Evidence of meeting #5 for Bill C-20 (39th Parliament, 2nd Session) in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was senate.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Fabien Gélinas  Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, McGill University, As an Individual
Peter Hogg  Scholar in Residence, Blake, Cassels and Graydon LLP, As an Individual

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Gary Goodyear Conservative Cambridge, ON

Do I have time left?

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Albina Guarnieri

You have one minute.

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Gary Goodyear Conservative Cambridge, ON

I'd be happy to share it with my colleague.

5:15 p.m.

Conservative

Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON

On the observation about the Australian Senate being a highly partisan body, I observed the same thing. Some of us went down and were guests of the Clerk of the Australian Senate, who confirmed the extraordinarily partisan nature of that body. But he also drew our attention to the fact that it was largely the result of their peculiar balloting process, in which you can effectively tick off the party list with one tick. Something like 90% or 95% of voters do that.

All the Australian states are bicameral. Other Australian states have adopted methods that seem to provide some protection against excessive partisanship, where individuals can be voted for as individuals. Given that you have multiple candidates running at the same time, you sometimes get people who are more independent within their party--or are even outright independents. The clearest example of this is in Tasmania, where in their upper house they effectively have a great deal more independence and less partisanship.

You can see I'm not really asking a question here; I'm making a statement. But I just wonder if you agree with me that certain mechanisms can be built in, such as the ones used in Tasmania--the assurance that the party can't choose where to place you on the ballot, for example--that will allow open nominations as opposed to closed nominations, that will allow people to be elected on their own merits and not to simply be pawns of the party bosses.

5:15 p.m.

Prof. Peter Hogg

I didn't have a good sense, in reading Bill C-20, of exactly how it was all going to work. I notice that the nomination process is not restricted to the parties, so there will obviously be nominees who don't come from parties. The question is, can they get elected if they're not supported by a party? It's going to be interesting to see how it plays out and whether you really need the support of a party to get to the top of that preferential list. If you don't, then we will have a body of independents who ameliorate, to some extent, the partisanship of party political institutions.

5:15 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Albina Guarnieri

Mr. Hogg, that will be the last word.

I'd like to thank our guests for their scholarly presentations. As you can see, this is a committee filled with studious individuals who will make very good use of your teachings. Thank you for coming.

The meeting is adjourned.