Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 2nd, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Good morning, everyone. I call this meeting to order. Welcome to meeting number 19 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. Pursuant to the order of reference of May 26, 2020, the committee is meeting on its study of parliamentary duties and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Pursuant to the motion adopted by the House on May 26, the committee may continue to sit virtually until Monday, September 21, to consider matters related to the COVID-19 pandemic and other matters. Certain limitations on the virtual committee meetings held until now are now removed.

As was just mentioned, the committee is now able to consider other matters and, in addition to receiving evidence, the committee may also consider motions as we normally do. As stipulated in the latest order of reference from the House, all motions shall be decided by way of a recorded vote. Finally, the House has also authorized our committee to conduct some of our proceedings in camera specifically for the purpose of considering draft reports and the selection of witnesses.

As you know, part of our committee meeting today will be in camera. I have a reminder that in camera proceedings may be conducted in a manner that takes into account the potential risks to confidentiality inherent in meetings with remote participants, such as the ability of people in close proximity to overhear the proceedings.

Members of the committee, the clerk and the analysts should participate in the proceedings with their camera on. Staff are allowed to participate. One staff per member is allowed to participate, as is one from the House leader's office and the whips' offices as well. They should make sure that their cameras are off. They should also make sure that their mikes are muted. I'm just going to paraphrase some of this stuff and get through it.

Interpretation in this video conference will work very much like it does in a regular committee meeting. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of “floor”, “English” or “French”. As you are speaking, if you plan to alternate from one language to another, you will need to also switch the interpretation channel so that it aligns with the language you are speaking. You may want to allow for a short pause when switching languages. When you're not speaking, your mike should be on mute. To raise a point of order in this meeting and to get my attention, please unmute your mike and say that you have a point of order. After that, anyone who wishes to speak to the point of order should raise the hand in the participant toolbar. Also, finally but most importantly, headsets are strongly encouraged. Please do make sure that you have your headsets or a mike. That will help the interpreters and will help all of the committee members to be able to participate properly in this meeting.

I would like to welcome back Mr. Anthony Rota, the Speaker of the House of Commons, for our meeting number 19.

We have received your opening statement in both official languages. Thank you very much for that.

I'd also like to welcome the whole House administration team that we have with us today, including Mr. Charles Robert, Clerk of the House of Commons; Mr. Michel Patrice, deputy clerk, administration; André Gagnon; and Philippe Dufresne. Mr. Aubé is back with us again today too.

Thank you for being here.

The Speaker will be here for the first half of the meeting. That will be for approximately 90 minutes. It may go over a little bit. For the second half of the meeting, for the in camera portion, we will also have with us Scott Jones, from the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security. That portion of the meeting will be in camera. Along with Scott Jones, we will still have the House administration here with us.

Without further ado, I would like to welcome you back, Mr. Speaker. Please take your time to make your opening statement. We will have two rounds of questions after you speak. As long as you're here, we'll be having questions with you. After that, we will continue and carry on with questions for the rest of the administration.

Thank you.

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Speaker of the House of Commons]

Thank you, Madam Chair, for your invitation to appear before the committee as it embarks on the second phase of its study of parliamentary duties and the COVID-19 pandemic.

The committee's order of reference asks that it look at what changes might be needed to enable the House to meet during this pandemic. It encourages the committee to adopt a gradual approach, beginning with hybrid sittings, and asks the committee to consider the issue of remote voting.

As I noted in previous appearances, through collaboration among the parties, the House has already adapted many of its usual practices in response to the current circumstances. For example, it has met with a reduced number of members physically present and suspended the application of certain rules to allow for sufficient distancing. It has authorized standing committees to meet virtually and has created a special committee, composed of members of the House, that has met in person virtually, and as of last week, in a combination of the two in a hybrid format. All of this took place with minimal adaptation of the Standing Orders.

In addition, over the past several weeks, the House administration has assessed our technical readiness for hybrid or virtual sittings of the House and their procedural implications. Last month I shared with you, Madam Chair, the committee and the House leaders, two documents showing how the House administration is ready to support such sittings. The solution has been developed in keeping with the guiding principles that I outlined during my appearance before the committee on April 21.

I am pleased to report that many of the technical issues around accessibility, connectivity, user-friendliness, security, sound and visual quality and real-time interpretation have been resolved. The success of virtual and hybrid meetings of committees, including the Special Committee on the COVID-19 Pandemic, which reproduces some aspects of the chamber proceedings, has demonstrated that it is possible to conduct deliberative functions in this setting. Therefore, the focus of my comments today will be on the procedural implications of virtual sittings and on the decision-making process.

As I noted in my appearance before the committee on May 4, many of the House procedures and practices could be adapted to accommodate virtual hybrid sittings. For example, a general provision could be added to the Standing Orders to allow the Speaker, in case of emergency and following consultations with House leaders of all recognized parties, to adjust the application of any standing order or practice to permit the virtual participation of members. This would be similar to Standing Order 1.1, which allows for the participation of members with disabilities. Such a general provision would provide flexibility as technologies change. It would also limit the need to change the many references in the Standing Orders that suggest the physical presence of members.

If the House were to decide to take this approach, the Speaker would make a statement outlining the emergency and how they propose to apply the rules.

An analysis of our procedures and practices has identified four key areas that, in my view, could be adjusted through this general provision. These areas are described in the information note provided to the committee on May 13. These areas are the presence of members, the transmission of documents, the manner of participating in proceedings, and decision-making.

First, with respect to the presence of members and in keeping with the exclusive right of the House to regulate its internal affairs, the House could indicate that it considers that those who are participating by video conference in a sitting of the House or a meeting of a committee count for the purpose of quorum. This would entitle all connected members to fully participate in the deliberations of the House committee.

With regard to the second point, although the tradition is for paper copies of documents to be tabled or presented to the House, it could be determined that documents transmitted electronically are equally valid. Again, the House has already begun to take steps in this direction, having decided in 2019 to accept electronic responses to petitions and more recently to allow petitions, committee reports and other documents to be filed electronically with the clerk during the pandemic.

In terms of how members participate in the sittings of the House, certain adjustments would have to be made in order to ensure that opportunities for members to intervene are effectively maintained while keeping order and decorum. In recognizing members to participate in different categories of business, the chair is already assisted by lists submitted in advance by the parties, although members are still expected to rise in their place to be recognized when their turns come.

In a virtual or hybrid setting, the chair would continue to use these lists without relying only on a physical signal from each member wanting to intervene. For impromptu moments, such as questions and comments, we could make use of features built into the video conferencing system, such as the “raise hand” function. If members participating virtually intend to move motions for which notice is not required, they could be asked to transmit the text to the table in advance, a practice that is already occurring.

The chair would continue to have the responsibility to preserve order and decorum, ensuring, for example, that members do not use displays or props in the camera shots and that members keep their microphones off until they are recognized by the chair. However, the committee may wish to consider whether additional guidelines could assist members and the chair in preserving decorum and dignity in the House.

The way that the House makes its decisions is perhaps the most complex issue to consider. The chair would have to proceed very carefully when putting questions to the House for a voice vote or when asking for unanimous consent so as to ensure that the will of all members is properly understood.

With regard to electronic voting in the context of recorded divisions, should the House decide to implement a system to allow members to vote remotely, a number of principles must be kept in mind. The most important principle is the integrity of the voting process. Members will want to feel confident that the system is secure and failsafe and that they're the only people voting.

I understand that our technical team has developed a conceptual solution for electronic voting that uses our existing toolsets and security platforms. It could be adapted to any requirements that the House might have.

The system should allow members to know when they are voting, what they are voting on and how much time they have to vote. It must meet accessibility standards and display text in both official languages. Finally, it should allow results to be given to the chair quickly and accurately. Such a system could provide secure notifications to members whenever a recorded division is to be held, inviting them to vote using a House-managed device. Since members will be able to read the text of the motion in an application, it might not be necessary to ensure that members were connected to the virtual meeting to hear the Speaker reading the question.

Members could vote at any point during the 15- or 30-minute period while the bells are ringing.

If the House were to adopt a hybrid model where some members are present in the chamber and others are participating virtually, it will have to consider whether all members should vote using the same method, so as to ensure that all members are treated equally.

These are but a few of the details and options that the committee may want to consider regarding the issue of remote electronic voting. Similarly, should it be the will of the House, I know that our procedural and digital services experts stand ready to assist in making the necessary adjustments to our practices to accommodate remote voting and virtual participation in proceedings.

My officials and I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have on this topic.

Thank you for having me this morning.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We will begin our first round of questions.

MP Tochor, for six minutes.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

I believe we changed the speaking order and John Nater was going to take the first question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Okay. That's not a problem.

Go ahead, Mr. Nater.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

It's a pleasure to join this committee. Even though I'm no longer a permanent member of this committee, it's always nice to come back.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for joining us virtually from what looks like West Block.

I want to follow up on some of the security measures. I know we'll be going in camera, so I want to keep this at a bit of a high level. I want to know some of the principles or factors you would consider important when looking at the security measures for remote or virtual voting.

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

One of the biggest things for security is making sure that the person who is there is the one voting and ensuring, if we do have a vote, that this takes place. I could go into more detail on that, but I believe that's probably something you'll do more in camera, as it's more on the technical end of things. That is probably the biggest thing. We need to making sure, as far as security goes, that those participating feel comfortable with what's going on.

One thing we have implemented, which will be put forward, is a 10-second delay. There's been some concern about it. Some say it's there for muting or censoring what MPs are saying. That is not what it's for. The 10-second delay is there in case somebody penetrates the security system or security wall and puts something on the screen that is not appropriate or makes statements. That 10-second delay would allow us to block and stop this and allow the member to continue after. That would probably be one of the bigger ones.

Mr. Nater, security kind of covers a large area, so is there any particular area in security that you are concerned about that maybe I can zero in on?

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

No. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just note that Don Cherry only had a seven-second delay. Obviously we're going for the full 10 seconds, so that's good.

I think the concern a lot of people would have is about safety and ensuring that those voting are in fact permitted to vote, that parliamentarians are voting and not a member of their staff or a member of the whip's office, for example. If a vote is happening, it should in fact be MP John Nater at his iPhone making the vote, rather than someone else voting on my behalf.

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

Staff have worked on many different variations and different possibilities. Ultimately it comes down to what the House is comfortable with, so the House has to make the decision on what it would like to see as far as voting goes. There are so many possibilities. Whether it's voting one at a time or whether it's on a screen and you toggle “yea” or “nay”, it really comes down to what the House is going to be comfortable with and what it will allow to happen.

My concerns originally were with security and voting. I'm very comfortable with a lot of the public voting, based on what I've seen to date and what has been done in other parliaments. As far as a secret ballot goes, I'm still not 100% there, but as far as public voting goes, because it is public and you can verify how you've voted, at this point I'm very comfortable with the technology that has been presented.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Thanks for that, Mr. Speaker.

One thing that's been brought up in the past is that we're all on the Zoom feature. We use video. Would it be possible to do a recorded division via roll call votes, similar to what we do in the House of Commons, where members are required to have their video on? It may take a bit more time, but I'm wondering if voting that way would be simple.

Would verifying by face and doing a roll call vote that way be an option, Mr. Speaker? It's a low-tech option in a high-tech world.

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

Whatever the House decides on could be an option, and that is definitely one of them. Certainly, as I said, it could be the roll call where you have the face showing up—you know it's them, and they're speaking—or where they're at their screen and they push a button “yea” or “nay”. There might even be some biometric or some code that has to be put in to verify the person.

Again, depending on what the House decides, yes, that is an option.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Great. Thanks for that.

On this next question, I just want a high-level response, because I know we'll be going into more detail later. Has there been collaboration with the Communications Security Establishment on these types of platforms, whether it's on remote voting or the Zoom platform itself?

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

I believe so.

Yes, there has. I just checked with the Clerk, and yes, there has.

I know we've collaborated with a lot of different countries around the world to see what they have been doing. There seems to be a lot of co-operation and collaboration going on when it comes to both video conferencing and procedures.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

That's great.

Talking about our counterparts, currently, literally as we speak, the U.K. House of Commons is dividing on the future of virtual voting there. I have my eye on Westminster as we speak. It looks like they have completed dividing and are probably tallying the votes; it will be interesting to see.

To that measure, our committee counterpart in the U.K. has talked a little bit about how they would expand and retract certain types of procedures. As the pandemic worsens or improves, there would be more of a dimmer switch rather than an on-off switch. Would you suggest a similar approach here, one where we can go on and off, and expand and retract as needed, for different measures?

Madam Chair, I see that you're cutting me off because of my time. I will respect that.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

I wanted you to at least finish your thought, but we are over time now.

Next up we have Madam Petitpas Taylor.

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

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for being with us once again. We certainly appreciate all the work you have been doing and all the work your team has been doing in order to get us prepared to work in a new era. We certainly recognize that the pandemic has forced us to innovate and has forced our teams to work around the clock to make sure that we have the tools that are needed. To start, then, I simply want to thank you.

During your opening statement, Mr. Speaker, you indicated that a number of technical issues had to be resolved in order to move forward. One of the issues you mentioned was connectivity. I'm wondering if you could elaborate on the steps we're taking in order to ensure that we can resolve the area of connectivity.

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

The staff here and in IT and in the Clerk's office worked very closely with all the MPs to make sure that everything could work. Connectivity was especially a problem in rural and remote areas. It's important that we look at this in light of, for instance, someone who has to come in to Parliament. If they come in and there's a snowstorm, or something causes a problem, it's up to them to get to Parliament to make sure they can vote. Similarly, if you're in a rural area, or you're at home and your connectivity is not that great, you can go to your office or you can go find a place where you can connect.

I can see that Ms. Blaney, for example, is probably in her office. I know that she has some issues. She is a prime example of how we can make it work.

Connectivity was one of the issues we were concerned about, but it certainly put broadband access on the front burner for all Canadians in both rural and metropolitan city areas. When we're looking at connectivity, I think we've pretty well come to the end of it. There are a couple of small exceptions where it could be a little bit of a difficulty, but overall it's been working out very well.

Our ambassadors have been working with everyone. Again, I notice that pretty well everyone has one of these headsets on, which makes a difference. It makes it easier for everyone to hear what you're saying, because we're getting a clear voice coming across. We found that with other microphones, there was an echo, because it was echoing throughout the chamber. No matter how good your microphone is, there is still that bit of a problem, and one that especially affects the interpreters.

I don't believe connectivity is a large issue, overall. Occasionally we get some glitches, but overall, connectivity is very good.

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

So would it be safe to say, Mr. Speaker, that all 338 MPs would have connectivity? I'm not saying that it would be perfect connectivity, but would they have access to the appropriate connectivity to do the work that is required in a hybrid setting or for remote voting?

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

Yes, if they're willing to.... It is possible. It is there for everyone.

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

Excellent.

I have another question with respect to standing orders. During your opening statement, you certainly gave a good overview of some of the work that needs to be done, but could you just tell us, very quickly, which standing orders you think are going to require some work in order to make sure that a hybrid setting could work and also that remote voting would be an available option?

Would there be a list of standing orders that you think this committee should really look at in order to make it work?

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

Yes, our Clerk and his staff have gone through the Standing Orders and they have a list of changes that would have to be made to make them work. There's nothing major. The other option would be to pass one standing order that would make the modifications that would allow the Speaker to make those changes.

Again, it comes back to the House to determine how they would like to handle it. I would recommend that when the Clerk comes back on, you could go through that. I could go on for the full hour just about the details and the small changes, but again, there would be small changes along the way to all of the Standing Orders or to many of the Standing Orders, but not a major change.

Basically, when we're in a hybrid situation, it's business as usual. The difference is just in location.

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

That's great. I have one other question. Do you believe, with the tools we have in place at this time, that if necessary we would be prepared to proceed with a hybrid sitting model? Also, do you believe that we would be prepared to move forward with remote voting? Do we have the tools we need to be able to do that at this point in time?

[Anthony Rota, Liberal, Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON]

Yes. I feel comfortable that it would go on, and if you would allow me, I'd like to answer in a little bit more detail about what Mr. Nater referred to as the U.K. model, in which they have certain numbers of people and they're starting to rethink their hybrid model.

When you look at the Canadian model we worked on, all 338 MPs have access, can speak, and can vote—or could vote, let's say—whereas under the British model there are 650 MPs but only a limited number would be allowed in the House and limited numbers would be allowed to participate electronically.

I would have serious reservations if we were to go with some model like that. With the model we've developed here, everyone, all MPs, can participate in a virtual hybrid sitting.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you. You're under time.

Next up we have Madame Normandin.