PDF Version

The Management Commission met at 1 p.m. in the House of Assembly Committee Room.

SPEAKER (Lane): Before I bring the meeting to order, I want to welcome everybody to today’s meeting of our Management Commission. It’s the first meeting of the 51st General Assembly and as Speaker and Chair, of course, of this meeting, I want to welcome new Members of the Commission and introduce all those in attendance today.

We have the hon. Lisa Dempster, Opposition House Leader; a new Member, MHA Riley Balsom, he’s the Member for Carbonear - Trinity - Bay de Verde; we also have the hon. Jamie Korab, Member for Waterford Valley; and, of course, I’m Paul Lane, Speaker of the House of Assembly and the Member for the District of Mount Pearl - Southlands.

Also in attendance, we have Bobbi Russell, our Principal Clerk of Committees, and Kim Hawley George, our Clerk.

The first order of business, the first thing on our agenda, is the approval of the minutes of meetings held on the following dates, they’re listed there one through six: January 27, 2025; March 12, 2025; March 19, 2025; April 16, 2025; May 21, 2025; and September 10, 2025.

Further, as required under the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act, I am advising of decisions from in camera sessions on January 27, March 12, April 16, May 21 and September 10, details of which are included in the draft minutes being approved today.

Are there any comments, errors or omissions before I call the motion to approve?

Seeing none, I have a proposed motion here: The Commission approves the minutes of the following meetings held on January 27, March 12, March 19, April 16, May 21 and September 10, 2025.

Can I get a mover and a seconder?

Moved by MHA Korab; seconded by MHA Dempster.

All those in favour, ‘aye.’

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: Contra-minded?

Carried.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

SPEAKER: Okay. So the next item on our agenda is an addendum to the previously approved minutes.

This item relates to an addendum required to previously approved minutes of October 22, 2024. There was an oversight discovered, after their approval, which has now been corrected in the version distributed with today’s meeting materials. What that relates to is a decision to reappoint the previous Law Clerk in an acting capacity, it was not noted in those minutes and now it is.

Are there any comments or questions before I move the motion to approve?

Seeing none, again, the proposed motion: The Commission approves the revised minutes of October 22, 2024. Can I get a mover and a seconder?

Moved by MHA Balsom; seconded by MHA Dempster.

Do you have a question?

L. DEMPSTER: Can you hear me?

Do you need to have been present to approve the meeting? I’m not sure.

SPEAKER: I will defer to the Clerk. I think we –

CLERK (Hawley George): It (inaudible), but it is preferable.

L. DEMPSTER: Yeah, so I can move, it’s just protecting you here.

SPEAKER: Okay.

All those in favour, ‘aye.’

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: Contra-minded?

Carried.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

SPEAKER: Okay.

Next, we have some reports. We have several items that are required to be reported to the Commission and there are no decisions required for these. These are as follows for the record, the first one: There’s a report outlining rulings on allowance use of Members since the Commission’s last public meeting.

Second item is the financial reports for the periods ending 31 March 2025, 30 June 2025 and 30 September 2025, which are required to be presented to the Commission quarterly in accordance with the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act.

The third item is the Caucus Operational Funding Grants annual reports. That’s for 2024-2025 FY, as required by the Caucus Operational Funding Grants Policy.

The last item is a report of all the budget transfers processed during the 2024-25 FY, as required by the House of Assembly Transfer of Funds Policy.

Are there any questions or comments from Members of any of the reporting items before we move to the next agenda item?

MHA Dempster.

L. DEMPSTER: Thank you, Speaker, for the opportunity.

As I was just reading through the budget notes, I did have a couple of questions on the caucus budgets. I just need to find a minute to get there, caucus operations, here we go.

First of all, there was – this is small print for me, even in my bifocals – one there that was kind of written in pen. I don’t know if you have it in front of you, Speaker. I wasn’t quite clear on some of the amounts. It’s been a while since I’ve seen a report where the figures were kind of handwritten in pen. I didn’t know, I would ask the Commission if that’s acceptable and there were some amounts that I wasn’t quite sure what it was.

So if we drop to the bottom of the Official Opposition for reporting purposes, there’s a balance – I’m not quite sure of the figure – and then there’s an amount scratched out and then there is another amount.

None of those four boxes were really legible to me; I just wanted to ask about that.

CLERK: They’re on page 2 of 2, Official Opposition Caucus?

L. DEMPSTER: Yes.

CLERK: It’s $15,285.02. I can get that verification for you if you can’t read it on the scanned version.

L. DEMPSTER: I can see a top column. It looks like $15,763. I can’t see what is the subtotal and I can’t see none of the other figures. They’re all a bit messy there.

CLERK: $15,783.50, I think.

This is how it was submitted by the caucus itself.

L. DEMPSTER: Yes.

CLERK: So we can go back for some clarification on that if you would like us to do that.

L. DEMPSTER: Yeah, there’s like maybe one, two, three – I can share with my colleagues who just came in. It’s kind of –

CLERK: Yeah, I can see where (inaudible).

SPEAKER: (Inaudible.)

L. DEMPSTER: Yes, it’s kind of all pretty messy and it’s a lot of money. We have to be fiscally responsible, I suppose. I didn’t know if we should make a motion to say – because the government budget and the Third Party budget was kind of nicely typed – if we shouldn’t make a motion that that’s how they come in, in the future. I’m not being picky –

J. DINN: Meaning in terms of (inaudible)?

L. DEMPSTER: Yes.

J. DINN: That’s the first time I’ve seen that.

L. DEMPSTER: Yes, it’s kind of things are scratched out and Official Opposition is written in. So that was a comment I wanted to make.

I’ll come back to the motion bit in a minute.

My other question was around the training and development, $7,637. Are we able to get a list of what that would have been?

Now, I might be gone back to page 1, Clerk.

CLERK: The Official Opposition?

L. DEMPSTER: Yes.

CLERK: I’ll go back to the CFO and we’ll get some more information. We’d have to go back to the caucus –

L. DEMPSTER: Yes.

CLERK: – and get that information.

L. DEMPSTER: I appreciate that.

CLERK: But I did have a note to say we have asked and it has all been reconciled. So I do have that confirmation for you, but I’ll bring that back to her and come back to the Management Commission.

L. DEMPSTER: That would be great; that would be excellent.

CLERK: Yes.

SPEAKER: On the first item – and I would just defer to the Clerk – would there be a requirement to have an actual motion on that or is it just simply we would send something out to all caucuses, just advising in the future, just to make sure that nothing is written in.

CLERK: I’m not sure that we need on a motion on that. I think we can provide that advice and direction to the caucuses (inaudible).

SPEAKER: Okay, do you have any other questions, MHA Dempster?

L. DEMPSTER: No, that’s good.

Thank you.

SPEAKER: Okay.

Before we move on, I also just wanted to welcome a couple of our other colleagues. We have the hon. Barry Petten, who is a Member of the Management Commission, as well as MHA Jim Dinn. Welcome, gentlemen, to the meeting.

The next item we have here is ratification of urgent budget transfer. Section 5 of the Transfer of Funds Policy delegates authority for approval of a transfer of funds that’s required urgently and there is not sufficient time for the Commission to schedule a meeting.

In accordance with the policy, a transfer of funds was approved for the Office of the Child and Youth Advocate. While the Commission has already approved the transfer for processing, a ratification of it is required in accordance with the policy. This was for a shortfall of funds for salaries due to some reclassifications. That was the reason why the funding was required. The briefing package that you have also outlines further details.

Before we call the motion, I’m going to open the floor once again. Does anybody have any questions?

MHA Dempster.

L. DEMPSTER: I think my only question on this, because it’s really straightforward, it is an office of the House and we had a funding shortfall and we transferred it, but normally when we go through the budgetary process with our statutory offices, the extra step is built in, so I just wondered what happened here.

CLERK: It will be budgeted going forward, MHA Dempster. At that point, there was not sufficient funds in the allocation because of the retroact aspect, but on a go-forward basis, when we meet for the budget, it will be built in.

L. DEMPSTER: Gotcha, okay. Because I hadn’t seen this before where we – even during Estimates, it’s all built in. Folks will say, why is there extra money in that budget for that? Well, it’s just preparing.

B. RUSSELL: The reclassifications were approved after the budget process was done last year so the retro –

L. DEMPSTER: Okay.

B. RUSSELL: – it wasn’t accounted for, I guess, in the Estimates.

CLERK: It couldn’t be projected, essentially.

L. DEMPSTER: Thank you.

SPEAKER: Okay, thank you.

MHA Dinn.

J. DINN: So with the reclassification process, that would not have been anticipated?

CLERK: No, not necessarily. People can apply to have their reclassifications. We don’t budget for what somebody could come forward with at that point. We budget on the basis of what the positions are at the time.

J. DINN: So these were positions, if I may then, not new people coming in or – they were there already.

CLERK: Yes, exactly, they were there already, yes.

J. DINN: Okay, I guess what I’m saying is when did the realization that maybe they needed to be reclassified come to their attention? Because I would assume, in any position, that would have been talked or discussed about or built into it, I guess to MHA Dempster’s point, I’m just curious. Otherwise, you could approve a budget and, all of a sudden, we have more reclassifications.

I think there’s another one there, too, with regard to the Chief Electoral Office, if I remember correctly.

So I’m just curious here as how this wouldn’t have been anticipated. It’s not like someone wakes up one morning and says I think I’m going to apply for reclassification. It would have been a discussion somewhere along the way, right.

CLERK: Well, yes and no. So the reality is that we budget on the basis of the positions as they’re currently classified, so once you approve a budget and then it goes to the House, that is the basis on which the budget is created and brought forward, but it is possible during that year, that with discussions with Human Resources and so forth, that an employee could request a reclassification, at which point it takes a period of time in order for that to be done.

So that’s why, in this instance in particular, the timing was sort of straddling in between the two, the old budget and the new budget, requiring the budget transfer for the shortfall on the retro piece.

There is no budget for reclassifications per se.

SPEAKER: Any further questions, MHA Dinn?

J. DINN: Not on that one.

SPEAKER: Does anybody else have any questions?

Okay, so we’re going to need a motion for this and again we have a proposed motion here. So the proposed motion is that the Commission ratifies the following transfer of funds, in accordance with section 5 of the Transfer of Funds Policy, from subdivision 1.1.04.01 Members’ Resources, Salaries, $218,000, to subdivision 5.1.01.01, Office of the Child and Youth Advocate, Salaries, $218,000.

Can I get a mover and a seconder for that motion?

Moved by MHA Dinn; seconded by Minister Petten.

All those in favour, ‘aye.’

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: Contra-minded?

Carried.

The next item: Approval of invoice from the previous fiscal year. So this item relates to an invoice from our previous fiscal year, which cannot be paid in the current fiscal year without approval of the Commission further to subsection 7(2) of the Members’ Resources and Allowance Rules.

The rules allow for the payment of office accommodation expenses related to the establishment of a constituency office in an electoral district. Further to those provisions, an agreement has been entered into for leased office accommodations for the constituency office of the District of St. George’s - Humber. The House of Assembly did not receive the invoice from the landlord in a timely manner to pay the expenses in the fiscal year to which they relate. The expenses related to security monitoring were incurred in the 2024-2025 fiscal year. These expenses in question are in compliance with the rules and established lease agreement.

I’ll open the floor for questions or discussion before we would call the motion.

Does anybody have any questions on it? So, basically, it was a constituency office, there was a cost associated to that and the bills were late coming in so we have to approve it for the previous fiscal year.

Seeing no questions – okay, MHA Dempster.

L. DEMPSTER: Is the figure at the bottom of the invoice monthly or is it total because it’s pretty small?

CLERK: It is. It’s just (inaudible).

L. DEMPSTER: Yeah, because it said monthly, I didn’t know –

SPEAKER: Yes, it’s extremely small.

L. DEMPSTER: Yeah, $39.

All right, thank you.

SPEAKER: Okay, so the proposed motion: The Commission approves payment of expenses in the amount of $39.61 for leased office accommodation expenses for the District of St. George’s - Humber for the 2024-2025 fiscal year with expenses to be charged to the applicable allocation for the current fiscal year of 2025-2026.

I need a mover and a seconder.

Moved by MHA Korab; seconded by MHA Dempster.

All those in favour, ‘aye.’

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: Contra-minded?

Carried.

The next item does not require a decision. For information purposes, I guess, and if anyone has any questions, it relates to the audited financial statements of the Office of the Auditor General. So further to section 32 of the Auditor General Act, the Management Commission appoints an auditor to annually conduct a financial audit of the Office of the Auditor General. Subsection 32(3) of the act provides that the auditor appointed submit the report to the Commission and to the Auditor General.

In accordance with those provisions, the audited financial information for the Office of the Auditor General for the fiscal year ended 31 March 2024 is presented to the Management Commission.

This would have come up earlier, but the Management Commission meetings were cancelled back in August due to the wildfires. Normally, this would have been dealt with at that time, but, because of that, we’re dealing with it now.

So, again, no decision is required, it’s for information purposes, unless someone has a question about the report.

Seeing nobody, we will move on.

The next item: Appointment of the Audit Committee Members. The Audit Committee is established under authority of section 23 of the House of Assembly Accountability, Integrity and Administration Act. The act provides that the Commission select two of its Members to serve on the Audit Committee. At least one of whom shall not be a Member of the government caucus and that the Commission designate one of those Members as the Chair.

Now that the Management Commission has been constituted for the 51st General Assembly, the Commission must appoint two of its Members to serve on the Audit Committee and designate one of those Members to serve as the Chair. Further details on the Committee are noted in the briefing package.

So we’ll be needing two people from here to serve on the Audit Committee. I guess I open the floor.

First of all, does anyone have any questions about the process or whatever? Everyone understands what we need to do. I guess we’re going to need two names.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) meet twice a year, maybe.

CLERK: Four times.

SPEAKER: Quarterly, is it?

B. PETTEN: I nominate MHA Balsom.

SPEAKER: Okay, so MHA Balson. I’m not sure if he has to accept or not or how that would go? Perhaps he’s been voluntold.

We’re going to need one from –

J. KORAB: I’ll nominate my astute colleague to my right.

SPEAKER: MHA Dempster, okay.

So there’s nobody else being nominated, I take it?

Okay, so then the proposed motion is the Commission appoints MHA Lisa Dempster and MHA Riley Balsom as the Members of the Audit Committee effective immediately. That will be the motion.

I’m going to need a mover and a seconder.

Moved by Minister Petten; seconded by MHA Korab.

And we’ll get that done before they change their mind.

All those in favour, ‘aye.’

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: Contra-minded?

Carried.

So now, of the two, somebody has to be the Chair. So it’s going to be one of the two.

B. PETTEN: I nominate –

SPEAKER: You nominate MHA Balsom?

Are there any other nominations? No. We’re good. MHA Dempster is fine with that, I’m sure.

L. DEMPSTER: I used to be the Chair and –

SPEAKER: Did you?

L. DEMPSTER: – and MHA Pardy served with me.

SPEAKER: There you go.

So, in other words, you’ve done your part.

L. DEMPSTER: Served my time.

SPEAKER: You’ve served your time.

Okay, so the motion is going to be that the Commission designates MHA Riley Balsom as Chair of the Audit Committee, effective immediately.

We need a mover and a seconder.

Moved by MHA Dinn; seconded by MHA Dempster.

All those in favour, ‘aye.’

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

SPEAKER: Contra-minded?

Carried.

Congratulations are in order.

So this now concludes the public portion of today’s meeting. We’re going to take a very brief recess and then we will be moving into an in camera session.

Thank you everybody for your participation today.