CONTENTS
Wednesday 5 December 1990
Organization
Adjournment
STANDING COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES
Chair: Jackson, Cameron (Burlington South PC)
Vice-Chair: Marland, Margaret (Mississauga South PC)
Carr, Gary (Oakville South PC)
Daigeler, Hans (Nepean L)
Hansen, Ron (Lincoln NDP)
Haslam, Karen (Perth NDP)
Lessard, Wayne (Windsor-Walkerville NDP)
McGuinty, Dalton (Ottawa South L)
McLeod, Lyn (Fort William L)
Perruzza, Anthony (Downsview NDP)
Ward, Margery (Don Mills NDP)
Wilson, Gary (Kingston and The Islands NDP)
Clerk: Carrozza, Franco
Staff: Campbell, Elaine, Research Officer, Legislative Research Office
The committee met at 1533 in room 2.
ORGANIZATION
The Chair: I see a quorum. We will deal with the report of the subcommittee first. For those of you who are reading it, I will briefly highlight that in accordance with standing order 57, the rotation selection produced the official opposition's choices as Ministry of Energy, seven hours, and Ministry of Community and Social Services, eight hours. The Progressive Conservative Party has the Ministry of Treasury and Economics, seven hours, and the Ministry of the Environment, eight hours.
The governing party has submitted the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines, which is specifically votes 2901 and 2903. The reason it is presented in the report as Ministry of Northern Development and Mines is that the legal name of this ministry has not been changed and that is the legal name of the ministry. So it is before you as its legal name, which has to be reported in the House. However, it is the understood intention, which Hansard is now recording, that the governing party wishes to do the estimates of that portion of the Ministry of Northern Development and Mines devoted to mines, and the Minister of Mines specifically. The government party has not submitted its other one, and wishes to hold open the option, but I will let it speak directly to that in a moment.
Perhaps we will deal with that issue first and then proceed to the meeting times and dates that are being recommended to the committee. Are there any questions on this portion of the subcommittee report?
Hearing none, then we will proceed to page 2, which sets out the recommendation from the subcommittee to meet in the three weeks commencing 4 February. The second week would be 11 February and the third week would be 18 February. The committee would meet on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays between the hours of l0 to 12 and from 2 until 5. This is considered somewhat normal procedure in terms of past practice for this and most other committees. Are there any questions on the recommended dates and times?
Ms M. Ward: I do have a question regarding the times. Has any consideration been given to other committee commitments that members of this committee may have?
The Chair: The House leaders will determine the scheduling of committees generally. Your whip -- at least that is the practice in our party -- I presume will look at substitution for two reasons. First, there may be specialized interests. For example, the parliamentary assistant to your Minister of Energy may wish to be substituted to your committee to participate in those estimates. That of course applies to any other committees that might be meeting at the same time the estimates committee is meeting
Your whip would deal with substitutions. So we generally try not to address that, but would be more sensitive to the attendance of the committee as we now are constituted. Does that answer your question?
Ms M. Ward: Not entirely, if you are saying that the whips will work this out. I am also on the standing committee on finance and economic affairs and I had the understanding that was to meet Thursdays. That was specifically why I was asking the question. I see you have Thursday --
The Chair: All right. This is a schedule to meet in February when the presumption is that the House is not sitting, so your regular committee time frames are not necessarily operating and it would be strictly full-day sessions that are booked by agreement among the three House leaders. That schedule is provided to you before we rise at the end of December. Any other questions on the timing?
There has been a request that we not necessarily approve this report today, to hold out the option of completing the final ministry selection for the governing party. That has been suggested to me as Chair and I am therefore sharing it with the rest of the committee. I am at your pleasure, but we can wait until Tuesday and approve certain matters. Perhaps then, by Tuesday, the House leaders will have met and we will have a resolution authorizing us to meet outside of our mandate, in February.
Mr Daigeler: Would that require another meeting of the committee?
The Chair: Yes, it would.
Mr Daigeler: Can we not just leave it open with a proviso that as with the two opposition parties, the government party will fill in the other ministry it wishes to choose? I do not really see the need for another meeting just for this particular purpose.
Clerk of the Committee: Mr Daigeler, we do not have the estimates before us. We must wait for the Legislature to send the estimates to this committee -- this is merely background information -- and directions among the committee to the House leaders. But before we proceed with this, we must have the estimates before us.
1540
Mr Daigeler: Supplementary estimates.
Clerk of the Committee: Supplementary estimates.
The Chair: We have been given the estimates, but the supplementary estimates were --
Mr Daigeler: I do not quite see how that clarification, though, answers my question. In order to present the thing to the House leaders, why do we have to meet again? Can we not just say, "You go choose the ministry that you will choose"?
The Chair: Yes, that is one suggestion, but your question also asked us why we needed to meet. Our clerk is advising us that we do not have any work before us. The standing orders say that our work is deemed to have been completed because we are this late in the year.
Mr Daigeler: I just want to avoid --
The Chair: I am with you on that point. I am trying to clarify for all members the awkwardness of the situation we are in in terms of not putting the cart before the horse. I share with you the desire not to have a meeting if it is not necessary. I think we all agree on that, but I am guided by the clerk who suggests that we should meet briefly to approve the final report next Tuesday. We are led to believe that by then the House leaders will have prepared the appropriate motion which refers the supplementary estimates to us. That is what the clerk is guiding us to. I might share a different view, but I am guided by the clerk or the committee; I am actually guided by the committee, so tell me what you would like to do.
Mr Daigeler: What impact would that have on us?
Clerk of the Committee: You cannot very well work on something that is not before you.
Mr Daigeler: Next Tuesday, other than formalizing that second ministry, what else would we be doing?
Clerk of the Committee: You will receive the motion in the Legislature giving you the mandate to review.
Mr Daigeler: To look at those.
Clerk of the Committee: Yes.
Mr Daigeler: That would be it?
Clerk of the Committee: Yes.
The Chair: I then ask the question, could we then make this as a condition subsequent to receiving that order?
Clerk of the Committee: If that is what you wish.
The Chair: Then that would avoid the meeting. Our motion would read, "Should the House refer to us the supplementary estimates by order prior to a certain date, we wish to submit the following:"
Mr Daigeler: I think that makes sense.
Ms Haslam: Certainly, with the proviso, with the understanding that the second one can be added at that time, the second government party ministry could be added in at that time.
The Chair: When you give us your final submission, it has to be as soon as we have the matter referred to us so that we can then turn to the government and get it on. I have shared with members my concern if all committees start to approach the House leaders simultaneously with requests for time. I understand that certain committees were not anticipating meeting during the break. I would hate to see estimates suffer in that sweepstakes. That is a part of the process that goes on in this building and it is not a problem of any governing party; it is a problem of process with 12 committees competing to use up a very limited amount of time. So I feel the committee should be aware that if you are serious about doing estimates, we should be serious and get our request in early to enhance its chances so that we can meet and do our work on estimates.
Ms Haslam: In other words, Franco, our request cannot go in until they tell us we have business to do anyway. Is that correct?
Clerk of the Committee: That is correct.
Ms Haslam: You were anticipating, Mr Chairman --
The Chair: The House leaders meet tomorrow, so that will be their first opportunity. If they do not resolve it tomorrow, then we have to wait until the following Thursday. I know they will be discussing several committees that have now, out of the blue, come up with 12-hour requests. That is pretty apparent.
All right. To accommodate the governing party, I think we just simply have to indicate that your final submission will be added as quickly as possible. Okay?
Ms Haslam: Sure.
The Chair: Then we may not have to necessarily meet. If that is the case, we will require a motion to that effect. Are you going to work on the appropriate wording?
Clerk of the Committee: Yes, I will.
The Chair: Thank you. Hansard has recorded that. I need a seconder.
Ms Haslam: I will second that.
The Chair: All those in favour? Opposed, if any? Carried.
The second item before us is the budget. If you will look not at your agenda but at the cover of the budget, the cover of the budget references that this is an interim or supplementary budget for the 1990-91 activity period, or to be more specific, for the period of 4 December 1990 to 31 March 1991. We felt this was the simplest way to deal with our budget since our budget requests are not on a calendar year, they are on the same financial year as the ministries that we are doing the estimates for. With that understanding, Franco would be pleased to comment briefly on the budget, and then we will answer any questions.
Clerk of the Committee: The items on page 2 deal specifically with the meeting per diem that the members will be entitled to claim when they meet and also the travelling per diems, which are eight days. Since we are meeting on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, you are entitled to claim the Monday as a travelling day and the Friday as a travelling day. Also, there are your meal allowances that you can legally claim for every day you are here, and also for travel. The travel includes, for instance, if a member is from a northern riding and he has to travel to meet here in Toronto; the committee will pay for the travel so he does not have to include it in his yearly travel. That includes members who travel by car. They are entitled to the kilometres. Also, if a member is not from Toronto and wishes to stay the night, the committee will provide for that.
"Printing -- Miscellaneous" deals with the budgets, the exhibits that you will be receiving, Xeroxing in particular. "Binding": At the end of the year we bind the material business of the committee and some of the Hansards that are not bound by the Queen's Printer. "Books, Maps and Publications": Should you require material to help you in your review of the estimates, the committee provides for that.
"Catering" is simply the juice that you see today and coffee and tea for the meeting days. "Postage" is self-explanatory, the same as long distance. "Transportation of Goods": In the past on special occasions we have sent couriers with material to members if they were out of town or if they required specific material. Then we utilize that. "Miscellaneous" expenses is self-explanatory.
The Chair: Any questions on the supplementary budget for the committee?
Mr Hansen: I have one question on transportation. Four weeks at $1,000 per week: If we have a northern member here, there is no way we would get away with a budget of $4,000 for all of us. My cost would be $78 per week. Now if you have a northern member -- I do not know if we have anybody -- it would be close to $600 per week, which would be $2,400 in the budget right off the bat. I guess maybe you have already looked at the location of everyone here.
Clerk of the Committee: That is included too, although some members might not specifically come on the same day, so it is kind of hard to tell, because if they come on a Monday they are entitled to the travelling day, but not if they come on Tuesday when the committee is meeting. So even though they may travel --
Mr Hansen: I am talking about "Travel-Transportation."
The Chair: You are talking about his air fare.
Clerk of the Committee: I understand that, but you might not be entitled under this account; you might be entitled under your own account.
1550
Mr Hansen: One of your 52 trips.
The Chair: But to answer your question directly, this budget was not prepared with the understanding of where all the members were coming from. These are mean averages and they generally work out. This is a guide. We cannot proceed unless we have a budget approved. There is some flexibility within this rather generous amount.
Mr Hansen: So some of us could take our 52 trips up here to Queen's Park.
The Chair: They are not counted against your committee time. They are a separate item.
Mr Hansen: Okay, fine.
Mr Daigeler: But if we have an overcharge, the Legislature would still pay for it even if there is no money in the budget.
Mr Hansen: I just asked the question. I have known of deficit financing before too.
Clerk of the Committee: The important point here is that the Legislature pays for all of the expenses for members that are required for the members to be present in Toronto for the work.
Mr Daigeler: And it is not counted towards your office expenditures.
The Chair: Any further questions with respect to the budget?
Mr Perruzza: I do not understand the travel per diem, the eight days. What if you are a Metropolitan Toronto member? I do not understand.
Clerk of the Committee: You are only entitled to claim your kilometre mileage. Unfortunately, it works out that the Toronto members or the members around the area of Toronto are usually not entitled to the travelling per diem, only the kilometres. For instance, if you live up in North York you are entitled to 20 kilometres' pay and not the travelling days, not the $78.
Mr Daigeler: You are entitled to the per diem for the committee work.
The Chair: Let me just try to explain it in this way: The difference between a meeting per diem and a travel per diem is that in a given week Monday is deemed a travel day, so if you are from Windsor or from Sault Ste Marie, you are travelling on a Monday. You get paid to travel on that Monday. When you arrive that evening, you will do some of your work to justify the travel per diem and then you will stay overnight and in the morning you will appear before committee and you will be paid a meeting per diem. They are two different amounts.
But if you live 20 miles from this building, it is hard to justify that you need a day to travel to get here. We have confused you about the difference between a travel per diem and a meeting per diem. You cannot be working in your constituency, but you are doing committee work in the process of travelling to get here.
Mr Perruzza: Okay. So for the people on this committee who are from Metro, if you have 11 members here times $78, you are going to have some moneys that go in your budget which are not going to be claimed.
The Chair: Possibly.
Clerk of the Committee: You might be substituted too.
The Chair: But you may find that this committee may wish to travel to Washington to examine how they conduct the estimates review in the capital, or a state Legislature. You would need to travel on a Sunday in order to be there for a Monday meeting. You would get a travel per diem. or if you were on another committee that was conducting public hearings in North Bay, you would travel the day before. This is a committee that does not traditionally travel unless it is examining estimates processes in other jurisdictions.
Mr Hansen: I have another question. I come from Niagara and I usually leave the night before because at 10 o'clock in the morning it would be pretty well impossible. Is that day before just a convenience to me?
The Chair: As the Chair, I will be pleased to talk to you, as will Franco, on an individual basis and to give you counsel in that area. We would be more than pleased to. But in the interests of committee time, perhaps if there are any questions about the quantum of the budget or any particular amounts -- hearing none, I would entertain a motion.
Mr McGuinty: One brief point: How are these per diems treated by Revenue Canada? Are those tax-free?
The Chair: Three years ago they were a lump sum payment, and in the last two years the Legislative Assembly's finance branch has put them on a form with separate entries. I guess the simplest way of putting it is that they are now accounting for them in such a way that should the government wish to treat it as a taxable item, they have a system in place to do that. My understanding is that it is currently not taxable. That is as clear a description of what is going on as you are going to get. Do you understand what I am saying? Okay.
Franco and I are prepared to sit down with you when you get your first form and explain it to you, but you will see a very clear distinction between certain items so that they can monitor this.
Mr Carr: I wonder if I could move a motion to approve the budget.
The Chair: That would be delightful. Could I have a seconder? Ms Haslam. All those in favour? Opposed, if any? Great.
Are there any other items of business members wish to raise?
I just want to take three minutes, if I can, with your indulgence, to introduce you to Elaine Campbell. She is someone who is new to the head table. She is with legislative research. It is customary for all committees of the Legislature to have the support of legislative research, as well as of legislative counsel, so that we have legal support should we require it.
It will not be uncommon for us to have legislative research here, and since Elaine has come today, with your indulgence, she will take maybe two minutes to briefly explain what she has done for the committee in the past so that you are familiar with her role and the degree to which she can support the committee in the estimates process.
Ms Campbell: Prior to the formation of the standing committee on estimates last year, the legislative research service had prepared on a very regular basis information packages for each member who requested them when participating in the ministry estimates debates. We continue to provide that service. These packages were made to order and we followed the directions received from the individual members.
We would cover things such as the questions asked in the House, statements made by the minister, initiatives, issues over the past fiscal year and quite often comparisons on the budgets for the current fiscal year and the previous fiscal year.
Last year I was asked to attend the first subcommittee meeting of the estimates committee and at that time research needs were discussed. It was decided that there was at that time no need to have someone here on a regular basis. They wanted it to be known that individual members could contact our service if they required information for their particular participation in the debates.
I was asked to return to the committee at the final meeting it had after its report was tabled last November. At that time I was asked by the chairman of the committee to prepare a memorandum that would discuss the role of legislative research in the committee's proceedings. The memorandum was presented to the members of the committee at their first meeting last spring. I had divided the proposal into two parts. The first dealt with background materials that could be prepared for use before or when the committee met in the new year. The second listed ways in which the LRS could support the committee on a more regular basis.
It was decided at the meeting in the spring that the background materials I had suggested could be prepared should be prepared. Due to time constraints and the few meetings that were held by the committee during the months of May and June, only one of the papers that I had been asked to prepare was actually distributed to the entire committee, and that was a summary of recommendations for estimates reform in Ontario that had been made over the last l0 years.
We were also prepared to and did prepare overviews of estimates committee activities in other parliamentary jurisdictions, as well as a sample ministry estimates review package. That was the extent of my involvement in last year's committee.
Mr Daigeler: Would it be possible to get copies of these documents? I think they would be very useful.
The Chair: They are and we will have Franco send those out to each of you. I read the documents. They are very helpful. I want to thank legislative research for its brief presentation. If there is no other business, I know Tony has a very important motion to adjourn.
The committee adjourned at 1600.