Honourable senators, today I rise to speak to the fourth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Audit and Oversight, which has to do with the delegation of audit responsibilities for the Senate’s financial statements by the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration and the Senate’s approval for granting intersessional authority to the Standing Senate Committee on Audit and Oversight.

Although I agree with the recommendations in the report, I asked to adjourn debate last Thursday so I could be better prepared to share my comments and concerns with you today.

At the moment, the Standing Senate Committee on Audit and Oversight has a lot of work to do as it gets organized and gets to the point where it will be capable of discharging the whole of its mandate. One of the pressing duties that the committee must address is the audit of the Senate’s financial statements, which is usually done over the summer while the Senate is adjourned.

To ensure that it can complete the task, the committee is asking us for intersessional authority through the end of the Forty-third Parliament, which is perfectly legitimate. The committee is just getting up and running, and it has important work to do so it can lay a solid foundation for its operations going forward.

The report’s second recommendation proposes that once the external members of the Audit and Oversight Committee have been appointed, which happened today, the Senate direct the Committee on Internal Economy to delegate, by a recorded decision, the audit and oversight functions as an interim measure for the intersessional period following the end of the Second Session of the Forty-third Parliament. Once again, that is an entirely legitimate request.

I therefore support the recommendations of the fourth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Audit and Oversight, and I urge you to vote to adopt the report.

I’d like to quickly address two issues that have been on my mind since we began the work to create the Audit and Oversight Committee, which is why I took adjournment of the debate last Thursday.

The first issue concerns the intersessional authority of the Audit and Oversight Committee, and the second concerns the determination of the governance body responsible for the financial results of the Senate.

My first point, intersessional authority, remains a concern. As the Audit and Oversight Committee gets up and running, I believe that it needs this authority to establish the foundation for its future work. Once the work of this committee is well established, I believe the committee will no longer need this authority, since it will be able to do its work during the regular sessions of the Senate.

A decision will have to be made as to whether this authority should be temporary or permanent.

My second point, the clarification of responsibilities between CIBA and the Audit and Oversight Committee, also remains a concern. These responsibilities have not yet been clearly defined when we speak of financial results. Which of the two committees, CIBA or Audit and Oversight, is ultimately responsible for answering on behalf of the Senate for the financial results of the institution? Long before the Audit and Oversight Committee was created, I commented on this issue. I have asked for clarification of this element, as it is critical to the proper functioning of the Senate.

Dividing the tasks between the two committees is one thing, but the task that involves exercising the powers and functions attributed under the Parliament of Canada Act is another.

Subsection 19.6(1) of the Parliament of Canada Act has this to say about the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration:

The Committee has the exclusive authority to determine whether any . . . use by a senator of any funds, goods, services or premises made available to that senator for the carrying out of parliamentary functions is or was proper . . . including whether any such use is or was proper having regard to the intent and purpose of the regulations made under subsection 19.5(1).

I do not see any problem with the Standing Committee on Audit and Oversight doing its job independently and reporting to the Senate, like all of the other Senate committees. However, when it comes to exercising its statutory functions and powers, it’s important that we question the overlap in the mandates and the responsibilities of each of the committees, since we know that the Internal Economy Committee is one of only two recognized committees that can answer for the financial results of the Senate.

There’s still an important step to take, that of clearly identifying how the governance responsibilities and functions will be shared, responsibilities and functions that must also be clearly defined. By clearly defining them, we’ll mitigate the risks associated with the distortion of roles between these two committees and we’ll resolve the issue of intersessional authority.

Thank you for your attention.