Evidence of meeting #147 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was debate.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
My goodness. This is all I had. Just kidding.
Clerk of the House of Commons
Another thing might be useful. At Westminster they have the committee of chairs, the liaison committee, the backbench committee and other vehicles that are not yet established here and may never be established here.
Since, for example, you have a subcommittee that deals with private members' business, if you really wanted to be bold, you could take on the responsibility or suggest that you, as the procedure committee, would be prepared to assist in setting the agenda of the parallel chamber.
I'm just throwing that out there for your consideration.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
That's why you're here, because you're just throwing way too much out there. That's a good thing.
Do you think, if the parallel chamber was to run not in the same calendar days, that would affect the functions of this House? Let's say there's a constituency week and you have—
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Oh, I'm sorry, did I ruin someone's vacation?
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Would that be a possibility? Do other jurisdictions do that, would you know?
Clerk of the House of Commons
I don't think they do, quite frankly. Well, the two models that we have are Australia and Westminster, and I don't think they do.
I think really what you might want to do is to consider hours when the parallel committee could sit that still respect the family-friendly intent of more recent reforms and do not interfere with the general highlight of each sitting day, which is—
Clerk of the House of Commons
You could do it earlier in the day. You couldn't do it on a Wednesday because of caucus, but you could either do it earlier in the day or in a sort of, let's call it a slack period, if you identify it as such, in the middle of a sitting day.
Liberal
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
What? Oh, I feel like I've just begun.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
You had, but you've also just finished.
Before we go to Mr. Reid, so the new members know, we have a pile of documents explaining how it works in Australia and Britain.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
First of all, thank you very much for being here. I always appreciate your very scholarly attitude.
I'd remind you of the promise that I extracted from you some time ago with respect to being an effective clerk: You have to commit yourself to a long period of service.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
In order that we can benefit from that experience.
Clerk of the House of Commons
I expect to be known as the old man of the Hill in some years.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
That's right. You and Ralph Goodale can battle that one out.
I did want to ask this. We keep on mentioning the U.K. and Australia, for obvious reasons. Obviously, Westminster is the most prestigious of all parliamentary systems, the most mature. Australia is a clear parallel to Canada, a mature, bicameral, federalized democracy. To your knowledge, are they the only parliaments that have parallel chambers? Is there anything else out there? I don't know of any but maybe you do.
Clerk of the House of Commons
In terms of continental parliaments, I'm not aware of anything similar, either in the National Assembly in Paris or in the Bundestag in Berlin. I was in Rome for a Speakers conference some years ago. It was not raised, so I'm not really sure that there are other places. I think it depends on the kind of legislative format they follow, the range of powers they give to their members and what they expect of them.
I think here in Canada, based on the Westminster model, there is a very strong legislative component to the role of the members. In more recent years, members have identified themselves as advocates for their constituencies. Constituency responsibilities have become far more important than they were 150 years ago, when they virtually didn't exist.
Clerk of the House of Commons
We do see an evolution and a change in the role played by members. Now the question really is: How do you balance the different obligations and responsibilities that you have accepted as part of your role? We know, for example, that legislation is not becoming any simpler. It's becoming more complex. Omnibus bills—or "ominous bills", if you like—are increasingly becoming the model for legislation. That's going to create challenges in terms of how you effectively address them.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
My impression, if I might say, on the subject of omnibus bills...I hadn't meant to bring this up, but looking at it.... I have an interest in the issue of administrative law. I'm an editor of the Administrative Law Review out of Washington, D.C. It's clear that administrative law and the need for administrative tribunals arise with the complexity of the regulatory state, which has exploded over the course of the 20th century. As far as I can see, it is unlikely to slow down in the 21st century. I think it is simply in the nature of an increasingly complex society with more interactions.
That being said, I think omnibus bills are a reflection of the practical fact that it's hard to get the larger number of bills we need through our legislative process in the requisite time. This is compared to the situation a century ago, let alone a century and a half, when the Fathers of Confederation were designing it.
