Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 18th, 2013

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

The only reason I say that, Mr. Chairman, is that the Sergeant-at-Arms is from Miramichi, New Brunswick, and people in Miramichi, New Brunswick, are up way after midnight, so yes, I would be quite sure that the Sergeant-at-Arms would probably be awake at midnight and happy himself to conduct some tours. I see him nodding in the back of the room.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I agree. Young folks visiting Ottawa certainly are up past midnight most times, so visiting Parliament...you have the 2:11 tour.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

And if we're lucky, maybe we could have an all-night voting again this spring.

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

We're up half the night on the other side.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Yes.

Mr. Armstrong, please, for four minutes.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here.

I'm going to focus on table 2 in the Library of Parliament document. I'd first like to start with the “Transportation and communication” under the heading “Standard Object of Expenditure”. There are significant reductions in that line item, to the tune of over $9 million, reducing the overall budget from last year at $56,485,000 to this coming year at $47,017,227. That's a significant reduction in expenditures. Can you outline how that was achieved? I think that might be a model for other departments to use, because that's a significant reduction in that line item. Maybe we could discuss how that was done.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

Sure. Of the two largest significant components of that particular line item, there are the flight passes, the switch. Members of Parliament are now required to book their trips back and forth from their constituencies with the flight pass, which brings in some bulk savings, which have been significant. And for those of us in this room who went through that exercise at the board, it's probably the largest contributor to the reduction in travel costs.

The other component of that is a renegotiation of the wireless plan that we, as the House of Commons, have with our main providers. When it came up for renegotiation, given the size of the contract and the number of devices the House of Commons uses, we were able to realize some significant savings there as well.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

So you were able to achieve significant savings in both the communications side of that line item and the transportation side.

Roughly how much was the reduction due to the flight passes? We couldn't have taken the airlines up on them because they didn't exist before, but when they did become available to consumers across the country, it provided a vehicle for us to actually save a lot of money.

Do you have any idea roughly how much of that savings is due to the switch of members of Parliament to flight passes?

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

The forecast is for $5.5 million, and as you mentioned, it's a relatively recent development that is offered. It took some doing on the House administrative side on how to manage it, because, as you recall, the old system was one at a time. The House administration would process those flights and so on, and a flight pass just was different. We had to change some of the models to be able to have the accounting side of it work.

So now that that's on stream, the answer to your specific question is $5.5 million.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

There are some restrictions on those flight passes and the ability to travel. For members of Parliament like me and Mr. LeBlanc, we travel less than two hours. We have to get a flex pass, which limits some of the opportunities to upgrade tickets and move tickets around.

I totally support this change. I think it's great for the taxpayers in the country, but if it does limit the MPs' ability to do their job in certain situations, are we going to be able to take a look at that and review this large change? It's a massive reduction of taxpayer funds, which is a good thing, but are we going to be able to take a look at how that affects MPs doing their jobs and be flexible, if needed?

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

I would venture to say absolutely.

If I can, I'll speak for the board a little bit on this. I think the key from the House administrative side is that there's a desire to see how this goes. It's new. Members aren't perhaps used to using them, and there may be a period of transition. Some things that may be viewed as problems for the first couple of months may not actually be that problematic as members get used to the service. But absolutely, our hope is that we get a good year, if people can work through it, and then we have a tremendous amount of data to look at and see what the actual savings were and what problems a significant number of members or their employees or their designated travellers encountered. If we can make tweaks while still achieving the overall savings, then of course we would be able to do that. But I think we have to get that data first before we can look at those changes.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

On the communication side, really....

I'm done? Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Madame Turmel, I understand you're sharing. We have a total of four.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I would like to go back to the pages issue.

I understand that there has been no increase to date on the Quebec side. However, is the Université du Québec en Outaouais considered for the pages program?

[Audrey O'Brien]

Yes.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Are there any?

[Audrey O'Brien]

You want to know whether there are any from the Université du Québec en Outaouais? I would have to check. I do not know for the moment, but I will check. Let us say that I would be surprised if there were not.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

All right.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I wouldn't mind picking up on two fronts where Scott was going.

One is on the telecommunications side of things. I'm not sure if all MPs are aware of where the actual costs come in terms of excessive downloading and all of that. Have we ever considered more information sharing with MPs about where money can be saved within their budgets? For example, we talked about the flight passes, and they have become more of a mandatory program than an optional one. Is that correct, that MPs have to fly on these?

There may be other savings. Here's my observation or concern: we've hit some of the low-hanging fruit, I would suggest, in this particular process. If we were to go further, it would probably require more involvement from MPs and their staff directly. Has there been any contemplation about giving the information out to MPs as to ways they can save on their budgets, either through the way they travel, the way they communicate, or the devices they're using and how they're using them? Has that been contemplated from your office or from the board?

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

I think it's safe to say yes, in certain areas. One example that comes readily to mind on the telecommunications is that there are efforts made to remind members that when they are travelling, if they notify telecommunications, a roaming package can be put on their wireless device. Instead of paying à la carte roaming charges, they're paying a standardized rate that's been negotiated as part of the contract. That's just one example that comes to mind of our trying to proactively look at ways that members can save the House of Commons money. In the case of their device being paid for out of their own budget, there would be some actual savings there.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I will pick up on that, because it's been in the news somewhat recently that, particularly when travelling abroad, some of our telecommunications companies use a billing process that can run into the hundreds and thousands of dollars for downloads while travelling in other regions if you don't make these changes. Has there been any consideration of...not just making a suggestion to MPs; I think we need to change the laws, frankly.

That's another place for another topic in terms of how our telecommunications companies are governed and what they can charge, because we've seen bills of $15,000 for someone's trip to Mexico because their kid downloaded some videos while there. Has the board considered, as we have with flight passes, making those types of switches and changes? They can seem small, but you can get a bill for $1,000 on your phone just because you simply didn't realize that one or two button switches would have cost $10. This is something I think the public might be interested in—and certainly I know a lot of MPs are—in terms of managing their own budgets and impacts on the public treasury.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Regina—Qu'Appelle, SK]

I have to say that the House administration does look for patterns of where there have been spikes for things like what you're talking about, and we would remind the whips at the board to communicate to their caucuses that these are things to be avoided, these are things to look for, and these are easy ways to save yourself or the House administration some money. But it certainly is something that I can take back to the board, and we can have a conversation about which items could be the low-hanging fruit, a quick FYI, remember to do this and you'll save your budget money, you'll save taxpayers money, and you'll save the House administration money.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you.