The committee met at 5:30 p.m.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

The Speaker: Calling the meeting to order.

Good evening, Members.

We have only 45 minutes to go over a very long agenda, so I will request all members to be very brief when they make their comments, and the presenters as well, so we can finish by….

Interjection.

The Speaker: And the Speaker as well.

Approval of Agenda and Minutes

The Speaker: Okay, the first item is approval of the draft agenda which was circulated earlier.

Any change to the circulated agenda?

None.

It’s been moved, seconded.

Motion approved.

The Speaker: Then the second item is the review and approval of the draft minutes of the April 14, 2025, meeting of the committee.

Any changes to the minutes of April 14?

Okay. Somebody to move.

It’s been moved and seconded.

Motion approved.

The Speaker: The third item on the agenda is an update from the Clerk.

Clerk’s Update

Kate Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): Thank you so much, Mr. Speaker, and good evening, Members.

As we continue a busy fall sitting period, I wanted to thank you for taking the time to join us at the committee this afternoon. I wanted to extend, as well, a warm welcome to new members of the committee, who are attending their first committee meeting, as well as introduce to members David Hoadley, our interim executive financial officer, who joined us in July and is attending his first LAMC meeting this afternoon.

I have two very brief update items, but first, on behalf of the Speaker, I wanted to confirm that he has asked me to ensure that the subcommittee on administration and operations, which is scheduled to meet on Tuesday, October 28, will include an agenda item to discuss the precinct use policy and approval of events.

With respect to my Clerk’s update this evening, I’ll just briefly touch on two topics: first, our Workday ERP system implementation, and then the second topic is a perimeter hardening project on Menzies Street.

With respect to the Workday ERP system implementation, members of the committee will recall this has been a focused priority for the past two fiscal years. Following an intensive testing and training period, Workday was launched on schedule, in August, and on budget. An operational support team has been set up to further refine Workday and will be continuing to work to optimize the system and its integration into our business processes.

A detailed project close-out report will be presented to the subcommittee on administration and operations next week, but should you or your caucus colleagues require any Workday support, please do not hesitate to contact client services.

Second, I’ll just mention members will have seen a busy area of construction along Menzies Street related to our perimeter hardening project, which will strengthen perimeter security on the precinct grounds. We’re currently moving towards completion of phase 1 of that project along Menzies Street, with the completion of that work expected along Menzies by the end of 2025.

The key project objectives include hardening the perimeter to mitigate against vehicle threats; enhancing controlled access, especially near the west annex; and adjusting vehicle traffic patterns with stronger controls for commercial and delivery vehicles. We appreciate the patience of members and staff with respect to the construction activity and the noise over the past few weeks.

I’ll conclude my update at that point there, recognizing we have a very full agenda and being mindful of the Speaker’s encouragement to be brief.

The Speaker: Any questions for Kate?

Garry Begg: Keeping in mind what you just said about being brief, Workday — how are we doing with that? I know you’re going to submit a report on it, but all the reports that I hear are not good.

Kate Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): Okay. Well, thank you for flagging that. We will certainly look forward to addressing a detailed project report at the subcommittee on administration and operations.

If there are any members who have particular concerns, such as a delay in processing expenditures…. I know that the team has made remarkable improvement in terms of processing timing, turnaround of those. I understand in some cases there have been some gaps, so please let me have those names on behalf of your caucus and others here at the table this afternoon. We’d be happy to follow up on that.

[5:35 p.m.]

Garry Begg: Thank you.

The Speaker: Okay. Anyone else?

Thank you.

Legislative Assembly
Governance Framework

The Speaker: Let’s move to item 4, amendment to the Legislative Assembly governance framework. That was a recommendation from the subcommittee on administration and operations.

Kate Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): Our first substantive agenda item relates to a proposed amendment to the Legislative Assembly governance framework regarding permanent officers. As the Speaker mentioned, this is a decision item, and we are seeking your support of a recommendation from the subcommittee on administration and operations.

As background, the Legislative Assembly’s governance framework was adopted by this committee in January of 2022. It is intended to document and clarify our administrative authorities and practices. It is a living document and is regularly updated to evolve with institutional needs.

Members will recall that on May 1, 2025, the Legislative Assembly appointed two additional permanent officers, our Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel and our Deputy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly. Their appointments build on previous appointments, myself as Clerk and the Sergeant-at-Arms in 2021, both already permanent officers.

However, the framework had explicitly excluded permanent officers from my oversight as Clerk, and there was no clear provision on how permanent officers would be managed operationally. So the proposed amendment before you this evening is to clarify that while permanent officers are appointed and may be removed by the House, as Clerk, those permanent officers report to me, who is accountable for managing their performance and can take disciplinary action if required.

The options before the committee this afternoon are to maintain the status quo or to adopt the proposed amendment to improve clarity and operational certainty. The recommendation is option 2.

The Speaker: This is moved and seconded:

[That the amendment to the Legislative Assembly Governance Framework be approved, as presented.]

Motion approved.

Capital City Living Allowance

The Speaker: Okay, the next item is an amendment to capital city living allowance provisions, recommendations from the subcommittee on administration and operations.

Artour Sogomonian (Deputy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): Good evening, committee members.

The recommendation before you today, coming from the subcommittee on administration and operations, is a proposed amendment to capital city living allowance provisions in the Members’ Guide to Policy and Resources.

The proposal is to provide greater flexibility while ensuring appropriate safeguards in a scenario where a member owns property in Victoria and wishes to rent accommodation to another MLA. These safeguards include a proposed provision that rental rates do not exceed fair market value, that shared accommodation is priced based on a two-bedroom unit and a prohibition on double recovery of expenses, providing that the landlord MLA cannot claim costs like utilities and furniture from both the allowance and the tenant MLA.

As discussed by the subcommittee and outlined in the enclosed decision note that it considered, these changes aim to balance risk management with greater flexibility for members seeking accommodation in Victoria to attend to their parliamentary duties. The decision before you this evening is whether to accept these proposed changes.

I’ll also note that there is a possibility, as outlined in the covering note, to have this decision be retroactive to November 1, 2024, to align with the start of the 43rd parliament, or to have it take effect as of today.

I welcome any questions or discussion from members.

The Speaker: Any questions?

Hon. Mike Farnworth: I would move:

[That the amendment to Capital City Living Allowance provision in the Members’ Guide to Policy and Resources be approved, as presented, retroactive to November 1, 2024.]

The Speaker: All right, that has been moved. You heard it.

Motion approved.

Armouries Building

The Speaker: Now, the next item is the decommissioning of the Armouries building, a recommendation of the subcommittee on administration and operations.

Kate Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): Yes, this next agenda item brings forth another decision item with respect to the condition of the Armouries building, which is located at 431 Menzies Street. We’re seeking your endorsement of a proposed decommissioning plan and work to acquire leased space for additional workspaces for the Legislative Assembly.

As background and as noted in the decision note that went to the subcommittee on administration and operations, the Armouries building, constructed in 1894, is the oldest and most deteriorated structure on the legislative precinct. Over the years, major capital repairs to both buildings have been deferred, pending broader precinct planning decisions. Essential maintenance has extended the building’s life, but engineering assessments have identified significant concerns.

[5:40 p.m.]

In 2024, a letter of opinion from Herold Engineering confirmed that due to the age and deferred maintenance, compounded by the unique structure as a military drill hall, there were a number of critical repairs that would be required to be carried out within three to five years. Some near-term improvements were prioritized, and that work was completed this last summer, in 2025.

The building remains safe for limited occupancy, but it doesn’t meet current building codes, and the ongoing deterioration will continue to pose operational and safety challenges. Currently there are numerous staff working within 431 Menzies Street, as well as two members of the legislative press gallery and B.C. Mail employees. The upper floors are used intermittently for training and storage purposes.

To prioritize staff safety and operational continuity, the proposal is for the administration to work towards securing off-site lease space. A proposal for off-site leasing will be incorporated into the forthcoming 2026-2027 budget submission for consideration of the subcommittee on finance and audit, and then to this committee.

In the meantime, we have, as I’ve mentioned, completed the urgent repairs to extend the building life up to the timeline laid out in the plan that is summarized in the decision note in front of you.

The decision is focused on the first page of the decision note with respect to approval of the decommissioning plan, with vacating the Armouries building by summer of 2027 for those who occupy currently permanent workstations in there — it likely could still be used for training or storage purposes; well, that will have to be determined in due course — and the administration work to acquire leased space for additional workspaces for the Legislative Assembly as required.

Hon. Mike Farnworth: It would be 2027 when the last people move out.

Kate Ryan-Lloyd (Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): That’s correct, Minister.

Hon. Mike Farnworth: Okay. I’m fine to move the recommendation:

[That the decommissioning plan for the Armouries Building by summer 2027 and that work to acquire leased space for additional workspaces for the Legislative Assembly be approved, as presented.]

The Speaker: Okay, it has been moved.

Anybody else? Question, no question?

Okay. Moved and seconded.

Motion approved.

B.C.–Washington State
Interparliamentary Group

The Speaker: All right, the next item is the B.C.–Washington state interparliamentary group. That’s a recommendation, again, from the subcommittee on administration and operations.

Artour Sogomonian (Deputy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): At least for the benefit of the three people that are listening, the recommendation before you today coming from the subcommittee on administration and operations is regarding the establishment of an interparliamentary group between the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia and the Washington State Legislature.

This flows from discussions held earlier this year by both the subcommittee and during a visit of the Lieutenant Governor of Washington state to the Legislative Assembly in May of this year, in which some members participated. As outlined in the interparliamentary activities framework, proposals for new interparliamentary groups are considered by your committee and, if approved, are formalized and executed by the Speaker on behalf of the Legislative Assembly.

During Lieutenant Governor Denny Heck’s visit in May, an agreement-in-principle was reached for the operating parameters of the interparliamentary group. The group’s aims are to promote dialogue between parliamentarians, explore solutions to shared challenges and cross-border constituency issues and foster collaborations on matters of mutual interest and achievement.

The establishment of the group is not expected to result in significant costs. There is no anticipated impact on the interparliamentary relations budget for the current fiscal year, and any future needs will be submitted for consideration through the standard budget process.

The decision before you this evening is whether to approve the establishment of the B.C.–Washington state interparliamentary group and authorize the Speaker to finalize the group’s constitution on behalf of the Legislative Assembly.

We’ve also proposed a consequential decision for the Clerk to be authorized to update the interparliamentary activities framework, which serves as the authoritative guide on the parliamentary diplomacy initiatives that the Legislative Assembly prioritizes.

With that, I welcome any questions from members.

The Speaker: Any questions?

Rob Botterell: I move:

[That the establishment of the British Columbia–Washington State interparliamentary group be approved in accordance with the agreement-in-principle, as presented, and that the Speaker be authorized to finalize the group’s constitution on behalf of the Legislative Assembly; and that the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly be authorized to update the Interparliamentary Activities Framework to reflect the group’s establishment and purpose.]

Motion approved.

Financial Update 2024-25 Quarter 4

The Speaker: Okay. The next item is No. 8 on the agenda, the 2024-25 quarter 4 financial update.

David Hoadley: For the financial update, for the operating expenditures, there was $7.5 million under budget. Primarily, that related to constituency operations, which made up $6 million of that.

[5:45 p.m.]

The biggest savings in that area related to constituency office tenant improvements. We ended up budgeting too much, so there were savings there. Also contributing to savings in constituency operations were unused constituency travel allowances for non-returning members, which were brought into income. I’ll speak a little bit more about that in the next agenda item.

For members’ remuneration, that was $1.5 million over budget. That was resulting from higher-than-budgeted non-returning members, which increased the transition assistance costs.

For parliamentary operations, that line item was under budget by half a million dollars, primarily due to fewer meetings outside of Victoria.

The other major variance on the operating side was administration, which was under budget by $2.6 million, which resulted from delayed hirings, savings in operating activities, and delayed maintenance and projects.

Turning to the capital side, capital was under budget by $2.4 million. This was primarily due to decreased spending on space modernization post-election and a delay given the child care facility approvals. This was partially offset by increased spending on asset retirement obligations.

That sums up the Q4 results. Any questions?

Jody Toor: There are still some MLAs that don’t have offices. Is there any update on that?

The Speaker: There are some MLAs still waiting to move into their new locations.

David Hoadley: For constituency offices, yes.

Jody Toor: Has that been set up in this budget or in this result? There are some that don’t even have an office, and the projected dates are in the new year.

Hon. Mike Farnworth: How many MLAs do not yet have offices?

The Speaker: Yes, that’s what we would like to know.

Jody Toor: We still have a few.

David Hoadley: We could get you information on that. I’ll commit to that.

Amna Shah: Thank you for your report. My question may be actually related to that, around Legislative Assembly administration.

You mentioned delayed projects. Do you have an idea of what that impact would be on the next budget report, and whether, obviously, that may potentially take us into the red for the next one, given the delayed nature of the project?

David Hoadley: This fiscal is on budget for capital, so that will not result in an overspending.

Amna Shah: Okay.

The Speaker: Any other questions? Okay.

Thank you very much, David.

All right. Next item is severance payments to employees of the B.C. United caucus. Who’s going to report it — Kate?

Personnel Matters

David Hoadley: I will.

This relates to severance for 23 employees in the B.C. United caucus. As a result, the B.C. United caucus had a shortfall of approximately $960,000.

As I mentioned previously, the unused constituency travel allowance for non-returning members is brought into income, and this was used to offset the severance costs. The total amount of the non-returning members’ unused constituency travel allowance was $2 million. Of that, $1,084,878 related to the B.C. United caucus.

[5:50 p.m.]

So that was more than sufficient to offset the severance costs related to the B.C. United, with the difference being brought into income.

Any questions?

Artour Sogomonian (Deputy Clerk of the Legislative Assembly): I just wanted to circle back, with your permission, to the previous question.

Currently we have seven members that do not have an operational primary constituency office and three members who don’t have an operational secondary or satellite constituency office. Of all of those members, with respect to the primary office, there’s only one where we have not identified a prospective space. Six have a space identified that is being built out. We essentially secured a shell because of what’s available in the market and are building it out.

Currently we are expecting all of those six members to be in an office by February of next year. There’s one member where we’re having a lot of difficulty with respect to market conditions and finding any commercial space that can serve as a constituency office.

With respect to the question about funding, there’s no concern with respect to…. What David spoke to were the financials for the concluded fiscal year, the fiscal year that concluded on March 31. In the current fiscal year, we have an adequate appropriation to deal with those needs. Any needs for the subsequent year are going to be included in our budget submission that will be coming to your committee later this year.

The Speaker: If there is no further question on item 9, we’ll move on.

Thank you, David.

Security Matters

The Speaker: Item 10 is security measures.

I would ask someone to move that we move to in camera.

It’s been moved to be in camera, seconded.

Motion approved.

The committee continued in camera from 5:51 p.m. to 6:06 p.m.

[The Speaker in the chair.]

Hon. Mike Farnworth: I move:

[That the following lands be known as “Legislative Assembly Area” constitute “Legislative Precinct” for the purposes of the provision of security in respect of the Legislative Assembly, pursuant to paragraph (c) of the definition of “Legislative Precinct” in section 1 of the Legislative Assembly Management Committee Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 258) (“the LAMC Act”):

a. the grounds or other areas used in connection with legislative grounds or Confederation Garden Park, as defined in the LAMC Act,

b. the roads, streets or lanes immediately adjacent to legislative grounds of Confederation Garden Park, as defined in the LAMC Act, and

c. roads, streets, lanes, grounds or other areas designated by the Speaker in conjunction with the City of Victoria or Victoria Police Department as a restricted zone.]

Motion approved.

Hon. Mike Farnworth: I move:

[That, on behalf of the Committee, the Speaker write to the Minister responsible for the Legislative Assembly Management Committee Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 258) and engage in discussions with the responsible Ministry to request updates to the Legislative Precinct Regulation, as presented.]

Motion approved.

The Speaker: Any other business, anybody? None.

The motion to adjourn has been moved and seconded.

Motion approved.

The committee adjourned at 6:07 p.m.