BOIE
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 30 of 120
View Kelly Block Profile
CPC (SK)
No, just that if there are any questions, I think we'd be happy to answer them.
View Kelly Block Profile
CPC (SK)
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate your question, and it probably raises for me other questions I have about our role as a working group. I don't think it's for us to determine or suggest the decisions that this board needs to take on this question, but I wanted to concur with what my colleague has presented to you in regard to the things we deliberated on. I would just add that the option we are favouring is the second of three. There was an option to go with a smaller square footage, and also a larger one. We took the middle-of-the-road approach, knowing that there was the scalability that my colleague commented on.
I would also like to put on the record that I personally leaned heavily toward supporting the recommendation coming forward on what had been done by previous boards in regard to establishing this concept of a visitor welcome centre. I did not feel, as a member of a working group that's here to provide suggestions to decision-making bodies, that I would be willing to undo the work that had been done over the previous 20 years.
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you very much.
First of all, it says here that about half of the front lawn will remain in place to allow public access and activities during the project. Obviously, the upcoming Canada Day celebrations will be the last to be held on the Hill for a while - you are all invited to come, by the way - because they take up a lot of space.
It seems that we will still be able to hold activities in the remaining space. How many people, approximately, can this space accommodate? What type of activities will be possible?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
My next question is about the palisade on the site, which looks pretty, from what I see. Have you consulted with the Mayor of Ottawa or Ottawa Tourism about this palisade, which does have a significant visual effect?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
You are saying that most stakeholders and people who are concerned, like the mayor and others, would be comfortable with one of the concepts. Okay. Thank you.
View Kelly Block Profile
CPC (SK)
Thank you very much.
I might go a step further than my colleague in describing some of the angst we probably felt in the last couple of meetings we've had. I do, at the front end, want to say that I have fully appreciated being brought in and being given the level of detail that we were provided. I think that there's a great group of people here working on this project, so we've relied heavily on, as I said, their expertise, as well as what's been done historically.
I would very respectfully suggest that if there is a standing committee that is made up of members from all parties who believe that perhaps they have a role to play in this process, and then there's a working group with three members representing all parties, it feels a little duplicative to me to have us meeting with these folks to sort of get our initial responses to some of these things and then bring that back to you. I'm questioning whether or not we have a layer here that is perhaps not necessary if we have a standing committee like PROC and then, of course, the BOIE, which ultimately is going to be the one making the decisions and which has great representation from every party on it already.
View Kelly Block Profile
CPC (SK)
Building on the comments that were made, I think one of the things that was an impetus for us was understanding that there is a cost to delaying, if we don't stick with the deadlines that we've agreed to. We understood that this was one of the reasons it was important to come back now.
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much, Mr. Paquette. It's a pleasure to see you again.
I tried everything I could to get away from this place, but I'm back.
You say that you provide money to other departments. Is that correct? Does that explain part of the increases? Will the recovery of those funds be faster in that case?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Okay.
I haven't been here in a while. Are there still collective agreement negotiations that could have an impact on the increases requested in the coming years?
I will also put my last question to you right away. I presume that this report will become public at some point. If so, when will it be made public?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
I was talking about this report, the year-end financial report.
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Okay.
Thank you.
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
I just have two general questions.
You said you have looked at what is being done elsewhere in other parliaments.
Can you tell me which ones? I assume they are mostly parliaments of industrialized countries?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Have you seen any cases where non-attendance is allowed for paternity, for a period of time?
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
That could be the case.
I want to bring up a very rare hypothetical case. What would happen if a member became a parent one month before the end of their term?
That individual would not run in the election and would not return afterwards.
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
Let's say we are talking about four months. That individual becomes a father or a mother one month before the end of the electoral term. They would not return afterwards.
View Pablo Rodriguez Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Ruth Ellen Brosseau Profile
NDP (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank Mr. Patrice and Mr. Aubé for their hard work. I think this is a time when we're all kind of singing with the same voice. I think we're all in agreement that the transition, the move here, went very well. There were some growing pains, and it took us all a while to figure out where to go, where the bathrooms were and where the committees were. Sometimes I don't get lost, but I have to make sure that I'm heading in the right direction.
I just want to thank you for all your hard work and the fact that we were able to get back here fast after the break. I think we all really appreciated it. Also, on the pace with which you moved to resolve some of the concerns we did have, I want to say thank you for that, too.
I agree that there needs to be a working group that works with MPs, because who knows who's going to be here after October. I think it's important, because this is our workplace, that it does fit and it does work for us, and obviously for Canadians and people who come from around the world to see our Parliament.
One concern that I do have—and I think there was a story in the CBC—is about the interpreters and the sound acoustic shocks that some of the people working on the Hill have suffered. I think we're all very thankful for and very aware of the important work that our interpreters do, so we have to make sure, on Parliament Hill and in committees, that when there are phone conferences, our interpreters are protected and have the proper equipment to make sure the acoustic shocks are being limited.
I don't know if this is the place to do it, but I think we need to have some information about that, about what kind of work progress has been done. I don't know if this is the forum for it or not, but I think it's important that we get an update to make sure that these people are being protected.
View Ruth Ellen Brosseau Profile
NDP (QC)
As I understand it, the equipment that we have right now in West Block, in the new committee rooms and the House of Commons, will all have to be replaced.
View Ruth Ellen Brosseau Profile
NDP (QC)
So all the stations have this new technology that limits—
View Ruth Ellen Brosseau Profile
NDP (QC)
Okay. Sometimes it does happen to us when we're in the House. Somebody gets up for a question or a speech, and I think they put their—
View Ruth Ellen Brosseau Profile
NDP (QC)
It's the feedback, and that kind of hits us. I know there's one case that you guys are aware of, and I think that was made public, but I think there might be possibilities of other cases where people who have been working in this type of environment for 10, 15 or 20 years have come to deal with certain health issues over the years.
Would it be of importance that, if interpreters have concerns, they do come forward and raise them?
View Ruth Ellen Brosseau Profile
NDP (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to thank Mr. Giroux and Mr. Paquette for their presentation.
I would like to say that the comments that I have gotten back from my constituents, after we went to colour, have been very positive. I think people appreciate getting news from their members of Parliament, and I think the way we're doing it is a lot more interesting to them.
Given the concerns raised by Candice and Mark, I don't know if there's an appetite from other members of the committee to see what it would be like to review some of the ten percenters or householders that have been refused, or ads that have been refused. I don't know if that is a possibility. I don't know what a review would look like. I don't know if there's an appetite from other members to look into this. I think this happens frequently. It hasn't been a big concern for our caucus. I don't know if there's an appetite from members of the board to look at this. I would like some more information, maybe some feedback, if a review is requested, on what that could look like.
View Ruth Ellen Brosseau Profile
NDP (QC)
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I'd like to thank Monsieur Parent and Madame Daigle for the presentation.
At first blush when looking at this, it made me think back to when I came into office in 2011. It was a whirlwind getting to the Hill, walking up, being in the House of Commons for the first time and then all the training. As soon as you're elected, you want to learn what your job in Ottawa is and get set up as fast as possible back in your constituency. I can't remember anything that happened orientation-wise, because I was just trying to get as much done as possible.
It's important to make sure that we evaluate the needs of members and make sure that if we do go ahead with new HR services and programs, they address the needs of members of Parliament. When I found out that there was this recruitment system being proposed and that recruitment services have been offered to certain MPs, I just wondered if that kind of blurs the line between House administration and MPs' duties and responsibilities.
I was wondering if there are any risks that could arise in a situation in which the House administration does recruitment, interviews and background checks. If something were missed, could that cause a problem? What kind of recourse would there be for MPs who use this recruitment system? For us, it's a little bit different. We have a collective agreement; we're unionized.
This is a good idea, but I think what we really need to do is talk to MPs and maybe go back to whips to see what other kinds of services would be needed.
I'm happy that we're talking about health and safety, but I think we also need to make sure that we have enough information about mental health for our offices and make sure that MPs know what kind of supports are available for staff.
This is really interesting. I'm for this, but I'm just worried. I think we need a little bit more information. As was mentioned, once the recruitment services were offered to one member, it snowballed, and other MPs found out about it.
I'd never heard of this being offered until we had a briefing about it. Given the fact that we're only going to have eight senior consultants and then 10 program and services representatives in the HR department, I'm just wondering if that's going to be enough, because it seems they are going to have a lot of work to do.
Those are my concerns around this.
Results: 1 - 30 of 120 | Page: 1 of 4

1
2
3
4
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data