Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 10th, 2016

[Deborah Deller]

If you're suggesting that our House is a bit more civilized than yours, I'll pass that along to the Speaker, and he'll thank you.

Aside from the normal rules around decorum in the House, which are quite similar to the ones you have yourself, and a Speaker who makes a valiant attempt to make sure those rules are adhered to and that there is at least a level of civility going into the debate in the House, I don't think we're doing anything special here that other parliaments aren't.

[Ginette Petitpas Taylor, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Richards, you have five minutes.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Thanks.

Thank you for being here. I wanted to start with a couple of questions surrounding some of the private members' business and the question period. The first question I have, though, is how many MPPs are in the Legislative Assembly there?

[Deborah Deller]

There are 107.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

It's about a third, then, of what we have in the House of Commons. I was noting, looking at your typical calendar for a week, that the hours you sit on Monday to Thursday, I would say, are quite similar to the number of total hours we would sit Monday through Thursday here in the House of Commons. Of course, we have a Friday on which we sit as well.

It looks as though the main difference is that there would be one fewer question period by not having a Friday sitting. Also, you have about two and a half hours less time for private members' business in the Legislative Assembly there than we have. Of course, you have a third of the members, so proportionally that still probably gives you more per member by way of time for private members' business.

I can see the impact we would have here, if we were to approach this the way the Liberal government is hoping to do, which is to get rid of the Fridays; that's something they're seeking to do. I think the effect we would have would be to see less time for private members' business here. We would also see less time for question period, and therefore the opposition would lose those opportunities and so would individual members of the governing party. That's obviously a concern that I have.

I want to move to question period. Typically, your question period now is at 10:30 Monday through Thursday. When would it have been held prior to the changes that you made?

[Deborah Deller]

It was in the afternoon. We used to come into the House at 1:30 p.m. and do routine proceedings, and question period was part of routine proceedings. So it could occur any time between 2 p.m. and 2:30 p.m.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Understood. You've obviously already indicated that one of the consequences of moving it earlier in the day is that the start time is much earlier for many people to prepare for question period. I guess the one difference you would have there...and it sounds like you've had some concerns and feedback around that, with people feeling that it hasn't been helpful to them. I think that's what I was hearing. I'll let you tell us if that is actually the case.

One further thing to consider is that people are coming from different time zones. Everyone coming in to Toronto to sit there would be coming from the same time zone. In our case, we have people coming from two-hour or three-hour time zone changes. I happen to be from Alberta so it's a two-hour change for me. For my colleagues in British Columbia, it's a three-hour change. For Monday, my flight gets in around one o'clock in the morning. A lot of people coming from B.C. on a Sunday evening would get in around the same time, at one o'clock in the morning. The impact of an earlier start on someone coming from British Columbia on a Monday could be pretty significant, with their day starting at seven o'clock in the morning when they're still at four o'clock in the morning Pacific time. I can see the potential challenges this could create.

In relation to question period, have you had feedback on starting earlier? It sounded like you had. Has it been problematic for some people? Have you had feedback on other unintended consequences of those changes?

[Deborah Deller]

I think it was an adjustment in the beginning. We had to make adjustments in order to accommodate that. We had to make adjustments in committee time, for example, because mornings were typically used for committee meetings. After making those adjustments, there were still mixed reviews. I think some members prefer it because their day is much more predictable, or as predictable as a member's day can get.

Other members who just really don't like it.... Members will tell you that as the day progresses, and the news cycle progresses, things can come up later, after question period is done, and they have to wait till the next day before there's any consideration of it in question period.

There's that issue. There is the very early morning start time. Reviews with respect to the legislative staff are mixed. We made some adjustments to schedules, and I think we have handled it very well, with very minimal disruption. I'm not sure you can say that the decision was good or bad. It depends on whom you speak with. You make a good point about time zones. There are considerations that you have to take into account that we didn't have take into account. Those are important considerations.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

From the statements you made earlier about being careful when we're making changes to hours, I think any change we make may be friendly for some members and their families and not so friendly for others, so we should be proceeding carefully. Is that a fair comment?

[Deborah Deller]

That would be my advice, yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Thank you.

Ms. Sahota.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Hello. Thank you for being here today.

First of all, I find that the programs and services you offer at the Ontario Legislature are amazing. The summer program, the March break program—they sound very exciting. As Mr. Christopherson said, they would be fun even for some members.

Do those programs usually take place when the kids are off school in a sitting week? Is that when you find them most beneficial?

[Deborah Deller]

It's good when the kids are off school—when the House is sitting and and even when it's not. At March break, for example, the House doesn't sit but the program is offered and many members avail themselves of it. Some out-of-town members find March break a perfect time to bring the kids to Toronto and spend the week there.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

And you're finding high levels of participation in this program over the day care program you have?

[Deborah Deller]

Those programs are always fully booked.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

I definitely think it's a good idea, and something that maybe we should try here. I don't know how many members will fly into Ottawa on an off week, but certainly there are other opportunities where we could have it throughout the year. It's something to talk about, for sure.

I'd like to find out when you removed the Friday sittings. You said it wasn't 2008. Do you remember what year it was, and if you were the clerk at that time or the deputy?

[Deborah Deller]

I was here, because I remember the Friday sittings. When the House sat on Fridays it did not meet on Wednesdays, so it was still a four-day week. Wednesdays were reserved for cabinet and caucus meetings, and some committees would meet in the afternoon, but the House did not meet and it met for half a day until one o'clock on Fridays.

The change to sitting on Wednesday and dispensing with the Friday occurred sometime in the early eighties, but I'd have to check.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

That sounds similar to our week, in a way; however, the House does sit on Wednesday, but we do have our caucus meetings and it starts a little later in the day.

Do you know what the debate was around the main purpose of changing the hours, creating more predictability, and perhaps at that point, even if you weren't around, why the Wednesday was switched to the Friday?

[Deborah Deller]

Yes. It had to do with out-of-town members not being able to spend enough time with family. There was a push to get rid of the Friday sitting so that those members who had to travel could get home in a decent time to spend with their family and have some constituency office hours.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

From what you may know, do a lot of the members have constituency hours on the Fridays?

[Deborah Deller]

A lot of them have constituency office hours on Friday, and many of them even on Saturday.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

It's not brought up a lot, but there is hesitation to make change. You know, we have to be careful about what change we make because it does affect everyone differently, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to make changes that may be for the overall good of family friendliness and inclusiveness just because we may be afraid to make a mistake. We should always be willing to adapt and change and try new things.

Oftentimes we're worried about political blowback, about what people will think, about public perception. It's not brought up often, but that is the internal fear that a lot of members may have to even bring up this topic or to speak up. They hesitate because they don't want to be seen as that person who wants to work less, quote-unquote.

Was that a similar fear for your legislature, and how did you resolve that?

[Deborah Deller]

You know, it's always a fear. It's too bad. I'm going to be completely blunt here and say that I think this bashing of politicians and the work they do has become a popular sport. It's really unfortunate. I wish members would stand up for themselves. The hours are terrible. They spend lots of time away from their families, particularly out-of-town members.

And you're right that frequently, whenever there is a change, there is an attempt by those who are commenting on it to suggest that maybe the change is made in order to somehow give the members some undeserved benefit. What happened here in 2008, when they wanted to get rid of the night sittings, was that they felt they wouldn't be able to withstand the public criticism of having fewer hours in the legislative chamber, so the question was not so much about whether they needed that many hours in the legislative chamber, but about what would have the least negative reaction from the public. That's why they were keen to replace the evening sittings with morning sittings. We ended up, in fact, with more hours of House time in the week rather than fewer hours. I'm not sure in the end how that necessarily improved work-life balance.

You made a comment at the beginning of your question about resistance to change. I think that's largely true, especially in a parliament. However, I think it has to be considered change, and you have to think about what might be the unintended consequences.

A small example of that is what happened here in 2008. Initially they had every day, including Monday, start at 9 a.m. Those were the hours when the House first adopted them. The out-of-town members then argued that previously they might have been able to travel on Monday morning to get to Queen's Park on time. With a 9 o'clock start time, they were now having to leave their homes Sunday evening, in many cases missing Sunday dinner with their families in order to be here for 9 o'clock on Monday morning. There was an amendment made to the hours, so now on Monday we start at 10:30. It was a small compromise, but it was something the committee hadn't really considered when it made the recommendation to change the hours.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Thank you so much for all the detail you've provided.