Evidence of meeting #150 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 pps.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Thank you very much.
I'm going to start with what transpired a while ago in an appearance by Mr. Robert. I'm going to get to that in a minute.
Mr. Speaker, I would love for you to weigh in on this as well, as you weren't present at the time, but I'm sure you're aware of this exercise regarding cleaning up the language in the Standing Orders, which, as I said—and I was quoted by the whip of the Conservatives—I thought it was a fabulous exercise. I think it's fantastic. I thought it was great for the simple reason that it clears up a lot of the language. It makes it more accessible for people who are not familiar, who are not jurilinguists. It makes it far easier to read and understand. It's an exercise, not in changing the Standing Orders, but certainly in making them far more accessible.
It appears, from what I understand, that the exercise has stopped.
Is that correct, Mr. Robert?
12:15 p.m.
Charles Robert Clerk of the House of Commons
When I appeared before the committee on April 9, I indicated that it was an initiative that I undertook in good faith to try to provide a better product for the members. At the same time, I indicated and acknowledged that I would not continue if there was any level of discomfort in proceeding further with it. I received communication indicating that there was some preference that the project be stopped, and it is now suspended.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
May I ask what the contention was with this?
12:15 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
I think the notion really is that any initiative that deals with the Standing Orders really belongs to the members. It was regarded as perhaps presumptuous on my part to become involved by initiating a project on my own initiative.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
This is not something you can answer, but I find that to be disingenuous at best for a reason as to why this should be done.
Mr. Speaker, do you care to comment?
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Geoff Regan Liberal Halifax West, NS
I will say that the administration from time to time brings forward to the Board of Internal Economy, for example, suggestions about improvements that could be made to things happening in terms of administration for its consideration. I think that's what was being worked on here.
However, it's very clear, and I know that the Clerk understands this, that the House and its members are the proprietors, so to speak, of the Standing Orders. Clearly, members know that they cannot be changed without the House's decision. If it isn't the wish of members that this sort of review be conducted, then it ought to be halted. That, I think, is the context that I could give to it, as best I can.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
I'm going back to Mr. Robert again.
It seems to me, though, you had no intention whatsoever of changing any of the Standing Orders or the fundamental characteristics of anything pertaining to the House business. Is that correct?
12:15 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
That was the objective that drove the project, yes.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Has this exercise been done throughout other Westminster parliaments?
12:15 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
I'd have to do a survey to understand what has been done in other parliaments. The movement really began about 30 or 40 years ago in law. In England it was under Lord Rankin, who was a strong proponent of plain language simply because since everyone is subject to the law, they should at least be able to understand it. That movement has spread to other jurisdictions. We in Canada, I think, have made an effort—I'll defer to lawyers who know better than I—when we draft laws now in English and in French, it's done in parallel. It's no longer done as a translation of one to the other.
As a result of that, I think the French version of laws at the federal level are clearer than they might have been otherwise if they were worked out as a translation of the English.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Can you estimate how much time you've put into this thus far?
12:15 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
Personally, probably very little. This is an initiative that I'm able to direct. I think there was maybe one full time and then two others on the procedural side who were probably part time. Then I think the jurilinguists were brought in as the project advanced to a fairly substantial level, so they could participate in clearing up the French technical terminology.
12:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
For me, personally—and you don't have to weigh in on this; this is my own thought—I think this is coming. I think we should endeavour to do a project of this nature, and not just for that, maybe, but for other reasons as well, especially for this type of job that we do. Not everybody who comes into the position of member of Parliament is from a legal background, me included. I was a TV weatherman, for God's sake. I don't know what that says, but—
12:15 p.m.
An hon. member
A good one.
12:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
It appears we've devolved.
I want to congratulate you for doing that. I'm very sad that it is, and I hope that this committee will endeavour in the future to take it upon themselves to give the direction that we do this once again.
12:20 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
I will point out that I was asked to take on another project, which I have happily done, to deal with the annotated Standing Orders. I think what we can do in that regard is to make it an evergreen document; that is to say, we would keep it up in a more active way so that when members want to know where a rule came from and why we are doing it this way, particularly when we have nuance—like, 69.1 dealing with second and third reading of omnibus bills—we can provide information that might be useful to the members in a more timely fashion.
If we're successful in implementing that approach, I think this will be of value to the members.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
What do these annotated Standing Orders look like?
12:20 p.m.
Clerk of the House of Commons
The second edition, I think, came out some years ago. I was still in the House when the first edition came out in the mid-1980s. It's the standing order, an explanation of what we think it means, and a history of the standing order going back to 1867, if that's appropriate.
12:20 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Simms Liberal Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
You're undertaking that exercise right now. Is that correct?
