Mr. Genuis, I would like to respond to what you just said about the precedent the government tried to set in order to put an end to this question of privilege.
It reminded me of something. When I was doing research on procedure and changes, I was struck by something I read about the tyranny of the majority. I would like to remind those around the table here that the tyranny of the majority is an undesirable aspect of democracy, which allows a majority to suppress a minority if the democracy does not provide certain rights to protect minorities.
This is very relevant to the attempt we have witnessed and to what is happening here before the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.
If I may, Mr. Chair, I would like to quote Alexis de Tocqueville, with whom you are no doubt familiar. You have surely read some of his works. In On Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville was quite eloquent about the tyranny of the majority. He talked about the risk of despotism of the majority.
I would like to quote one or two short passages from de Tocqueville, which are as follows, roughly translated:
Democracies tend naturally to concentrate all the power of society in the hands of the legislative body, it being the authority that derives most directly from the people and also the one that exercises its supremacy the most. It therefore has a natural tendency to bring together all forms of authority within it.
This is similar to what we are witnessing, this desire to change the rules of the House of Commons. Essentially, the majority is trying to use all its powers in order to control all the procedures that are currently available to each member of Parliament.
Returning to de Tocqueville, he said, loosely translated, that:
Just as this concentration of powers greatly undermines the orderly conduct of affairs, it is also the basis for the tyranny of the majority.
Before Mr. Genuis continues, I would point out finally that de Tocqueville added the following, roughly translated:
The power of the majority is not unlimited. Overriding it, in the moral world, are humanity, justice and reason, while in the political world are vested rights.
The opposition, both the NDP and the Conservatives, are trying to preserve these vested rights, which are the last bulwark against the tyranny of the majority, Mr. Chair.
I thought this was relevant, in view of the example that Mr. Genuis had just given us. This attempt to put an end to a question of privilege without even allowing members to vote is a first. This is the first time we have witnessed this in the Parliament of Canada.
I just wanted to make this aside and remind you that well-intentioned people have examined this matter and have described this kind of attempt, that is, the desire of the majority to suppress the minority, especially when the majority has the power and every opportunity to do so.
I wanted to give a nod to de Tocqueville, Mr. Chair.