Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Nov. 27th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

This is meeting number 59 of the procedure and House affairs committee. We're here today pursuant to Standing Order 81(5) on supplementary estimates (B).

We have some great friends in the room today. It's always good to have our House administration friends with us.

Speaker Scheer, I understand you have an opening statement for us, so we'll go from there.

If you could introduce the guests who are with you, then we'll ask you some really hard questions.

[Andrew Scheer, Conservative, Speaker of the House of Commons]

Thank you. It's always a pleasure to be in front of my favourite committee. Thanks for having me.

I am pleased to be here today, along with Mr. Marc Bosc, Acting Clerk of the House of Commons, and Mr. Mark Watters, Chief Financial Officer.

We are also joined by the other members of the House Administration's executive management team: Mr. André Gagnon, Acting Deputy Clerk of the House of Commons; Mr. Soufiane Ben Moussa, Chief Technology Officer; Mr. Louis Lefebvre, Director, IT Operations and Services; Mr. Richard Denis, Deputy Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel; Mr. Pierre Parent, Chief Human Resources Officer; and Mr. Kevin Vickers, Sergeant-at-Arms.

Today I will be presenting the House of Commons supplementary estimates (B) for 2014-15. These proposed supplementary estimates for the House of Commons total $15,913,000. I would like to note at the outset of this discussion that all items included in the supplementary estimates (B) were presented to and approved by the Board of Internal Economy.

For reference purposes, you have received the document showing the appropriations. The first line item is for $10,307,000 in funding in accordance with the carry-forward policy. This policy, which has been in place since 1995, allows members, House officers, and the House administration, to carry forward lapsed funds into the new fiscal year up to a maximum of 5% of the previous year's main estimates voted authorities. The ability to carry funds forward increases budgetary flexibility, reduces the pressure to spend at year-end, and provides an incentive to underspend budgets. The House of Commons carry-forward policy is similar to that of the federal government, except that for the House of Commons, unlike the case for federal departments, funding for the carry-forward must be obtained through the supplementary estimates and not from the Treasury Board.

The second item allocates $3,820,000 towards enhancing transparency through the Members' Expenditures Report.

Further to approving quarterly reporting and an enhanced reporting format for 2014-2015, at its meeting of April 7, 2014, the board decided that members' travel expenses incurred under the travel points system, as well as hospitality expenses, be reported in a manner similar to the ministerial-style proactive disclosure used by the Government of Canada.

As a result, the second-quarter report of 2014-2015, which will be published in December of this year, will include the names of travellers (except for dependants), the departure dates (except for regular travel points), the points of departure, the destinations, the purposes of travel, the numbers and types of points used, the total costs of transportation, as well as accommodation and per diem expenses for all regular and special trips charged against the travel points system.

For hospitality expenses, the report will include the dates, types, purposes and locations of the events, the suppliers, the number of guests, and the costs of the events. All subsequent quarterly reports will also contain these disclosures.

Increasing the disclosure of travel and hospitality expenses to the standards currently used by ministers involves significant system changes and business process improvements for members, their staff, and the House administration. The additional funding will also be used for resources to expand claim processing and verification, as well as for monthly and quarterly reconciliation processes, to respond to additional inquiries from members' offices, and to provide more assistance and training to members and their staff.

Increasing transparency has been a priority of the Board of Internal Economy for some time, and the board remains committed to finding ways in which we can continue to improve.

The next line in the amount of $1,616,000 involves severance pay for some House administration employees, more specifically the procedural clerks and analysis and reference group, which is the last bargaining unit to reach an agreement. In the summer of 2011, the Treasury Board informed the House of Commons of its intention to eliminate the accumulation of severance benefits for voluntary departures. It requested that all federal departments, crown corporations, and separate employers, including the House, address this issue with their staff. The board accordingly decided to adopt the same approach to voluntary departures.

This decision eliminates the accumulation of severance benefits, and presents employees with three options: to immediately cash out their severance, to retain the previously accumulated weeks of severance to be paid out upon resignation or retirement, or to cash out a portion of severance with the remainder to be paid upon departure.

As such, additional funding was sought through the supplementary estimates (B) in order to account for the cash-out of these benefits. As per Treasury Board directives, unlike federal departments, funding for severance cash-outs for the House of Commons must be obtained through the supplementary estimates

The final line item is funding of $170,000 for the 24th annual meeting of the Asia Pacific Parliamentary Forum. The APPF is a conference for parliamentarians representing the 27 member countries of the Asia-Pacific region as well as parliamentarians from eight observer countries and members of the diplomatic corps of these countries.

According to an established rotation, Canada was expected to host in 2017, 20 years after hosting its last annual meeting. However, given that many events are planned across the country for the 150th anniversary of Confederation in 2017, Canada was able to negotiate with other member countries to allow a deviation from the normal rotation. As a result, Canada was invited to host the conference in Vancouver in 2016. This conference is an excellent opportunity to showcase Canada, foster parliamentary diplomacy, and advance Canadian objectives internationally. Funding in 2014-15 will be used to initiate the planning process for the 2016 conference.

This concludes my overview of the House of Commons supplementary estimates (B) for 2014-2015.

At this time, we would be happy to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. With such a thorough speech, I'm sure there are no questions from the members, but we'll check just to be sure.

Mr. Lukiwski.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

It's always a pleasure to be able to question the Speaker.

Thank you very much for your presentation.

I have one question in two parts. Are there any anticipated programs or additional expenditures that might occur later in this fiscal year that haven't been contemplated in these supplementary estimates? I'll give you two specific examples. One, Mr. Speaker, in light of the current environment and some of the stories that are gripping the media and much of Parliament on anti-harassment policies that may be yet to be developed and implemented, you had made mention that you, perhaps, have services of the House that would be made available to all members who may wish to avail themselves of such services. Is there a cost implication—I assume there would be—to the services that you would be offering and has that been captured in these supplementary estimates?

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

Sorry, what was the last thing?

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Are the costs associated with any services offered to members who may wish to avail themselves of such services regarding harassment in the workplace in the supplementary estimates?

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

I should mention that the policy I referred to is an existing policy that the House administration has, at the moment, for House administration employees, so it's not part of the supplementary estimates. I don't think, depending on their usage, there would be additional cost because it's already here. It's already available for the House administration employees. That's what's been made available. It's an existing program.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

So no existing costs are necessary to be identified here.

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

No.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

The second one I assume would be, potentially, an increased cost, and that's on security. We've heard now that there will be an amalgamation of security, a unification of security forces as opposed to the previous system. Are those costs or anticipated costs captured in these estimates?

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

As I've stated in the House and in other forums, there is a very comprehensive review being done right now, not only of the incident on October 22 but also of the overall security posture on the Hill. As those reviews are conducted and as the security officials identify areas where improvements need to be made or changes need to be made, there are some costs associated with that. It's my understanding that those changes, some of which have already been approved by the board, won't be included in the supplementary estimates (B) but they will be in the supplementary estimates (C).

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

When do we expect that? February-March?

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

Yes.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

A question we always have for you when you appear before this committee is this. Are there any anticipated savings? You have always, in previous presentations, been able to identify some of the cost savings that you've been able to implement.

Are you confident that will continue for the remainder of this fiscal year and the upcoming years, and have you been able to identify any potential areas for cost savings?

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

Yes. This is something I spoke to a couple of times in the mains and in previous fiscal years, but the Board of Internal Economy was invited to match the strategic and operating review and identify savings.

We were very successful. We worked with all members of the board and House administration to come up with savings. The fiscal period 2014-15 is the final year of the three-year strategic and operating review program. It saw the House identify a 7% budget reduction and a $30-million operating expenditures reduction.

In addition, we've noticed significant savings in travel costs with the expanded use of the flight pass system. Members have been using that now for....Is this our second year?

[Mark G. Watters, Chief Financial Officer, House of Commons]

Since June, yes. On the corporate side, since June.

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

We've expanded that to include what's called the corporate flight pass, which sees even more significant savings. It's bulk purchasing, in essence, by the House of Commons with the airline provider.

The advantage of making those bulk purchases at the beginning is that we get a significantly reduced cost. Purchasing flights one at a time à la carte, as when you and I were first elected, versus the House administration doing it in bulk has really seen those costs come down.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

I don't know the exact cost savings on flights alone. Have you got any figures that you can share with us before the introduction of the flight passes, for example, what the costs were, average costs for a fiscal year, as opposed to what the costs are now just on travel?

[Mark G. Watters]

When we did the strategic review, our budgeted savings were estimated to be about $5.5 million on flight passes with the introduction of corporate flight passes. Another factor that we're noticing is that there are fewer travel points that are being used.

Last year and so far this year, the trend is about a 10% drop in usage of travel points. With the introduction of corporate flight passes in June, which basically allows us to buy 200 segments at a time, so the discounts are quite significant, so far this year we're trending at about another $7 million in savings.

I'm hesitant to quantify that as a final number because those numbers are based on the data that we had until the end of September. But certainly, if the trend continues, when we're looking at the main estimates with the board next year, we will be factoring another significant reduction to the statutory vote for travel.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

How much time, Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

You have about 30 seconds.

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

I'll cede my time, then, to my colleagues in the opposition.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Madame Latendresse, you get an extra 30 seconds. Mr. Lukiwski gave you a gift today.

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

That's very kind of Mr. Lukiwski, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Scheer, I thank you for being here today. We are always happy to have you.

I will pursue the topic of security brought up by Mr. Lukiwski.

Obviously, there are costs to integrating the services. Do you believe we'll see savings in the long run? Do you think this merger will help improve security, as well as be more economically efficient?

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

I can say with confidence that the unification of the security forces inside the Hill will lead to some savings on the administrative level. It has been something that was identified by the Auditor General, not only as something that would lead to cost savings but also something that would enhance security in general.

Of course, as we identify other aspects that we want to implement to make the precinct more secure, those will have a cost. The idea is that we may save some on the administrative side and behind-the-scenes side, but there will be costs associated with increasing the security posture on the Hill, whether that's through personnel, material, or other things. Physical changes, those all come with costs, so there will be increased spending on those items.