Evidence of meeting #14 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was security.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Clerk of the House of Commons, House of Commons
My understanding is that you are correct in assuming that. In our case, I don't think we have anybody, any union, to which that would apply, because everybody is at the bargaining table. All of the collective agreements have run out.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Secondly, in response to Monsieur Paquette's question about the $140,000 reduction with regard to a former Prime Minister, it's my understanding that there is in fact a practice, under some kind of order or something, that when you have a former Prime Minister who's a sitting member of Parliament, there's an additional budget that is allotted to that MP for as long as that former Prime Minister continues to sit as an MP.
Does that mean that former prime ministers who are no longer members of Parliament receive no additional services by virtue of the fact that they were prime ministers? I'm thinking of the United States, for instance. A former President continues to have some kind of security detail provided to him or her. We have six former prime ministers who are not sitting MPs: Joe Clark, John Turner, Brian Mulroney, Kim Campbell, Jean Chrétien, and Paul Martin. I'm assuming that if they don't have anything like that, it's because there have been experts who have evaluated the security risks that may exist to them and have determined that there is no risk beyond what an ordinary Canadian would have. Therefore there is no reason for additional services, whether on the security side or otherwise.
Liberal
Peter Milliken Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
There may be security services provided to them, but not by the House of Commons, and not in our estimates. If they're provided by the RCMP, it's something I don't know about. It may well be provided. In fact, I'm fairly sure that in some cases it would be provided.
But I don't know the details, and they're not part of our estimates. All we had in our estimates was the payment for the member of Parliament. Since the person has ceased to be an MP, we would stop making those payments.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Okay. I understand that. So my question would be best directed to the Minister of Public Safety, possibly.
Liberal
Peter Milliken Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON
The RCMP, or the Minister of Public Safety, sure.
Clerk of the House of Commons, House of Commons
If I may, Mr. Chair, the arrangements for the House to give a special budget to a sitting member who is a former Prime Minister is not under a continuing order. That is done on a case-by-case basis. The board in existence at the time will then look at the needs of the sitting member.
Liberal
Clerk of the House of Commons, House of Commons
As we did specifically in this case, yes.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
Although, that begs the question: has there has been a case of a former Prime Minister, a sitting MP, for whom a decision was made not to provide an additional budget?
Clerk of the House of Commons, House of Commons
Not in terms of the precedents that we could find.
Liberal
Marlene Jennings Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC
I was going to say, who got blackballed?
Thank you.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
I have Mr. Reid next. I have three people left on the list, I believe.
Remember that we've made a commitment to the Speaker to let him absent by noon today, because he has another commitment. I'm just asking you to be succinct in your questioning.
Mr. Reid.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON
I'll do my best, Mr. Chairman.
This follows up on the theme raised by Mr. Comartin about technologies that could be available but that are limited by the security provisions put in place by technical services. In my own office we have a printer-scanner-photocopier, but we can't hook it up to scan documents into our system. It makes a considerable difference to our efficiency in dealing with documents and our ability to, for example, have them in an electronic format, which could then be used whether I'm here in Ottawa or in the constituency office. Any effort to overcome this particular inefficiency would be appreciated.
I don't want to suggest that the reasons why it is currently prohibited are not reasonable, but it would be nice to see them addressed, if possible, while being respectful of the concerns held by IT.
Clerk of the House of Commons, House of Commons
We would happy to take that on and see what solution we could come up with for you. Certainly, as you say, the scanning of documents can make a big difference to efficiency.
Conservative
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Thank you, Chair.
I would like to confirm what the Speaker said about security for former prime ministers. Prime Minister Chrétien is accompanied by two RCMP officers. Every year he attends the golf tournament organized by Jackie and Paul Desmarais. This event is held at Manoir Richelieu in my riding. I attend and it costs me $350. I can tell you that I am the only separatist who attends the reception after the tournament. Last year, he played with Stéphane Quintal, a former Montreal Canadien player, and Vincent Lecavalier, who plays for the Tampa Bay Lightning and is a very good driver.
Mr. Speaker, could you ask the Clerk the date of the Speaker's and the Clerk's last appearance? I will ask the Clerk a question about a commitment she made. My purpose is to prepare her psychologically.
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Hence, they testified in advance! Unless you are referring to December 2008.
Conservative
Bloc
Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC
Therefore, at last December's meeting, I asked the Speaker and the Clerk a question about the opening of the restaurant, Le Parlementaire. We agreed to some extent that because of the hallways and its location on the sixth floor, it would be difficult to open the restaurant to the general public during the summer or the long holiday break.
The situation is quite different at the National Assembly because you access it through a door and then go up a staircase. It is easy to channel traffic. I understand the situation but the fact remains that you seem willing to try to open Le Parlementaire during constituency weeks, at least to our staff who does not have the opportunity to go there.
As a result of my training as a lawyer, I know that when you ask a witness a question, you always know the answer. Did you try to open it?
Clerk of the House of Commons, House of Commons
No, but we conducted a major study on whether or not to open the restaurant. This will soon be on the agenda of the Board of Internal Economy. As you know, the Board meets quite regularly, almost every week. However, the agenda has been very full. That is why we have not been able to add this item.
I must say that I have one main reason for not being optimistic about the restaurant opening. Careful consideration of the situation indicates that, every time someone uses the restaurant, the costs are not covered by the amount paid for the meal. We are talking about the parliamentary restaurant but officially it is the parliamentary dining room reserved for MPs and Parliament. It was designed for use by MPs.
I understand that you would like to open it up to everyone who works for the House of Commons. At certain times of the year, special activities are organized and it is open not only to management but also to employees. At those times, it is rather full.
As for constituency weeks, I decided that I would not go ahead with the pilot project before submitting the matter to the Board of Internal Economy. I wanted to be certain that the Board was aware of all costs involved.
Bloc