Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 21st, 2020

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Yes, I'd be very grateful for that. Thank you very much.

I was interested to hear Mr. Robert's comment on decorum, and that we might not be able to have the same level of uproar and violation of the Standing Orders by Zoom that we had in person. I want to ask him to clarify. Given that we have adopted the practice that the party whips—and, by the way, we're the only Westminster parliamentary democracy that does this—give the Speaker the list of who gets to ask the questions, it seems to me that, of all of our daily affairs within Parliament, question period might be the easiest to adapt to a Zoom meeting.

I just want to ask, Monsieur Robert, if you could clarify or add to that comment you made.

[Charles Robert]

What I was trying to point out was based on a question coming from Mr. Richards.

The portion where we traditionally follow how question period works would probably still be followed. I think you're quite right, Ms. May, that it would be easy to identify the rounds, but not necessarily who the minister or the parliamentary secretary answering the question is. That would still be a bit of a challenge.

A critical aspect that would really change is that the excitement that is part of our question period now would be quite different in a virtual environment. That was the point I was trying to make.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

I'd like that so much better.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Monsieur Robert. That's all the time we have.

Next we have Monsieur Therrien.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Thank you for your valuable input.

Mr. Dufresne, regarding the quorum of 20 members, we gather that Parliament has the power to decide that the quorum can be established virtually. You confirmed this several times. Is that correct?

[Philippe Dufresne]

The courts haven't ruled on this issue. I provided my interpretation. According to parliamentary privilege and a broad and not a narrow interpretation of the Constitution, as long as the House has a quorum of 20 people, virtual presence can be considered physical presence.

In my opinion, this should be maintained. However, there hasn't been any decision on this issue.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Okay.

The courts could then be asked to assess a decision of the House on this matter. Is that correct?

[Philippe Dufresne]

In the Mikisew Cree First Nation v. Canada decision, the Supreme Court clearly established that the law-making process and parliamentary procedure are internal affairs of the House. The courts won't interfere. The courts will be more inclined to interfere when a bill is passed, since their job is to review the validity of bills passed. In that situation, the courts are more likely to wonder whether things were done properly. In my view, this is the most relevant point. However, we could still argue that section 48 is open to interpretation and that privilege gives the House a great deal of leeway in terms of the method it will choose.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Okay. I understand.

I'm not a lawyer and I'm a new member. Could you tell me what the House can and can't do with a quorum of 20 members in a virtual sitting?

[Charles Robert]

Nothing prevents the House from making decisions as it sees fit.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

So anything is possible. Is that correct?

[Charles Robert]

Yes.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

With respect to Internet access, my colleagues brought up a good point. Limited access could make it difficult for some members to participate in these activities. There are also security issues. In particular, we must make sure that each person who votes is indeed the member in question.

Is presence by video conference enough, from a legal perspective, to confirm that each vote is indeed from the member in question?

[Philippe Dufresne]

I think that the House should make these types of decisions about the process. Certainly, the issue must be looked at carefully. A decision must be made regarding what mechanisms are acceptable, how to proceed and whether the security measures are enough for the House to consider this presence satisfactory.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Okay. We must wait for a decision on this matter.

I now want to know more about something that I heard through the grapevine. Don't be too hard on me. I heard that, on May 8, we'll be able to do some things virtually that we can't do right now.

On May 8, will there be something different from our current Internet tools or processes?

[Charles Robert]

I think that this is the time needed to ensure that digital services give members the equipment and the training required to use it. That's what we're talking about.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

Clearly. I just wanted to know where things stood.

Regarding the bills, there are debates to determine who will be able to speak during the 20-minute and 10-minute periods. If we accept a quorum of 20 people, will the whips be responsible for drawing up a list to facilitate discussions and to enable people to follow the debates effectively?

We usually rise spontaneously to ask questions. Will there be some spontaneity, or will we need to work out a schedule with the whip, who will say which member will ask a question after a speech?

[Charles Robert]

The reality is that your committee must determine what to do. Your mandate is to look at these issues and to determine how you want to proceed.

[Alain Therrien, Bloc, La Prairie, QC]

You're giving us a few responsibilities. We greatly appreciate that.

I'll give the rest of my time to Ms. May, because she doesn't have any officially, and I want her to participate in the discussion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

You have about a minute, Ms. May.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Thank you.

To pick up on the question of connectivity and access for more rural MPs, I wanted to go back to the key point that, in a pandemic, I've been very concerned that some members of Parliament really can't participate without having to self-isolate when they get home. I was trying to get to this point with the Speaker. Any MP, it seems to me, can travel within their own province to a place with a very good high-speed line with far less difficulty than travelling all the way to Ottawa during the pandemic. I wonder if this intermediate step of leaving home or the home office to go to another location for a very solid high-speed line is being looked at.

[Charles Robert]

If the decision is to allow the House or its members to connect remotely, I'm not sure there would be a requirement that you do it at your home or your office. The one matter that would come into play is the issue of multimedia access and security.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you very much. That's all the time we have.

Ms. Blaney, go ahead for six minutes, please.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you so much.

I appreciate, deeply, both of the presentations.

I would like to start off by asking this. We have several committees that have now been running for a couple of weeks. What were the most important lessons learned, just from doing committees, when you look at applying some of those practices to a virtual Parliament?

[Charles Robert]

Philippe may have something to add, but my guess would really be that this is a learning process. We need to develop experience, and we need to actually test the technology to see what works best. That's why I think the IT people are particularly keen to follow these developments and to try to build into the system that we have more effective technology that will allow the members to become more comfortable as they use it so they can perform their duties more than adequately but properly and with some satisfaction.