from the microphones. Microphones must not be touched. Activation and deactivation will be managed by the console operator. Avoid handling your earpieces while the microphone is active. Earpieces should either remain on the ear or be placed on the designated sticker at each seat. Thank you all for your cooperation.
I would like to acknowledge that the land on which we gather is the traditional, ancestral and unceded territory of the Anishinaabe Algonquin Nation and is now home to many other First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples from across Turtle Island.
I would now like to go around the table and ask my colleagues to introduce themselves.
Senator Boehm: Peter Boehm, Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Oudar: I am Manuelle Oudar from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Boyer: Yvonne Boyer, Ontario.
Senator LaBoucane-Benson: Patti LaBoucane-Benson, Treaty 6 territory, Alberta.
Senator Mohamed: Farah Mohamed, Ontario.
Senator MacAdam: Jane MacAdam, Prince Edward Island.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Good morning. I am Éric Forest from the Gulf region, in Quebec.
Senator Saint-Germain: I am Raymonde Saint-Germain from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Tannas: Scott Tannas, Alberta.
Senator Wilson: Duncan Wilson, British Columbia, filling in for Senator Henkel.
Senator Francis: Brian Francis, Epekwitk, Prince Edward Island
[Translation]
Senator Audette: [Innu-aimun spoken] I am Michèle Audette from Quebec.
[English]
Senator Osler: Flordeliz (Gigi) Osler, Manitoba.
[Translation]
Senator Housakos: I am Leo Housakos from Montreal, Quebec.
[English]
Senator Smith: Larry Smith, Saurel, Quebec.
Senator MacDonald: Michael MacDonald, Cape Breton, Nova Scotia.
Senator Al Zaibak: Mohammad Al Zaibak, Toronto, Ontario.
The Chair: Thank you.
I would also like to welcome all of you who follow our deliberations across the country.
[Translation]
Colleagues, the first item on today’s agenda is the consent agenda for approval. Just a reminder that the consent agenda items are not controversial, but require our approval. For these items, a briefing note, form or other document is submitted ahead of time, but no presentation is needed.
For today’s meeting, the consent agenda contains the following item: the Minutes of Proceedings for the meeting of October 2, 2025, which was held in public and in camera.
Can I have a mover for the following motion:
That the consent agenda be approved.
Senator Boyer: I so move.
The Chair: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: The motion is adopted. The second item relates to the annual financial statements of the Senate of Canada and audit results.
With us this morning are Isabelle Ricard, Chief Financial Officer, and Nathalie Charpentier, Comptroller and Deputy Chief Financial Officer, from the Finance and Procurement Directorate. Joining us by video conference are Sonia Leblanc, Partner, Assurance Services, and Niguel Givogue, Senior Manager, Assurance Services, at Ernst & Young. Good morning and welcome.
I understand that Senator Forest will present the financial statements and that the external auditor will then present the audit results.
Isabelle and Nathalie will also be available to answer questions, and, as usual, senators will have the opportunity to talk with the auditors in private without their staff present.
We will then return to the meeting agenda.
[English]
Hon. Éric Forest: I have the honour of presenting the first report of your subcommittee.
[Translation]
Your subcommittee has reviewed the Financial Statements of the Senate of Canada for the year ended March 31, 2025, as well as the audit results report. The audit was conducted in accordance with generally accepted Canadian auditing standards by the professional services firm of Ernst & Young, LLP.
This audit resulted in an unqualified auditor’s report indicating that the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Senate of Canada as at March 31, 2025, and the results of its operations and cash flows in accordance with Canadian public sector accounting standards.
Your subcommittee recommends that these audited financial statements be approved and tabled in the Senate.
As the chair mentioned, if you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to ask our auditors, who are joining us by video conference.
The Chair: Are there any questions or comments for the witnesses in the room? Thank you.
Senator Forest: I’d like to move that the first report of the Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets be adopted and that, pursuant to the division of responsibilities between the Internal Economy Committee and the Audit and Oversight Committee, the internal report on the financial highlights of the audited financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2025 and the results of the audit for the year ended March 31, 2025 be shared with the Audit and Oversight Committee.
[English]
The Chair: Are we in support of adopting this motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Adopted. Thank you.
Colleagues, as I mentioned earlier, it is a good practice for senators to meet privately with the auditors following an audit. At this time, if senators agree, I will ask that we go in camera, but before we go there, I would like to ask Senator Forest, did you have that in camera portion with the auditors when you had your session?
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Not necessarily.
The Chair: Is there a reason why you didn’t receive the presentation?
Senator Forest: Yes, we received the auditors’ presentation.
The Chair: Was this done in camera?
Senator Forest: Yes, we were in camera.
The Chair: Okay. The reason I am asking is that the report that we were presented with is a clean report, unqualified.
Do you think we need to go in camera with the auditors? If you think so, we will move in camera.
Senator Forest: I don’t see why we would move in camera.
The Chair: Are there any other comments on the matter? Are there more specific questions for the auditors?
[English]
Senator MacAdam: I think we should meet in camera with the auditors, if that’s what you’re asking.
The Chair: Yes, that’s what I’m asking. Thank you. I think it might be a good practice. At this time, if senators agree, I will ask that we go in camera. I would request that all officials and staff please leave the meeting, except for the representatives of Ernst & Young, senators and the recording secretary, who will act as clerk for this portion of the meeting.
(The committee continued in camera.)
(The committee resumed in public.)
The Chair: Welcome back, staff.
Before I go any further, I wish to take this opportunity to sincerely thank the financial team. As I understand it, this is as good as it gets in terms of an audit. Our team again received this year a clean opinion on the financials. No adjustments or corrections were required by the external auditor, and no recommendations were made in terms of internal controls or process.
I would now like to address the timing of the financial statements. The audit is conducted in the summer when the year‑end is over and the budget allocation for the new year is done. This allocation of the work ensures an efficient usage of our internal resources. While the audited financial statements are ready in early September, we are not requesting senators to ensure travel costs solely to review the financial statements. The work of the Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets, or SEBS, is prioritized when the Senate resumes sitting in the fall, and once SEBS has endorsed the financial statements, those are presented to CIBA. This is what we did this morning. The presentation of the financial statements today is in line with the planned timeline.
The next step will be to share the financial statements with AOVS and then with the entire Senate before publishing them on our website. Are we in agreement with sharing our financial statements with AOVS?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Osler: Madam Chair. I am content to share the statements. My question is related to the statements but more the timing of when we were sent the package. As a senator relatively new to CIBA, I’m wondering if it is the committee’s usual practice and whether it is best practice to send a complex package with a lot of information less than 48 hours before the meeting.
The Chair: Senator, I will tell you this: If we were a regular board, like in a company, we would have four meetings a year. That is what happens when you have board meetings in a private company. They don’t meet every two weeks. That is the problem we face here. Because we meet every two weeks and your steering committee meets on a weekly basis, access to the documents is according to the schedule that we have. It has been this way for years, senator. I’m not saying that it is the best practice or that it should not be changed. We are looking at this. Steering is going to be discussing this.
It also has to do with the fact we have an unusual schedule in the Senate. We sit three weeks at a time and then are off for a week. It is a different timetable. That is one of the aspects.
Another aspect is the confidentiality of the information that is provided to senators and staff. That is another question.
I would rather we have that discussion at another time and return to it. Steering is going to have that discussion because there have been requests by some senators on steering to have access to this information. This has been the practice for a long time. It has been brought up again that two days for reading the amount of information that is provided is not a long time. We understand that. It is a discussion we are going to have.
The other thing is that if senators are here and they are not regular members of CIBA, they will receive the documents here at the meeting. They don’t even have time to look at the documents. That is another part of the discussion we need to have.
This was a practice that was established before my time. I have been on CIBA for eight years. I say this so we understand that it is not something that we have put in place. It is a practice we have had for years, and we need to discuss this.
Senator Osler: Thank you, Madam Chair. I look forward to this being brought back to the bigger committee.
The Chair: It will. Thank you, senator, for the question.
Senator Housakos: Correction, senator. This is not the board. The board of this institution is the Senate of Canada. That is the board. The central body of the Senate is the board. This is the executive operating committee of the Senate.
The practice in the past has also been that this body called CIBA would meet at least once a week, not once every second sitting week, sometimes every third. We have also had instances now where this committee has not met for five or six months. Steering has taken decisions and, in the past, that was the practice, but steering was obligated within a week, two weeks, three weeks maximum, to get those decisions approved by this executive committee.
To Senator Osler’s point, we have a problem because this committee is not meeting frequently enough. Whenever there are prorogations and breaks, we go away and steering operates. Frankly, they operate without the constant approvals.
The fact is that if you go back 10 years ago and compare it to today, we are meeting much less frequently as CIBA over a 12‑month period compared to what used to be the case. As a result, the work piles up and the issues become complex. Within 48 hours — forget about being able to get ready even if you had some of these documents five, six or seven days in advance, which used to be the practice.
We had put pressure on the administration to ensure that if it didn’t get into the agenda a week before to senators — that was the practice in 2016-17 — it didn’t get to the agenda. We would not put it on. They would not get approval. That was the clear message at that particular point in time. If senators did not have at least seven days to review the documentation, they would not get approval. I think we should return to that practice to put the onus on the administration to understand we are not going to rubber stamp and sign off on something that we get eyes on for 48 hours. That used to be the practice. With all due respect, we should look at this and not brush it off. It is at the core of us being able to make appropriate decisions.
The Chair: Thank you, senator. As I said, this is a discussion that is going to happen at steering before it comes back here. It is not on our agenda this morning. We have important items to look at today. We will get to these items, but we will return to this one with a longer discussion.
Senator Housakos: Senator, again. That is always the practice here. When we bring up valid points it, it goes back to steering and it is also noted and always discussed, but it needs to be addressed. I would like this issue to be addressed at the next meeting with a path forward because, again, there is too much of this habit of taking things under consideration but never addressing them.
The Chair: This is what I just said. Thank you for reiterating.
Item 3 has been taken off the agenda, so we are now going to item 4.
Senator Saint-Germain: I read the senator’s letter. He makes assertions that are concerning to me regarding the SOMP, the Senators’ Office Management Policy, and the lack of clarity, so I would like, when we are in camera, to have an opportunity to discuss the lack of clarity. Is it substantiated? And if so, we need to find more clarity. I am asking for an in camera conversation on this topic.
The Chair: It has been pulled. It is not on —
Senator Saint-Germain: We received it. The senator is making a statement that is concerning to me and should be concerning to us as members of this committee. I would like us to discuss this in camera today or at the next meeting. If there is a lack of clarity in the Senators’ Office Management Policy, we need to be aware of it and we need to act.
The Chair: Thank you, senator. If there is time, it will be today. If not, it will be at the next meeting. Thank you.
[Translation]
We will now move to the fourth item, the Parliamentary Protective Service’s annual update. Mitch Monette, Chief Superintendent, Director of the Parliamentary Protective Service, Albéric Bilodeau, Chief Operations Officer, Parliamentary Protective Service, and Julie Lacroix, Director, Corporate Security Directorate, Senate of Canada, will now join us. Good morning everyone. Superintendent Monette will present on the current situation, after which we will have a question portion.
Mitch Monette, Chief Superintendant, Director, Parliamentary Protective Service: Thank you, Madam Chair. Honourable senators, I am pleased to be joining you this morning. I first appeared before this committee in December 2023, just after joining the Parliamentary Protective Service, or PPS. I am honoured to be the director of this organization after 33 years of service in the RCMP. As director, I get to work with a community dedicated to the advancement of Canadian democracy, and it is a privilege. Many of you know that, yesterday, we recognized the eleventh anniversary of the shooting on Parliamentary Hill. This event marked the beginning of a new operational reality for our community and the entire country. We remember that day with sadness. However, we are also heartened by the resilience and determination that followed. This tragedy led to the establishment of the PPS, an organization tasked with making our work environment, the Canadian Parliament, safe and secure for parliamentarians, employees and visitors.
[English]
Over the past 10 years, we have grown into a prepared, professional and leading agency. We have moved through phases of amalgamation, integration and unification. We have built a unique culture that balances protection with client service. We have developed a deep understanding of our mandate and how it fits within the broader context of public safety in Canada.
Of course, over this period, we have had to pivot and adapt. We have made mistakes and we have had growing pains. However, thanks to our commitment to continuous improvement and to the patient, honest and timely feedback from our clients and partners, we remain steadfast in our commitment, engagement and pursuit of excellence.
Strong, efficient relationships with our internal security partners and external law enforcement counterparts have become central to our functioning and success. I am personally committed to nurturing and valuing these connections every single day.
[Translation]
Parliament Hill is a place of national significance and serves as an international stage for major events. Given the ever‑evolving security situation on the Hill and in the Parliamentary Precinct as a whole, each event is unique, whether planned, unplanned, minor or critical. Good communication and a delicate balance between openness and security is essential to protect such an environment effectively. Success in a multi‑jurisdictional environment like the downtown area of our nation’s capital requires, above all, that clients, partners and organizations trust each other. It also requires a commitment to continuous improvement and the clarity of roles, especially in joint interventions. This ensures operational unity in a complex environment.
[English]
As the agency responsible for the integrated physical protection of Parliament Hill in a parliamentary precinct, the Parliamentary Protective Service, or PPS, has a fundamental role to play in helping other agencies understand our cultures and traditions, our community’s values and expectations. We foster dialogue. We coordinate joint training, and, of course, we aim to be exemplary in how we balance protection and client service while respecting the rights, privileges, traditions and cultures of the communities we serve.
I would like to refer, if I may, to a recent event that illustrates how far we’ve come in the past decade: the Royal visit of His Majesty King Charles III and Her Majesty The Queen Camilla last May. As many of you will recall, this visit required extensive coordination across multiple jurisdictions and disciplines, including federal and local law enforcement, protective details, police, fire and paramedics, as well as our parliamentary security partners. Each agency brought distinct mandates, authorities and operational approaches, making alignment both essential and complex. PPS was well prepared and played a pivotal role in ensuring optimal interoperability and communication. We did what we do best. We kept the precinct safe and accessible while supporting the community we are so privileged to serve, honouring and participating in its ceremonial traditions.
[Translation]
This is just one example. Every day, the PPS is called upon for a variety of services, including providing escorts, responding to alarms and effectively managing medical incidents. We have to manage all sorts of situations daily involving people in crisis, demonstrators and individuals whose behaviour varies from disruptive to criminal.
I learned in my long career as a police officer that interoperability doesn’t happen on its own in a silo; it relies on trust. Over the past two years, I have deliberately focused on improving co-operation, clarifying roles, promoting joint training and seeking feedback, all while standardizing communication protocols. The goal will always be to respect parliamentary privilege and ensure consistent security measures, while leveraging customer service.
[English]
Lastly, I want to reassure every senator and every employee in this room that PPS is better positioned today than ever before to deliver on its protective mandate. While challenges remain — and we recognize that — and our environment increasingly reflects polarization and political violence, PPS continues to strengthen its ability to deter, detect, defend and recover. This pursuit of excellence and commitment to continuous improvement lies at the heart of all we do.
In closing, I would like to highlight something I see as a true sign of progress and maturity. Today, most PPS employees understand their role through a broader lens of significance. Our administrative personnel feels a true sense of pride as they develop the systems, policies, processes and tools that support our operational mandate, and our operational front-line employees see themselves not strictly as protection officers and detection specialists but as ambassadors of Canada’s Parliament, as stewards and defenders of Canadian democracy. For this, I want to thank you, senators. It is your continued trust in our ability to deliver on our mandate that makes our work possible.
[Translation]
Thank you. I look forward to answering your questions and welcome your comments.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Monette. Are there any questions?
[English]
Senator Boehm: Thank you for the presentation, Mr. Monette.
I have a question that I think is very sensitive in terms of security, and I would recommend that we go in camera so I could ask it.
The Chair: Thank you, senator. After the questions that can be answered in public, we will go in camera.
[Translation]
Senator Saint-Germain: Mr. Monette, I would like to congratulate you and your team, as well as Ms. Lacroix, for this presentation. It shows you are strong believers in service, dedication and professionalism.
The subject of my question might be a little sensitive, but I have no problem discussing it in public. You said in your remarks that challenges remain. I would like to know what those challenges are, but more importantly, what more we, as senators, and our staff can do — or what we can do better — to help you meet those challenges. Would it be better to move in camera to answer this question?
The Chair: I’m not sure how sensitive the answer could be. Ms. Lacroix?
Julie Lacroix, Director, Corporate Security Directorate, Senate of Canada: I would prefer to move in camera to avoid revealing any vulnerabilities.
The Chair: Since there are no more questions to be asked in public, we will move in camera to discuss issues of a more sensitive nature.
(The committee continued in camera.)
[English]
(The committee resumed in public.)
The Chair: Colleagues, the next item on our agenda concerns an update on the Long Term Vision and Plan. This agenda item is provided for informational purposes. It does not require decision approval from the committee.
I would invite the following individuals to join us as witnesses from the Property and Services Directorate: Josée Labelle, Director General, and Adam Khamphoune, Manager, Major LTVP Project Planning and Delivery. They will be accompanied by Jennifer Garrett, Assistant Deputy Minister, and Jean‑François Robert, Director General, representing Public Services and Procurement Canada. As usual, this presentation will be followed by time for questions. Welcome, Josée, Adam, Ms. Garrett and Mr. Robert. Josée, the floor is yours.
Josée Labelle, Director General, Property and Services Directorate, Senate of Canada: Honourable senators, it is my pleasure today to update you on the advancement of the Centre Block and Parliament Welcome Centre design submissions received this fall. This presentation is available in your bundle, item 5, starting on page 46.
Today I’d like to give you a quick update on the status of key ongoing elements within the Long Term Vision and Plan, or LTVP, and particularly on the Centre Block Rehabilitation Program and some upcoming work in the same LTVP portfolio. We are achieving important milestones in design, and it is important for us to check in with the people who will be using these spaces and provide a fulsome overview.
[Translation]
On page 76 of your package, you will find information on the long-term vision and plan, the master plan for all the big projects going on in the Parliamentary Precinct. Public Services and Procurement Canada, or PSPC, has just finished its first major update of the plan, which, by the way, was approved by senators and MPs.
The objective at the heart of this plan is to make Parliament Hill more accessible and sustainable, safer and more secure, and more functional for parliamentarians, their staff and Canadians.
[English]
On page 79 of your bundle, you will find the approved accommodation strategy for the Senate. Right now, we are spread across eight buildings. In the long term, we will reduce that to four buildings, and we will continue to occupy our warehouse in Gatineau. Senators’ offices will be in three connected buildings: Centre Block, East Block and the new Senate Office Complex within the city block directly across Parliament. These buildings will be connected by a new underground Parliament Welcome Centre. Right now, the Senate Administration occupies four buildings. We are currently planning to consolidate into one building.
[Translation]
Let’s turn to page 80 to talk about Centre Block and the Welcome Centre. These two projects have reached the design stage. Imagine a giant puzzle. Thanks to a functional program and schematic design that were completed in 2022, we were able to identify the necessary puzzle pieces the Senate needs to operate in the long-term. Now, PSPC and its parliamentary partners are working to ensure that the pieces fit together in the best way possible. This marks the end of the design phase.
At the same time, important work is still happening on the site, like excavation and construction.
[English]
Final design plans have been submitted to the parliamentary partners. We are currently reviewing these plans with the understanding that any substantive modifications will be brought through our established governance. Today, you will get an exclusive preview of the latest version of these plans.
It should be noted that over the past 10 years, we have gathered feedback from senators, their staff, administration, management and stakeholders in a number of ways. We have briefed with the Speaker’s office and the Speaker. We have briefed permanent committees, subcommittees, working groups, joint committee meetings with the House of Commons and the Senate, caucus and group meetings, administration town halls, stakeholder engagement sessions, public media and communication products and guided tours for Parliament. In fact, we encourage you to sign up and reach out to us to take a tour of the Centre Block construction site. We have also had engagement on specific topics of interest. We also have an LTVP newsletter called “Front and Centre.” We have our public website as well as videos and other social media.
I will now bring your attention to page 83 in the bundle, called “The Design Narrative.” We’ll start with the Parliament Welcome Centre, which is the new front door to Parliament for hundreds of thousands of visitors we welcome each year.
The Centre Block’s design theme has a very strong concept. The architect, John Pearson, developed a nautical theme throughout the building. The theme symbolized Parliament as a ship of state, with the central column in the Confederation Hall featuring a compass rose on the floor and a carving of Poseidon at its base. The overall ship of state metaphor represents Canada’s government as a ship, with the compass and wave patterns throughout the building symbolizing leadership and direction and the idea that there is a calm centre in rough seas. This theme continues throughout the building with sea creatures, dolphins and mythical creatures on the exterior of the building. Floors in the Prime Minister’s Office and those of the Speaker space and House of Commons Speaker will be built with a teak and ebony inlay, mimicking the decks of important ships. For the Parliament Welcome Centre, the theme of confluence aims to tie both new and old buildings together with the expression of land, water, and sky and stories of Canada’s parliamentary democracy serving as the core elements of people’s journey into Parliament.
On page 84, you will find the landscape. From the outside, not much will look different. The front lawn will be reinstated, with minor adjustments to the central pathway from the Centennial Flame leading to the Parliament Welcome Centre. The new landscape design for Centre Block includes the ribbon plateau pathway, which is a low curving wall, an accessible pathway that resembles the movement of a river and guides visitors around the building while offering integrated seating. This pathway is designed to connect surrounding monuments, and new native plants will also be added. The landscape also better integrates items like parking as a flexible space that connects with the surrounding landscape. You can find those design intents on page 85. In the future, strategically integrated parking areas, by creating green buffers with vegetation, will reduce those visual impacts.
[Translation]
At Centre Block, MPs and staff with a parliamentary access card will still be able to use the level 1 Peace Tower entrance or the Senate-exclusive entrance to the left, as was the case before, and all entrances will be fully accessible.
On page 86, the entrances are marked with stars. The images on page 87 depict the new universally accessible entry of the Parliament Welcome Centre. The entry leads into the mezzanine, on the ground floor, which you can see on page 88. Then, you go through security scanning before entering the Arrival Hall, which is shown on page 89.
[English]
Now, if you turn to page 90, the first level underground, visitors will be cleared in the security area marked in yellow in the central area of your plan if you have that plan in colour. Then they will have access to an alternate visitor’s experience in addition to new added features such as a theatre, classrooms, exhibit spaces, a café and a boutique, all of which are operated by the Library of Parliament. This is also the level where parliamentary tours will begin. Images of these functions can be found on pages 91 and 92 of your bundle.
[Translation]
The second basement level will house two committee rooms and one multi-purpose room for the Senate to hold events. You can see the entry points to the tunnel system leading to West Block, East Block and the future Senate office complex across the street. The Welcome Centre in Centre Block will house committee rooms, three small rooms and two medium-sized rooms. Just to give you an idea of size, a small committee room will be approximately the size of Room B30 in this building, on the ground floor. A medium-sized committee room will be as large as the room we are in now. You can see what they will look like on page 95.
[English]
On page 96, the Parliament Welcome Centre will also feature a new multi-purpose room for events organized by senators and the Senate administration. The space can be split in half to host two separate groups, which will be a great addition to our portfolio.
The parliamentary tunnel loop is a key part of the updated LTVP strategy across the precinct. You can see the entirety of the underground loop on page 97 of the bundle. It aims to link key precinct buildings north and south of Wellington.
Now let’s turn to Centre Block on page 99. On this page, you will see a plan of level 1, which is the level below the Senate Chamber, and it is on this level that you will find a cafeteria, which is identified in dark green, the Speaker’s spaces, which are in purple, and a small committee room in red. The Usher of the Black Rod’s office has spaces identified in blue, and the clerk’s spaces, which include an office and a boardroom, are in light green.
[Translation]
On page 100, you can see the second floor. There, you will find the Senate Chamber, the area in burgundy, and in yellow are the Reading Room and the senators’ work area. You will see a small committee room near the rotunda and, in turquoise, a few senators’ offices surrounding the foyer. The Speaker’s office suite, which includes the Salon de la Francophonie and the Speaker’s office, are shown in purple.
[English]
Pages 101 to 104 show photos of the design intent for the fully rehabilitated heritage chamber, foyer, galleries, Speaker’s suite and Salon de la Francophonie.
The Senate Chamber itself will be fully accessible when we move back in. Desks will be spaced out a bit more, and senators will have new chairs. A new and more ergonomically designed clerk’s table will be introduced. The heritage desks currently in the Senate of Canada Building will return to Centre Block. Cameras and infrastructure will be added for broadcasting, which we did not have prior to moving out. The foyer will get improved lighting, and the galleries will also be universally accessible.
[Translation]
On page 105, you can see the third floor. It will house other senators’ offices and a small committee room. The east courtyard, which used to be open to the elements, will be covered by a glazed roof and serve as the new public entrance to the galleries from the Parliament Welcome Centre. The area is shown in green.
[English]
The courtyard, shown on page 106, will continue to bring natural light into the adjacent offices. It will create a new space where the public can learn more about the Senate and the senators that represent them.
On the upper floors, like level 4, shown on page 107, new shared workspaces and meeting rooms will be built above the Hall of Honour, which is shown in yellow.
On page 108, you will find a conceptual image of what a future parliamentary office unit will look like.
On pages 109 to 111, you will see features of the Hall of Honour infill space, including a dedicated Indigenous cultural practices space to support First Nations, Métis and Inuit ceremonies such as smudging and kudlik lightings. The infill will also provide meeting spaces and work stations to be shared by the House of Commons and the Senate.
Finally, on page 112, you will see the updated design for the parliamentary restaurant that will return to its original location on the sixth floor of Centre Block.
I will now present a short 3-D video walk-through showing you the designs proposals we just discussed.
You will notice the front lawn includes a universal accessible central pathway from the Centennial Flame leading to the new Parliament Welcome Centre entrance. Visitors will pass a land acknowledgement and go down to the first basement level for security.
This is the new front door. You can go either left or right. It’s a symmetrical design.
We are now making our way to the first level underground. The security area will have multiple lanes and operate like airport-style security screening. Previously, Centre Block only had one lane under the Peace Tower entrance. In addition to the new Parliament Welcome Centre providing enhanced security, it also provides universal access that’s available for everyone.
We’ve just passed the foundation stone, which is the large, circular stone that you see in the centre of the video. A skylight will bring natural light into the space, offering a view of the Peace Tower.
Continuing north, now we’re underneath the actual footprint of Centre Block. Visitors will queue here to begin their tour with the Library of Parliament.
Large-scale elevators equipped to move big groups will transport visitors into the east and west courtyards and bring them up into Centre Block. This is the path of travel that we’re seeing right now. In this video, we’re making our way on the east side first.
Once we’ve travelled vertically from the Parliament Welcome Centre to Centre Block, we will now find ourselves in the newly enclosed courtyards. Previously, these courtyards were open to the elements, and in the future, a glazed roof will permit more habitable space in addition to reducing the number of exterior walls, contributing to a more sustainable design approach.
Elevators will be sufficiently large to accommodate full groups taking a tour. Visitors arriving in the courtyards from the Parliament Welcome Centre can either take the stairs or an elevator to access the third floor where they will pass through secondary screening and scanning before entering the rehabilitated, accessible chamber galleries.
Now, we are doing the exact same path but on the west side leading into the House of Commons galleries.
Given the Centre Block is a Beaux-Arts planned layout, it uses a symmetrical design approach, so what’s happening in the eastern courtyard is the same for the west courtyard.
[Translation]
Lastly, I’m going to digress for a moment and say a few words about other LTVP projects that will have an impact on the Senate. You can refer to page 115 of your package. You’ve no doubt noticed the hoarding along Sparks Street, Wellington Street and Metcalfe Street. It is for Block 2, a city block just south of Parliament Hill. Block 2 will be a combination of restored heritage buildings and new buildings.
The Senate will occupy the east side, which is where the Senate office complex will be. It will house many senators’ offices, three committee rooms and services such as a fitness room and cafeteria.
The Victoria Building, which is part of Block 2, also has to be rehabilitated. Senators who work there now will be moving to the Chambers Building, located at 40 Elgin Street, in 2027. Those offices are currently being renovated to accommodate the senators.
The idea behind the plan for the Senate Administration offices, shown on page 116, is to bring all the offices under one roof, in the Chambers Building. This will make it easier for people to work together and provide efficiency gains by reducing the Senate’s physical — and thus environmental — footprint, while saving money every year.
The design phase is ongoing and will continue until 2026. Construction is scheduled to take place from 2026 to 2028, and the majority of moves will take place once construction is over.
[English]
This brings me to the end of my presentation. In essence, the update of the Long Term Vision and Plan and the designs of Parliament Welcome Centre, Centre Block and other major projects like the Senate Office Complex are focused on preserving Parliament’s heritage while making it more inclusive, safer and more functional for those who work here and for Canadians who visit.
With that, we are ready to take any questions you may have. I’m accompanied by my colleagues at Public Services and Procurement Canada. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you, Josée.
Colleagues, if you do not mind, we will not go to questions or comments here. It was a “for information” presentation. We have other items to get to.
It was an excellent presentation. I wish to thank you for taking the time and showing us what is coming in the future for the parliamentary precinct. Thank you.
[Translation]
The next item on the agenda is the annual report on the Senate’s Accessibility Plan.
Julia Zayed, the Senate Accessibility Officer, is going to be joining us as a witness. As usual, the presentation will be followed by questions and answers. Again, please note that this is all for your information. Given how much time we have left, I would like us to get through the items on the agenda. Julia, the floor is yours.
Julia Zayed, Senate Accessibility Officer, Communications, Broadcasting and Publications Directorate, Senate of Canada: Good morning, honourable senators. My name is Julia Zayed, and I am the Senate Accessibility Officer.
It’s a pleasure to be with you this morning. I am here to present the Senate’s new Accessibility Plan, which covers the next three years. As you know, the first plan is coming to an end. The new plan must be published, and sent to the Accessibility Commissioner, by December 31.
I’m going to give you just a quick summary, barely three minutes long, but first, I’ll provide a bit of context.
The Senate must publish an accessibility plan every three years, and it must include steps the Senate intends to take to prevent and eliminate barriers. The 2026-28 Accessibility Plan is the Senate’s second such plan. All Senate directorates were closely involved in developing the plan. Each directorate had to submit goals specific to its area of expertise.
[English]
In our new accessibility plan, we have a total of 31 goals that will be addressed over the next three years. They cover the seven priority areas under the Accessible Canada Act, such as employment, built environment and communications. They support accessibility for employees, committee witnesses, guests, visitors and all Canadians who interact with the Senate.
My role as the Senate accessibility officer was to lead the development of the accessibility plan in collaboration with all directorates. I track and respond to all accessibility feedback received year-round, which is shared with relevant directorates. Each year, I lead the Senate’s annual accessibility consultation process. These are mandatory. They include hearing directly from people with disabilities, such as employees, visitors, witnesses and senators, as well as various organizations. These consultations have been key to informing this new plan, its goals and timelines. All relevant directorates have approved the plan, and Anne Burgess from legal also made sure that it complied with legislative requirements under the act.
We don’t anticipate any costs in the implementation of the first year of the plan. However, based on how the implementation of some goals go and if new accessibility standards are announced, the Finance and Procurement and Information Services directorates could request funding through the Main Estimates process in the coming years.
It is also important to note that, in addition to the three-year plans, we must also publish an annual report that describes the work we have undertaken that year. In this case, the progress report for 2025 is included in the next accessibility plan. The Office of the Chief Accessibility Officer is aligned with this approach.
Thank you for your time. I am happy to answer any questions you may have if there is time.
The Chair: Thank you, Julia.
Senator Tannas: My question is from page 120 of the bundle, around employment, goal number one, and it refers to the fair, inclusive, bias-aware selection process. I am not sure I know what that means. Is the objective to try to get the selection process to the point where it is blind to any disability or to any access issue? Is that it?
Ms. Zayed: Yes. That is a great question. What we want to do is ensure that everybody has a fair chance of getting to go through the selection process when applying for a job at the Senate, regardless of their disability. Yes.
Senator Tannas: It is not an affirmative action kind of thing; it is really just giving everybody an equal chance. We are all blind to those other issues, correct?
Ms. Zayed: Absolutely.
Senator Tannas: Thank you.
The Chair: I said this item was for information, but there is actually a motion attached so we can approve the report.
[Translation]
Can I have a mover for the following motion?
That the Senate’s 2026-28 Accessibility Plan be approved.
Senator Saint-Germain?
[English]
Senator Mohamed, do you have a question?
Senator Mohamed: I am here filling in for Senator Moodie, and she asked that I raise concerns about the entrance to chambers and other buildings where the bus can pull up and accessibility issues around the bus. I would like to see that noted on behalf of Senator Moodie.
The Chair: Thank you, senator. It is being addressed. It is a concern we have had for a while. Thank you.
[Translation]
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you, Julia.
[English]
Colleagues, the next item is the membership of the Artwork and Heritage Advisory Working Group.
This is a motion that the following senators be named as members of the Artwork and Heritage Advisory Working Group: Senator Ataullahjan, Senator Black, Senator Cardozo and Senator Cormier.
Could I have someone to move the motion? Senator Tannas. Thank you.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Yes.
The Chair: Carried.
[Translation]
For item 8, you received two things by email. One is a post‑visit report, which is going to be corrected, so it will be presented to you at a later time. You will receive the corrected report. You also received the Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets’ report, a quarterly financial report.
Are there any questions on the two reports that were presented? Seeing none, I will move on to the item dealing with the values and ethics code.
We received a request.
[English]
We need to address this item, and it is on the Ethics and Conflict of Interest Code for Senators Staff. You have received from Senator MacDonald a motion to modify or to streamline, I will say, how we are going to work on this item. I will read the motion. I will let Senator MacDonald — I don’t want to call you —
Senator MacDonald: That’s my name.
The Chair: Indeed. I will give you the floor to explain.
The motion reads as follows:
That the Subcommittee on Human Resources be authorized to establish a consultative process on revision to the Code of Values and Ethics for Senate Staff which includes engagement through the caucus and group Chairs (Senators) and with the Working Group on Senators’ Services (WGSS);
That implementation of the Code of Values and Ethics for Senate Staff, adopted on June 19, 2025, be suspended pending completion of the review and presentation of recommendations by the Subcommittee on Human Resources; and that the most recent version of the Conflict of Interest Code for Persons Employed by the Senate be reinstated for Senators’ staffers in the interim;
That the deadline for written submissions on the Code of Values and Ethics for Senate Staff be extended to a date as determined by the Subcommittee on Human Resources once an engagement process has been adopted by the subcommittee; and
That the Senate Administration provides the necessary administrative support for an independent consultative process with staff working in senators’ offices under the direction of the WGSS.
Senator MacDonald: Thank you, chair.
There is an important issue here, colleagues, relating to the Code of Values and Ethics for Senate Staff that requires our immediate attention that should be addressed by this full committee, and we are addressing it, because Senate staff do not really know what their obligations are.
There continues to be a lot of confusion on the part of senators and senators’ staff regarding CIBA’s recent adoption of a new Code of Values and Ethics for senators’ staff and the subsequent decisions to pause and now review that policy. A good portion of this confusion stems from the fact that both the decision to adopt the policy and the decision to review the policy were taken in camera, and, as such, it is very difficult for anyone who didn’t participate in those meetings to get answers to their questions. With that in mind, I asked that the item be placed on today’s public portion of the agenda.
With your support, I hope we can adopt the attached motion which was drafted following consultations with the various groups and caucuses in order to bring clarity to exactly what is being paused, as well as to the processes for consultation with senators but also with senators’ staff.
The motion we adopted on October 2, 2025, ordering a review referred the matter to a subcommittee that had not yet even held its organizational meeting, proving the November 1 deadline for written submissions a moot point. My motion addresses that and puts forth a plan for setting a new deadline that takes into consideration that the subcommittee must be given proper time to do its work.
The motion also makes very clear the active role of the various caucuses, groups, through the chairs, liaisons, and the staff through the WGSS. This does not preclude the HRRH subcommittee from also accepting written submissions from individual senators and/or their staff.
I believe this motion, as well as discussing the matter in public, will not only clear up a lot of the confusion that we already have but will go a long way to avoiding further confusion. I know that some people may believe that because it is a policy that involves our staff, it might be a matter that should be discussed in camera. However, this is not about an individual staff member or an individual issue. This is a policy discussion that should be dealt with transparently in order to protect the very people it affects most, which is our staff.
I will leave that with you.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator MacDonald, for providing the information so that the members of the committee could have access to the rationale behind this.
[Translation]
Senator Saint-Germain: I am speaking as the former chair of the Subcommittee on Human Resources.
Thank you to Senator MacDonald for putting forward this motion, which I support.
That said, I want to let you know that the subcommittee — whose then deputy chair was our former colleague the Honourable Judith Seidman — felt that the subcommittee members representing each of the groups and caucuses had undertaken those internal consultations, in addition to the Policy Committee. It was important to us, and still is, that those consultations take place. There were interpretation issues. Efforts to consult staff, senators and the administration may not have been as extensive as what we were told. It’s always important to make sure that matters relating to ethics and the code of conduct are extremely clear. That is why I agree with Senator MacDonald’s motion, which will provide clarity and address the disinformation, so to speak. I support and even second Senator MacDonald’s motion.
[English]
The Chair: So you are moving the motion. Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried. Thank you.
We are now going in camera, unless there is something else that we need to discuss in public.
If not, colleagues, we are suspended.
(The committee continued in camera.)