Evidence of meeting #148 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 changes.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Okay, but it might be relevant on a go-forward basis for some of that material to be made available. It might require a motion of this committee so that—
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Yes, let's stop and make sure that I'm not speaking through my hat when I say this about the materials, but maybe we could ask our clerk or our analysts to go back and take a peek at what was discussed in the last Parliament.
There was some discussion to give some idea of where the areas of consensus existed and didn't exist, so that's a thought. Many people are unfamiliar with it, because we had a substantial turnover in this committee after the 2015 election.
I want to deal with a couple of issues that are of concern to me. The book whose title always changes based on its most recent two authors.... Currently it's Gagnon and Bosc. Before that it was—
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
O'Brien and Bosc. I'm muddled up. Anyway, it's gone through a number of names. That book gets updated from time to time, and the moment it comes out, it starts falling out of date.
Would this project that you're working on cause the next iteration of that—which of course you'll be intimately involved in, as there's no other way of doing it—to be moved back, or do you think that the—
12:25 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
Well, it depends. If this committee and the House decide to accept the proposal that is before you, it might lead to a rush to review for a new edition.
We could do what the Australians do, which is basically update the book every six months online and publish it every two years.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
Has that been a successful experiment, in your impression?
12:25 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
Certainly in keeping the book up to date, it would be very helpful. The House of Representatives Practice manual is now in its seventh edition, and it came out originally about 20 years ago.
Odgers', which is for the Senate of the Australian Commonwealth Parliament, is in its 14th or 15th edition. Erskine May, which has been published since 1844, is soon to have its 25th edition.
What will happen, though, with the next edition of the House of Commons Procedure and Practice is, again, that in a more proactive attempt to be of help, there will be a section in the book on what members need to know under each chapter, because when I was reading and studying the book—and I don't mean this as a criticism; please be clear about that—I found out that in the chapter on oral questions—and I've become notorious for this because I just don't let it go—the fact that you're limited to 35 seconds is buried in footnote 41.
12:25 p.m.
An hon. member
Right.
12:25 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
You will not find it in the text of the chapter, yet it seems to me that it is something of importance for you as a member, and it's been in footnote 41 for all three editions.
12:25 p.m.
An hon. member
Right.
12:25 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
It's based on an understanding that is observed, but it has not been part of our actual practices; it has not been formalized, but the House leaders have made an agreement that this is how it would happen, and it has been observed faithfully since.
In terms of trying to inform members, it seems to me that it's healthy to know that.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
It's a very good example.
Am I out of time or do I have a little bit more?
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
I wouldn't mind returning to this subject a bit later, perhaps in a future round.
I do want to say with regard to the annotated Standing Orders that very few members use it, but it's actually an enormously useful book. My own feeling is that it doesn't get updated as often as it should, number one. I have a concern that I actually think that book should be updated first. That is just to say that I would not want our Standing Orders changed in any meaningful way, particularly with regard to changes in where things are placed and ordered, without having an annotated Standing Orders come out at the same time.
Otherwise we are effectively without that tool until such time as it comes out. I suspect that all you would say in response is that you agree with me, but I should ask: do you agree with that?
12:30 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
No, it's a good point.
It's something that we would consider, but again, that will depend on what happens with respect to how you want to deal with the Standing Orders. I'm perfectly happy to withdraw. I did not intend this to be a provocative gesture.
Again, as I mentioned earlier, this indeed is a good faith effort. If it leads to controversy, then that is the exact opposite of what I intended.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell
Now I'll do what we often do in this committee, which is to informally go to anyone who wants to ask a question or make a comment.
12:30 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I, for one, do see it as an objective effort. I appreciate it. I just wanted to say that on the record.
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
If we're back to me, now I get to ask the thing I was going to ask before I ran out of time.
With regard to the volume that is currently O'Brien and Bosc, it would make numerous references to—
12:30 p.m.
Conservative
Scott Reid Conservative Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON
I'm sorry—I meant Bosc and Gagnon. It was O'Brien and Bosc, right?
12:30 p.m.
Conservative