THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON INTERNAL ECONOMY, BUDGETS AND ADMINISTRATION
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Thursday, November 6, 2025
The Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration met this day at 8:01 a.m. [ET], 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. My name is Lucie Moncion. I am an Ontario senator and 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 all 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 on the traditional, ancestral and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe Nation and is now home to many other First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples from across Turtle Island.
I will now go around the table and ask my colleagues to introduce themselves.
Senator MacDonald: Michael MacDonald from Cape Breton, Nova Scotia.
[Translation]
Senator Oudar: Manuelle Oudar, Quebec.
[English]
Senator LaBoucane-Benson: Patti LaBoucane-Benson, Treaty 6 territory, Alberta.
Senator Boyer: Yvonne Boyer, Ontario.
Senator Boehm: Peter Boehm, Ontario.
Senator MacAdam: Jane MacAdam, Prince Edward Island.
[Translation]
Senator Saint-Germain: Raymonde Saint-Germain, Quebec.
Senator Forest: Good morning. Éric Forest from the Gulf region, in Quebec.
[English]
Senator Mohamed: Farah Mohamed, Ontario.
Senator Francis: Brian Francis, Epekwitk, Prince Edward Island.
Senator Al Zaibak: Mohammad Al Zaibak, Ontario.
Senator Moodie: Rosemary Moodie, Ontario.
Senator Hay: Katherine Hay, Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Audette: Kwei. [Innu-aimun spoken] Michèle Audette [Innu-aimun spoken] in Quebec.
[English]
Senator Tannas: Scott Tannas, Alberta.
Senator Osler: Flordeliz (Gigi) Osler from Manitoba.
Senator Ross: Krista Ross, New Brunswick.
[Translation]
Senator Henkel: Good morning. Danièle Henkel from the Alma region in Quebec.
Senator Quinn: Jim Quinn, New Brunswick.
[English]
Senator Smith: Larry Smith, Saurel, Quebec.
The Chair: Thank you.
I would also like to welcome all those who follow our deliberations across the country.
[Translation]
This morning, colleagues, we’re going to make two changes to the agenda. Item 2, which concerns the replacement of the Senate shuttle, will be moved and discussed during the in camera portion, because we’ll be talking about prices. In addition, we will resume the discussion on the Senators’ Office Management Policy, which we were to discuss in camera, at item 2. Is that okay with you?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you.
Our first item for the public portion of the meeting 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 two items: the Minutes of Proceedings from the meeting of October 23, 2025, which was held in public and in camera; and membership of the Advisory Working Group on Artwork and Heritage.
Colleagues, in your package, you have received a motion to add a member to the Advisory Working Group on Artwork and Heritage. I understand there have been discussions, and there is a desire to add Senator McBean to the working group.
Can I have a mover for the following motion:
That the consent agenda be approved.
Senator Saint-Germain: I so move.
The Chair: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
[English]
The Chair: Carried.
We are now moving to item 5. Before we go to that discussion, I would like to remind senators to avoid mentioning names so that we can have discussions that are less controversial and that don’t identify colleagues. Let’s keep the conversation around the items we will be discussing.
If you recall, at our last meeting, the Honourable Senator Saint-Germain requested that we discuss whether any changes to the Senators’ Office Management Policy were required following a request for an exemption later retracted. We agreed to continue the discussion today, as we ran out of time at our last meeting.
Senator Saint-Germain, would you like to express your concerns to begin the discussion?
[Translation]
Senator Saint-Germain: Good morning, colleagues.
I have no desire for us to discuss a specific case. Rather, I would like to come back to something a colleague pointed out that deserves our attention. He said:
[English]
In the absence of any clarity on what gets paid back under SOMP in these circumstances, that I can find or have been shown, I would ask you to accept the payment . . . .
A refund.
[Translation]
What concerns me is that a colleague — and perhaps even several — feels, on the one hand, that the Senators’ Office Management Policy lacks clarity, and on the other, that when a senator asks questions, the answers provided don’t seem sufficiently enlightening.
The point I wanted to make is that we have a subcommittee whose mandate includes studying the review of the Senators’ Office Management Policy. I would like to invite all members to inform the Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets, or SEBS, of any aspects of this policy that seem confused, confusing and not clear enough, as well as of any changes you would like to make to it.
I want to emphasize one thing. In Unit4, every time we make a claim, we are shown the number of travel points we’ve used. With this latest claim, the number of points is clearly indicated. I also invite you to work closely with your administrative assistants to ensure that you are aware of this accounting of points. If there’s one thing that’s clear in the policy, it’s the 64 points.
I say that in a constructive way; however, I’d like us to be able to follow up on this colleague’s comment, which I take very seriously. Thank you.
The Chair: Are there any comments or questions?
Senator Forest: I just wanted to pick up on that. It’s important to note that when we get reimbursed, our points are counted down, so we’re responsible for handling our points ourselves. That’s an important point to make.
[English]
Senator Quinn: I would like a clarification. Has a decision been taken that Subcommittee on Senate Estimates and Committee Budgets, or SEBS, will review SOMP?
The Chair: Yes.
Senator Quinn: Okay.
The Chair: Are there any other questions or comments? The takeaway this morning, Senator Saint-Germain, is that you are asking groups to look at SOMP, and if there are modifications, changes, improvements or whatnot that are needed, to provide that information to SEBS so that they have the information to work on when they’re going to be looking at our different programs and different rules.
Senator Saint-Germain: If I may, SEBS members could also decide to reach out to senators. I don’t want to interfere in their work, but my point is, if there’s a need for clarity, in the meantime, please make sure you receive this clarity so that no senator will be in a difficult situation regarding the management of his office and especially regarding the travel points.
The Chair: Okay. Thank you. Are there any other comments?
[Translation]
Thank you very much, Senator Saint-Germain. We will now move on to item 3.
[English]
This next item relates to an item that was sent for information purposes only. This week, three documents were sent for information purposes. You will have received the quarterly report for the second quarter on Senate intellectual property requests for commercial use. You also received information on the options for the 40 Elgin Street gym and the post-trip report to CIBA that came from senators who were part of the Manitoba tour.
Do you have any questions or comments on these documents? Seeing none, we will move on to other matters.
I would like to give you an update on the concerns raised at the last meeting regarding the frequency of meetings, the timing of the distribution of documents and the consideration of exceptions. The steering committee met to specifically discuss those issues, and we intend to provide a report with recommendations at the next CIBA meeting. You will probably be pleased by some of the information provided.
The portion the steering committee did not discuss is for non-members’ access to documents. We haven’t had that discussion yet. When non-members come to the CIBA meetings, they receive the documents as they sit here, and some of our colleagues have a computer with all the documents, which puts you at a disadvantage because you don’t have the information beforehand. This has yet to be discussed.
Any questions or comments on this matter? My goodness, you are either tired or very disciplined this morning. I will say disciplined.
Before we go in camera, colleagues, are there any other matters that you want to bring to the attention of CIBA that we would bring at other meetings? Seeing none, we will suspend for a few minutes for us to go in camera.
(The committee continued in camera.)