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 46
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2021-04-22 11:12
Expand
Yes, there was a request by one party, the members of the Liberal Party, to remove the item because they were not ready to proceed. After discussion with the chair of the working group, Mr. Stanton, he agreed to defer the matter to subsequent meetings.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2021-03-25 11:41
Expand
Thank you, Mr. Richards.
You're totally right. The proposal as presented right now is about Canadians living abroad, but it doesn't capture constituents who may live outside a riding. To reach those types of constituents, they would need to modify it. If it's the wish of the board, we could definitely make that change to the submission to capture Canadians outside of a riding who are registered abroad and those within Canada.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2021-03-25 11:42
Expand
We would look at the wording to make sure it captures what you addressed, but there are also other constituents. For example, it could be students who are registered in a riding but studying, for example, in another....
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2021-03-25 11:44
Expand
It would be the information, as I understand.... We're not providing those lists, but it would be based on the lists that MPs receive pursuant to the Canada Elections Act. We could look further into what information they provide you in the lists. It's clear that for people abroad you're getting a mailing address, but it could be the same thing in relation to other constituents. We would need to have a better understanding of the list that is provided to MPs on a confidential basis.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2021-02-25 11:27
Expand
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I am not going to presume to know what Mr. Gagnon was going to talk about. He can continue along the same lines later on.
Indeed, the question of resources is of great concern to us in the administration. We are in further discussions with our partners to try to assess and determine the extent to which we could add slots for committee activities, particularly when the House is sitting. As you are aware, committee resources and activities have increased significantly, particularly since November.
According to the figures and statistics, which I will be happy to provide to the board members, the rate of time slot usage is much higher than in previous years. The House Administration and its partners are doing their utmost to meet the needs of members and provide them with the time slots they require.
As for the weeks when the House is not sitting, I want to report, with respect to resource issues,
the unfortunate incident at the Friday meeting when there was only one committee meeting, when we could and should have supported that committee. It was a miscommunication that occurred. We own that mistake. The protocol will no doubt avoid a situation like that recurring.
In the non-sitting weeks, there's definitely more availability of sitting time, whether it's for committees or associations, because the utilization rate of those weeks is not as high as during sitting weeks.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2021-02-25 11:40
Expand
Up to this time there have been no expenditures submitted for the deep cleaning of an office.
For the protocol, we'll provide that information to the board.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-12-03 12:25
Expand
I have heard the same concerns as you have. I can guarantee you we'll look at quickly making a proposal that will allow us to address those concerns.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-12-03 12:30
Expand
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
We intend to send you the results of the analysis in the coming weeks.
As a result of the concerns expressed and Mr. Richards' question, we also intend, as soon as possible, to send the members of the board a written submission concerning the decision that must be taken with respect to access to external printing services.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-11-19 11:51
Expand
I just like to make it clear that the total envelope is $4 million. That's the budget for all committees.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-10-08 12:18
Expand
We'll delve into more details later, but just for further information, the virtual chamber and virtual committees were a result of a decision of the House, so yes, the administration did enter into expenditures in relation to that.
In terms of the estimates in the report you have for the expenses as of September 17, it does include overtime costs in terms of the resources that had to be deployed to support the virtual or hybrid committees and the chamber. We'll get more information for you.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-07-10 13:09
Expand
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Actually, it's a correction to the minutes of the March 12 meeting. There was an administrative error that was made in relation to the membership of the working group, and it has been corrected. Since it was approved at the last meeting, the amendment needs to be agreed to by the board.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-07-10 13:10
Expand
The information has been sent. I'm just trying to locate the information right now.
I don't know, Rebekah, if you have the information right at your fingertips. We're looking for it.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-07-10 13:29
Expand
Thank you, Mr. Stanton.
Mr. Julian, in terms of paring back, I don't have information for all the partners, but definitely from the House of Commons I can tell you that the requirements were pared down to what we felt was needed to support the work of the House of Commons and the members.
The Library of Parliament also did its part in terms of paring down its requirements. I don't have the exact number, but at least 1,000 square meters, if not more. In terms of the exercise, that would be going to the medium option. The partners have been working since last year—not necessarily in relation to this working group—on making sure that nobody was asking too much. These are the partners I can talk about, in terms of paring down the requirements of what's required to support the work of Parliament.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-07-10 13:46
Expand
I will ask Susan Kulba to maybe give a bit of detail.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-07-10 13:55
Expand
Thank you for that question.
I'm just going to say a bit about the gross and the net square metres, because I kind of had the same reaction when I saw the different data. Just for the benefit of the board, I'm going to say that at that time, while we were discussing net, the amount was about the same. It was around the same number in terms of the estimated costs when we were looking at that issue, but it did create for me some kind of angst when I saw the two different sets of numbers.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-07-10 13:56
Expand
Yes.
In terms of the decision, obviously the working group is looking at it and making a recommendation to the board in terms of what they think the requirements of the House would be. The board here is responsible for the facilities, and in terms of the administration of the House of Commons is basically informing the government, through the minister, what we have identified as our requirements and our needs. The decision rests with the minister and the government in terms of whether or not they will go through and undertake that spending.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-07-10 13:56
Expand
My understanding is that there is no decision. I personally would be surprised if a decision had been made by the minister before hearing the views of the House of Commons. So nothing has been done—
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-07-10 14:14
Expand
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We have located the information. The mailing cost for the member at that time was $6,590 at the rate he was charged. If he'd been charged the preferred bulk rate, it would have been $177. The difference was $6,400, essentially.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-07-10 14:18
Expand
I think it would be beneficial for the board to do it in two steps, so we'll send a report, in terms of information that could come up in the following weeks, and maybe come to the board itself at its meeting to have the discussion and the exchange.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-06-01 16:23
Expand
Your question was about interpretation, Ms. DeBellefeuille, correct?
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-06-01 16:24
Expand
Ms. DeBellefeuille, I'm going to ask Mr. Eric Janse to answer, since he's the ideal person, being the director for committees.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-03-12 11:27
Expand
That's correct.
Those kinds of instructions, directives or directions are very helpful in a way in going forward, for example, by taking off the footprint of the chamber. If we don't look at that and we keep the same footprint, then we can focus on other elements, yes.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-03-12 11:36
Expand
That would be very helpful. It would be our pleasure to prepare such a list and submit it for your consideration, with maybe a little background on each.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-03-12 11:36
Expand
I think we're done.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-03-12 11:36
Expand
Thank you very much.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-02-27 11:22
Expand
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Actually, Susan Kulba will start. She and Ms. Garrett will provide an update on the activities that have taken place since our last presentation in June.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-02-27 11:36
Expand
We've outlined the decisions that we believe parliamentarians should be involved in and consulted on so that they can share their opinion and ultimately make a decision. A number of decisions will be required in the coming months to continue making progress on the project.
It's not my intent to go into all of those decisions. Obviously, the objective of this meeting is not to get one decision on any of those topics, but just to give you a sense of what needs to be reviewed in designing the program and designing the building. I would say that governance is more the objective, in terms of putting that on the board's agenda to discuss and obtain direction on where the board wants to go.
In a simplified way, the governance for the parliamentary precinct involves many players.
First, the legislative power, in this case the House of Commons, determines the requirements for buildings and offices.
The executive power is the custodian and is responsible for carrying out projects and implementing budgets.
There are obviously other stakeholders, including the Department of Canadian Heritage, the National Capital Commission and the City of Ottawa.
The devil's in the details. That's simplified, but when it's time to really get to answers and discussion, the decision becomes a bit more complex. The parliamentary administration is the lead for engagement with parliamentarians. It is our responsibility to ensure that members are properly engaged to allow for effective decision-making as it relates to defining the requirements of your workplace for the next 100 years.
Historically, the board has been the decision-maker for LTVP and related projects.
In the previous Parliament, for example, the board appointed a working group that was created to help it make decisions. This concerned the excavation required for the future Visitor Welcome Centre.
We remember the discussions. It may not have been a perfect model yet, but the fact that you were kept informed and that you received help with making decisions was a step in the right direction.
I have reflected quite a bit over the past year on what could be an efficient decision-making process that would ensure that members are engaged in the level of details both on the requirements and potential cost of options.
Obviously, you must receive enough information to ensure that you're satisfied and assured that any potential decision will be made with full knowledge of the facts. In my view, our obligation as an administration is to act transparently and to respond to your requests and concerns.
I would add that our job is to make recommendations. Your job is to study them.
I believe that the working group named by the board is a good model, but we also need to reflect on the interplay with PROC, which also has an interest in the Centre Block or the projects. For example, as Susan has mentioned in terms of the chamber, one of the big decisions that will need to be made is whether or not to expand the chamber. This has implications and I believe it merits the necessary study by members to arrive at a conclusion. I believe that PROC would be well placed to do that kind of study and make recommendations to the board.
For example, if the decision is not to expand the chamber, we know because of the growth in the number of MPs that the rules will have to be adapted. Because of the growth in those numbers, assigned seating will no longer be possible. There are all sorts of procedural implications that would need to be examined with respect to the rules.
I believe that another aspect could be the level of effort for other types of decisions, as we did in the past for the visitor welcome centre, for example. I suggest that for a series of the decisions, it will take hours of iterative discussions between members, the administration and Public Works, so that the members, whoever they are, feel they have all of the information necessary to make a decision in the best interest of the House of Commons, and also Canadian taxpayers.
I would suggest that the level of effort, in terms of the members engaged in that exercise, would be a minimum of probably two hours per week.
I'm leaving you with that at a very high level. That's how I see the way that everybody could work in a complementary fashion in a working group, PROC and the board itself. I will leave it at that.
I am ready for questions.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-02-27 11:46
Expand
Yes.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-02-27 11:47
Expand
Being a shared building and a shared facility obviously creates another level of complexity with each House setting up its requirements, so it could have an impact on the overall project. As to how those dialogues take place between the two Houses, frankly I don't really have a response.
I'm going to talk about myself here. Our responsibility is basically to come to you with proposals and options, and listen to what your requirements are and what is the most taxpayer-responsible approach to what we're going to propose.
For example, if you look at the plans in the past in terms of the vision for the visitor welcome centre and the House of Commons requirements, one of the latter was that there be committee rooms in the visitor welcome centre. The team reviewing those requirements surveyed the committee rooms that we have across the precinct and the new committee rooms in this building that have been put online, and it is our collective view that we don't need committee rooms in the visitor welcome centre. We're well served with what we have around our facilities.
That is the type of work that we can do and the challenge for us that we need to address in terms of the requirements. Therefore, committee rooms are no longer a requirement for the visitor welcome centre.
I suspect that the other chamber may do exactly the same, but I cannot speak to that.
Collapse
Michel Patrice
View Michel Patrice Profile
Michel Patrice
2020-02-27 11:51
Expand
Obviously, these are projections. We suspect that there's a point in time when Parliament will modify the—
Collapse
Results: 1 - 30 of 46 | Page: 1 of 2

1
2
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data