The committee met at 1:03 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Approval of Agenda and Minutes

Mr. Speaker: I call the meeting to order.

Welcome, everyone. I hope you are having a wonderful summer so far.

Also, welcome and thanks to Jagrup Brar. I think he’s here in the designated place of Michele Babchuk.

Thanks to you for joining us.

Hon. J. Brar: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Speaker: Okay, thank you.

The first item on the agenda is approval of the draft agenda. Any changes to the agenda as it was circulated? If not, a motion is in order to approve it.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: Okay, now the minutes of the April 28 meeting. Any changes to the minutes?

If not, then may I have a motion to approve the minutes of April 28?

Motion approved.

[1:05 p.m.]

Mr. Speaker: The Government House Leader is here.

Welcome, Ravi.

All right, item No. 3 here on the agenda is an update from the Clerk.

Clerk’s Update

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): Great. Thank you so much. Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker and Members.

Thank you for this opportunity to provide an update on some of the priority projects that we are working on during the non-sessional period. These generally fall into three categories, which I’ll address: first, the MLA safety and security program; second, an update on various capital projects; and thirdly, an update on 2024-25 budget planning.

First, I’ll begin with an update on our MLA safety and security program.

As part of a transformational departmental restructuring under the leadership of our Sergeant-at-Arms, Ray Robitaille, the Sergeant-at-Arms department is transitioning to a new hybrid model of layered security. This summer we were very happy to welcome our first cohort of ten unarmed safety officers for their orientation and training. These unarmed officers complement and support the armed officers, taking on a variety of important security and support roles.

The Sergeant-at-Arms department is continuing its collaboration with our IT department, focusing on the modernization of security systems both on the precinct and in constituency offices. As a result of this collaboration, we aim to provide 20 constituency offices with security modernization supports this year.

I’ll now move on to the next topic, an overview of our many capital projects underway this summer. This project activity includes continuing network and data centre upgrades at the legislative precinct.

Thank you again to the IT department for leading these important upgrades.

Our teams are also going to be working towards the replacement and upgrade of desks in the Douglas Fir Committee Room this summer, along with installing a new digital sound system.

A special thank-you to Hansard broadcasting for that work.

This project will take place in August after the conclusion of the Finance Committee’s budget consultations.

In the chamber, we currently have a project underway to assess the structural load capacity of the 130-year-old chamber floor, an important piece of work to assess the floor load capacity in light of plans to accommodate 93 members in our new parliament. This floor load assessment, which is led by the precinct services department along with a structural engineering team, required the removal of all furniture in the chamber, scanning by the contractor and then the replacement of all desks, wiring and furniture.

The precinct services department continues to be busy with our two active construction projects as well: the front stairs project and the fire exit project. These projects are generally on track. Most of the disruptive construction work is, at this stage, still anticipated to be complete by the end of September, prior to the opening of the fall sitting period. Some activity will continue into October on the fire exit project.

I want to extend again sincere thanks to all members and staff for their understanding and patience during the construction period this spring and summer.

With respect to the modular child care facility project, we are working to refine a detailed child care project proposal, including reviewing the operational requirements of the proposed new facility, its optimal placement and location on the precinct grounds and the preparation of an RFP to retain a child care operator. The project team looks forward to bringing a detailed project proposal forward for final consideration and approval by your committee in the early fall.

With respect to our enterprise resource planning project, last December we provided this committee with an update on the enterprise resource planning project, also known as the ERP project. Members may recall that the Legislative Assembly relies on labour-intensive manual processes, in the absence of an integrated corporate information system, to administer payroll, benefits, HR and financial services. The organizational risks associated with these legacy systems were confirmed through observations and report findings, including a 2022 payroll system internal audit.

To address this service and technical risk, we have embarked on a multi-year ERP project focused on replacing our existing legacy applications, including payroll, HR and finance. We are targeting to post an RFP on B.C. Bid by early August.

This critical project represents a significant opportunity to modernize our aging technical infrastructure in these areas. It dates from 2002. It’s also a significant new investment for the Legislative Assembly. Based on consultation with comparable public sector organizations, the initial implementation costs will likely be in the multi-million-dollar range over two fiscal years.

[1:10 p.m.]

As a result, a very detailed project update, including specific budgetary requirements, will be brought forward for your consideration and approval later this year.

Finally, I’ll close by noting that the Legislative Assembly administration has begun its 2024-25 budget planning. The year ahead will be one of transition for us as we move towards the provincial general election in October of 2024, and we look forward to supporting the transition to a new parliament, including supporting a total of 93 members.

As we did last year, our team will be reaching out to engage with you, Mr. Speaker, and each of the caucuses in the next month or two to seek feedback, from a client perspective, on key areas of investment and resourcing for the ’24-25 budget year.

We find these discussions very helpful to ensure we align our service capacity and resources and key investments with the needs and priorities of our key clients — members, caucuses and constituency offices. These meetings can take place virtually or in person, and we will be reaching out to schedule them shortly.

Thank you very much, Members, and I’m happy to answer any questions on the Clerk’s update.

Mr. Speaker: Any questions for Kate, any clarifications?

Thank you, Kate.

The next item on the agenda is additional legislative chamber seating. We are dealing with a recommendation from the subcommittee on administration and operations.

Kate and Jesse, please take us through that.

Legislative Chamber Seating

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): Great.

Before I turn it over to you, Jesse, I’ll just mention that the project team and I were very pleased to receive some feedback from the subcommittee on administration and operations at our recent meeting in June, with respect to the short-term option that’s being brought forward for your consideration this afternoon.

We did receive some very helpful feedback with respect to continuing to review current usage of space in the chamber to ensure that we can prepare an overview of any other opportunities to modernize that space, including meeting accessibility requirements. But the recommendation being brought forward today, which Jesse will now speak to, represents our best advice with respect to a short-term solution to meet the needs of the new parliament.

Over to you, Jesse.

J. Szczepanowski: That’s great. Thank you, Kate.

Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker and Members.

As you all are likely aware, in April of this year, the B.C. Electoral Boundaries Commission recommended six additional electoral districts, and this recommendation was approved by the Legislative Assembly through the royal assent of Bill 25 on April 6. As Kate mentioned, this, of course, poses a major challenge for the Legislative Assembly. As you all are aware, we are currently at our full capacity in the current layout of the chamber.

The Legislative Assembly administration and my team have gone through a number of iterations, looking to develop a solution to accommodate six additional members. As Kate mentioned, we did present these options to the subcommittee on administration and operations, three short-term options and one longer-term option, back in April.

Two of the options did introduce bench-style seating, so looking at different types of seating arrangements as well. There was some interest in exploring bench-style seating further. However, we determined it was not a viable option at this time, due to the short time frames we were dealing with. To build custom benches and to bring in this change…. It would have been a major change, and we really didn’t have the time to introduce that.

Following the meeting, we did establish a working group and incorporated the feedback we received, and we did present back to the subcommittee on June 30 with the recommended option that does stand referred to the Legislative Assembly Management Committee for deci­sion and consideration today.

In your meeting package, you will find the recommendation from the subcommittee on administration and operations. I would ask you to please reference the decision note in diagrams which are located in your meeting package, in the appendices on pages 4 and 5.

Our recommended option is to move forward with a major shuffle of the rows within the chamber. As you will see in appendix 1, which is the existing seating plan, the current layout does have a curvature to the rows, and this is to accommodate the Clerk’s table and also to accommodate the current layout.

What we are recommending is moving to appendix 2, which is the diagram in appendix 2, and it’s to do a shuffle of the desks forward into straight rows. By moving the rows forward, four additional member desks can be ac­com­modated in the alcoves that currently only house one member on each side. One additional desk will be placed at the rear of the chamber, as well as one additional desk on a platform at the very rear.

[1:15 p.m.]

We will have room for a temporary desk to be brought in at the rear of the chamber to be used during the election of a Speaker.

Overall, we are confident that this is the best option, from a short-term perspective, to get us ready for October 2024. This is really the best option to get us ready. It does accommodate 93 seats, and all members will have the same size and style of desks in a symmetrical and well-balanced layout.

As Kate mentioned as well, this option does not solve accessibility. Certainly, accessibility between the rows is still a challenge. However, we did receive feedback, and there are still eight desks within the chamber that do offer more accessibility if required.

Finally, as Kate mentioned, this is certainly a shorter-term option. A longer-term option to accommodate future growth in the chamber will be considered as we start work on our long-term infrastructure renewal planning.

Overall, the estimated budget for this option is approximately $300,000. This was one of the least expensive options for a short-term option because it doesn’t require any major construction or major reconfiguration.

With that, I would like to open it up to any questions any of the members may have before we proceed with a motion to approve the recommendation as presented.

L. Doerkson: Just a quick question on the cost. The first time I heard the cost of this project, I thought it was $500,000, which shocked me at that time. I’m equally shocked to hear that it’s $300,000. But is that the right number? Is it three, or is it five, or have I misunderstood something here?

J. Szczepanowski: We did receive quotes. I think the initial number we presented before was just an estimate. We have received quotes for the desks as well as the construction work that’s required to build the platforms and redirect the HVAC in the chamber. The estimated cost is actually $300,000, and we’re pretty confident on that number.

T. Stone: Jesse, my question was going to be along the lines of Lorne’s. The number seems big. I’m obviously not on that subcommittee where this was already considered and referred to LAMC here. I’m wondering if you could provide a little bit more detail as to…. When you say you received quotes, what are the items that come into play that actually result in a $300,000 cost?

I get HVAC, and there are new desks that have to be, I assume, constructed or whatever, but to the public, it really…. We’re straightening out a line and adding six more desks, and $300,000 would seem to be a pretty significant nut to crack to make that happen.

J. Szczepanowski: The overall cost, the majority of the cost is actually on the custom-made desks. This is a custom-made desk that costs somewhere in the range…. They’re fairly expensive. It’s around $120,000 for those six additional desks.

There is cost for Hansard broadcasting to reconfigure and do recalibration of their camera systems, and that’s a significant cost.

Then the construction cost of building the new platforms, redirecting HVAC, potential carpet repairs that need to be done and the additional wiring that has to be done brought us into an estimate of approximately $300,000.

Mr. Speaker: Any further questions or clarification from anyone?

If not, then we need a motion to, as presented in the briefing note….

Artour, can you put that on the screen?

I don’t see it, but it should read: “I move that the proposed additions and reconfiguration of the legislative cham­ber for the 43rd parliament be approved, as presented.”

Somebody to move it.

N. Simons: So moved.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: The next item is the interparliamentary activities framework. Again, it’s a recommendation from the subcommittee on administration and operations.

Kate, please take us through.

Interparliamentary Activities Framework

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

[1:20 p.m.]

I’m very pleased to present to the committee the interparliamentary activities framework, which is a new undertaking that we have brought forward for your consideration. As the meeting materials explain, the Legislative Assembly has, for a very long time, participated in many interparliamentary activities, including outgoing visits by members and employees of the assembly to other parliaments, incoming visits from elected officials and officials from other parliaments.

We also maintain active engagement and membership in various parliamentary associations and have undertaken organizational initiatives and relationship-building to work towards reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.

The draft interparliamentary activities framework provides an overview of these many activities which are undertaken annually by the Legislative Assembly and ensures, for the first time, some overall coherence and direction for planning of interparliamentary activities to ensure a prudent use of public funds.

As noted within the framework document, there are a number of strategic objectives of these activities, including supporting our presiding officers, members and parliamentary officials in their roles through targeted professional development opportunities. We’re also seeking to build partnerships and share best practices with other parliamentary institutions to promote parliamentary diplomacy and democratic strengthening. We’re also interested to maintain our commitment to reconciliation, to strengthen our efforts in that regard with Indigenous people through relationship-building and special initiatives.

This interparliamentary activities framework had been presented to your subcommittee on administration and operations and is also presented and recommended to you for approval today.

We’d be pleased to answer any questions you may have about this work.

Mr. Speaker: Any discussion or clarification, any questions?

If not, then, Artour, please put that motion on the screen.

It reads that the interparliamentary activities framework be approved as presented.

I need a mover.

G. Begg: So moved.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: The next item on the agenda is new policy 7405, IT resource allocation for members and employees of a member or a caucus. It’s again a recommendation from the subcommittee on administration and operations.

Brent.

IT Resource Allocation for Members
and Employees of a Member or Caucus
and New Policy 7405

B. Lee: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and good afternoon, Members.

Before you today you have a new policy focusing on allocating IT resources to members, employees and employees of a member of caucus.

This policy, prioritized in our policy workplan, attempts to formalize what has previously been captured in guidance through the members’ guide as well as to improve transparency and consistency on how IT equipment is distributed. The policy, through its appendix, defines standard equipment that will be allocated to members and their constituency offices, to constituency employees and to the caucus employees and employees.

It also defines the process of acquiring non-standard equipment and has provisions for returning, reassigning and disposing of IT equipment. As outlined within the briefing note, aligned with feedback received, members and employees will have a choice of options, and work is underway to secure supplies for the future.

My thanks go out to many constituency assistants and the members of the IT team who have visited constituency offices in person to better understand the business and develop this policy.

Lastly, this is the first of a series of IT policies that will be coming to this committee. We are also working on policies related to appropriate use and information security that we’re presenting later in this fiscal year.

I’m happy to take any questions at this time.

Mr. Speaker: Any questions for Brent?

N. Simons: Yeah. I couldn’t find reference to it, but my office has two very separate offices that are joined by a ferry, with about 25,000 people in each, and I only get one printer.

I’m not sure if that kind of extenuating circumstance is addressed with the proposed policy. Forgive me if I just missed that. Thanks.

B. Lee: MLA, yes, the policy does address the printer for the second office. We’re working, actually, through a procurement around our photocopiers in preparation for October of next year. One of the challenges is the supply chain around printers, so we’re looking at a smaller format for a second office as a solution.

[1:25 p.m.]

Just as a note, in the subcommittee meeting, there were a couple of CAs that didn’t have enough screens. My team reached out to MLA Babchuk’s office and has already put screens in the office, to align with the policy.

I think you’ll find this policy really is us listening to those engagements in person. We did hear the same thing about printers; we heard it about wireless; we heard about the security. This is really tackling the computer side, the iPad and the phone, as well as offering you the option to have a Mac computer in a future state where we support both a Mac and PC platform. I know it will be quite a positive experience for quite a few people.

Mr. Speaker: Do you have, Nicholas, even a smaller printer in your second office?

N. Simons: Yeah, we lease that through our caucus funding.

I just want to thank Brent and his team for everything they’re doing on this work, so thanks a lot.

Mr. Speaker: All right then.

Artour, again, let’s try to put the motion on the screen: that policy 7405, IT resource allocation for members and employees of a member or a caucus, be approved as presented.

Somebody to move. Moved and seconded.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: Okay. The next item is item No. 7, restructuring of Vote 1, a recommendation from the subcommittee on finance and audit.

That would be Kathy.

Vote 1 Restructuring

K. Humphrey: Good afternoon, everyone. I’m here to talk about the restructuring of Vote 1.

On June 5, the subcommittee on finance and audit considered a proposal to restructure Vote 1, which is the Legislative Assembly’s vote, starting with the ’24-25 fiscal year. The restructured financial presentation intends to better reflect the changing activities of the Legislative Assembly.

The current structure has been in place for many years and does not highlight some more recent departments or the activities that go on within the assembly. It is proposed that the next budget build reflect the programmatic grouping of the Legislative Assembly operations. We believe this will provide a more holistic and accurate program-level financial reporting structure.

The changes in this new structure highlight the activities that are driven by parliamentary and member activities and then those that are more administrative in nature. In the report, it highlighted the different categories, but at a high level, we would have caucus operations, constituency operations, members remuneration, independent respectful workplace, parliamentary operations, Legislative Assembly administration and centralized accounting functions.

If approved, the new structure would form the basis of the assembly’s next budget in the ’24-25 fiscal year and would appear in the blue book for the upcoming fiscal year, with notes explaining the reconciliation and the shift. There would be no retroactive change to the current blue book for the current fiscal year. However, our quarterly financial reporting for both the subcommittees and this committee will be modelled on the new Vote 1 structure, going forward, starting with this quarter that just ended here, Q1 of ’23-24. I’m happy to take any questions.

Mr. Speaker: Any questions for Kathy, any clarifications?

If not, let’s have a motion on the screen. The motion reads that proposed restructuring of Vote 1, effective for the 2024-25 budget, be approved as presented.

Somebody to move. It has been moved, seconded.

Motion approved.

Mr. Speaker: The next item is 2022-23 quarter 4 financial update.

Kathy, again the floor is yours.

Consideration of
Quarterly Financial Statements

K. Humphrey: All right. Now we’re going to talk about our unaudited financial results of the fiscal year ending March 31, 2023. We have now wrapped up the ’22-23 fiscal year, and the audit is currently underway. We will be providing a more fulsome analysis and summary of the recent year which just ended with the presentation of our audited financial statements later this year in the fall.

Overall, our unaudited financial statements show a net underspend of about $4½ million, approximately 5 percent of our total budget. This is primarily due to the planned annual underspend in the members services area.

[1:30 p.m.]

This is structurally built into the budget to ensure that all of the allowable expenditures have a budget allocation. In practice, not every situation occurs, and not all members spend equally, so the funds are not needed in their entirety, but they are available as needed.

Caucus support services overall had a small net underspend, and specific overspends are now currently reflected in the current-year budgets.

Overall, the Legislative Assembly administration budget was almost completely utilized, with just $172,000 of underspend compared to the overall budget. This past year the assembly administration consciously reallocated funds within their departments and projects to reflect amounts that had changed or projects that had changed throughout the year. However, in the budget, these amounts reported were not updated, so the adjustments in parties show as over- or underspend, although the actual spend was approved and planned.

Some key areas of note that were unknown at the time of the budget were the extent of the cost-of-living adjustments in wages, which affected all of the departments across the assembly, as well as the cost of goods impacted with the inflationary amounts in many departments, particularly in food and in materials for various projects. Parliamentary requirements and the increased activity im­pacted the operating costs of several areas — in particular, in Hansard.

From a capital perspective, many projects were undertaken and successfully completed throughout the year, which you heard about earlier in this meeting. Some of the key building projects were delayed in getting started, which impacted the total spend in the past fiscal year. However, overall, these projects will continue into the current year. Overall, the underspending capital was just over $4 million, and many of these projects are now on track to be completed later this summer and in the fall.

As assembly administration works through the first quarter results that would have just completed, we will be reviewing our results, particularly in capital, to determine the resourcing capacity and the timing of the next series of critical projects to happen throughout the year.

I’m happy to take any questions if you have them.

Mr. Speaker: Any questions for Kathy?

If not, thank you, Kathy, for the information. Thank you so much.

The next item is the mandate letter, 2023-24, for the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly.

Mandate Letter for
Clerk of the Legislative Assembly

Mr. Speaker: Members, further to the last meeting of our committee and the direction that I received and in accordance with the Legislative Assembly governance framework, I am depositing the 2023-24 mandate letter for the Clerk with the committee. This is an information item, and if any members have any questions relating to this, I’m happy to take that.

In your briefing notes, you will see the copy of the letter which was drafted, based on the information that we talked about.

Any questions? Any clarifications? If not, then this letter will be deposited. I’m sure we will all agree that we are all served by our Clerk. It is good to articulate, on the committee’s behalf, the priorities that we have set for her in addition to her day-to-day responsibilities and the priorities that we have approved through the Legislative Assembly administrative strategic plan.

Kate, I am sure I’m speaking on behalf of all of us. Thank you so much for your hard work and your guidance on many of the issues which I seek personally from you to do my job.

And to your team, thank you so much.

K. Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Members.

Legal Matters

Mr. Speaker: Okay, the next item we’re going to have in camera that’s about some legal matters.

May I have a motion to move into in-camera meeting.

It has been moved and seconded.

Motion approved.

The committee continued in camera from 1:34 p.m. to 1:45 p.m.

[Mr. Speaker in the chair.]

Other Business

Mr. Speaker: [Audio interrupted] the drought situation in British Columbia going on, you may have noticed that the grass behind the Legislative Assembly is turning brown. We have stopped watering it. Even in the front, instead of having regular watering for a few days a week, it has been cut down to one day. Even that is also half the time that we regularly use.

We will be, I think, installing some notices to let the public know why we have done it, that kind of thing.

If the CRD comes back with a complete stopping of watering, then we may have to do that as well. We will be doing it.

I just wanted to share that with all the members.

Any other business?

If not, a motion is in order to adjourn.

Moved, seconded.

Motion approved.

The committee adjourned at 1:47 p.m.