Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Nov. 19th, 2013

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

My final question has to do with how the board makes its decisions. We have a Board of Internal Economy, which has in the past functioned by consensus. Unfortunately, it seems to be moving to a majority model now. Where there is some difference of opinion, does your board rule by consensus or is it a majority vote that decides?

[John Sills]

I think the current board in particular is very keen to do things by consensus. It's been in place for nearly a year now and as the director I go to all the board meetings. It doesn't come down to a vote if there's a good argument. Directors coming from quite different backgrounds can have different views on matters. Having been advised by policy officials like myself, they work very hard to find consensus. If they had to vote they would, but we work through consensus if we can.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

So you are not aware of any time when there's been a vote that has taken place?

[John Sills]

I'm trying to think, but not a real “hands up because we can't decide this”. People work hard to find consensus. We've had votes in the past but not this time around.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Julian.

Mr. Sills, we work in both official languages of Canada here, both French and English. If you are asked a question in French you will get the translation. If you get a delay, that is what is happening.

Mr. Lamoureux, you are next.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Welcome, Mr. Sills.

I have a few questions that I would like to get on the record. One of them is dealing with the process when members of Parliament say they want to be able to move in a certain direction and incur another expense. For example, with advertising, we don't think we should have a party logo on it. There would be a discussion and a decision would be made by the Board of Internal Economy, and then it's passed on.

What role does IPSA play in regard to guidelines for what a member of Parliament can or cannot spend money on? Or is that brought to IPSA?

[John Sills]

We have a set of rules that govern all MP's expense claims, and we consult on those rules. When they started we had extensive consultation, and we review them every year. As an independent body we then set them, and that's it, basically: they are the rules.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Are you approached by the House or any of the committees who say they would like you to consider extending that sort of a benefit of expenditure, or to change something?

[John Sills]

We have regular discussions with all the parties, and other political figures. When we consult we always make the effort to discuss matters with them and seek their views.

We also have a parliamentary group called the IPSA-MP liaison group with a number of senior MPs, which meets from time to time to discuss issues. There are plenty of ways of having those discussions.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

So the board would take it upon itself to meet with different caucuses, and independents, to get a sense of their feelings and thoughts.

[John Sills]

Yes.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

What sort of an appeal mechanism do you have in place? For example, what happens when an MP puts in a claim, he or she gets a response, and they are not happy with the response? Who do they appeal to?

[John Sills]

In the first instance, they could ask for IPSA itself to review it. We have an audit team that would review the decision.

If they are not satisfied with that, they can go to the compliance officer, who is independent of IPSA. He is appointed by the IPSA board but he operates independently. If an MP isn't happy that something hasn't been paid, then he or she can take it to the compliance officer. It's relatively rare, but it has happened.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

How often does IPSA meet?

[John Sills]

The board?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Yes.

[John Sills]

It's meant to meet once a month, but it quite often meets more than that. It has one formal board meeting a month, but we have been holding a lot of workshops because of a huge range of issues that we're dealing with at the moment. The board has in recent times been meeting two or three times a month, but that is unusual. It is generally one meeting.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Do you publish the minutes on the Internet? How does one gain access?

[John Sills]

Yes, we do. They are published on our website.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

As a committee, you don't meet publicly. Is there any sense that there could be a need or a justification to allow it to be open? Can someone come in and participate, or watch?

What would the rationale be for not having it open to the public?

[John Sills]

It's interesting. At the beginning there was talk of having cameras and so on, but we decided that we didn't think that was going to work. So what we do is to publish those minutes.

For example, when we consult we'll always report back on the views of the public and the reasons for our decisions and so on. At this point in time, I don't think there's much appetite for actually holding public meetings.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

One of the issues that has come up in the province of Manitoba—and I really believe in this—is that they have actually appointed a commissioner who sets the salaries and pensions of MPs. It's non-debatable, and it takes effect after the following provincial election.

How precisely do you establish a member of Parliament's salary and pension benefits, and when does it take effect?

[John Sills]

Well, we have the power to do that now. We've been consulting about that. We've already determined MP's salaries. These are backbench MPs, by the way, not government ministers' salaries. We said for the current year and the next year that they should get a 1% pay increase, which is the same as the rest of the public sector.

The decision on what happens after the next election is what we're consulting on, and we will set the exact salary and the pension contributions, benefits, and so on. We are working on that at the moment. We have consulted very widely, but it will be IPSA's decision alone.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

You have consulted. Do you have some sort of public meeting, or public input? How do you come to the conclusion?

[John Sills]

We've consulted in all sorts of ways. We do it in the traditional way, with a consultation paper inviting responses; we have an online survey; we've done quite a lot of opinion polling. Last year we conducted a number of citizens' juries, which I know is something that has happened in Canada quite often, whereby you can really get to understand what the public are thinking, if you're with them for three to four hours getting more information. That was extremely helpful. Obviously we consult MPs.

For something such as the pensions, we've worked a lot with the trustees of the MPs' pension fund. In fact, I personally am one of the trustees—IPSA has a member on the MPs' pension fund.

We basically look for as many ways to consult as we can.