Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 4th, 2020

[Marc Bosc]

Again, I think it could be done in a hybrid fashion. In other words, the members who happen to be present in the House at the time of a vote could vote in the traditional manner and other members could vote in whatever technological manner the committee has recommended and the House has agreed to.

That said, proxy voting, to me, is one of the options that have been mentioned that ought to be looked at.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you.

Do you agree with the Speaker that MPs could see if their vote was recorded properly?

[Marc Bosc]

Yes, I think that's useful.

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you.

With that, I believe I have about a minute left. I would like to turn the questioning over to my colleague Mr. Turnbull.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Go ahead, Mr. Turnbull.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My first question is for Mr. Bosc.

I'm a new MP and I definitely can't wait to get back to Parliament Hill. I have two fundamental beliefs. One is that I want to fulfill all of my duties as an MP. As a newly elected MP, I think that's pretty important, and right now I'm not able to fully participate. However, I also have another belief, which is that I shouldn't be putting people's health at risk unnecessarily.

Based on your perspective, would you agree with both of those statements or beliefs that I hold?

[Marc Bosc]

Everyone wants to stay healthy and safe. I understand your desire to come to Parliament Hill and do all the duties incumbent upon you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Unfortunately that's all the time we have, but it was a good question.

Next up is Mr. Duncan.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses today for some really good information and some good perspective.

Mr. Blaikie, your appearance here has at least generated one more sale of your book The Blaikie Report. When I saw you were presenting at committee I ordered it, and I appreciate all your experience over the years.

Mr. Gerretsen's point highlights a concern I have, and I think other members of the committee have—you've all mentioned this in your opening statements—as we talk about the modernization of Parliament. Is this study and the timeline we've been dealt an appropriate study to talk about permanent modernization? We talked about adding in cameras and things that have been done in translation. Would this process be the right way of doing it? Would this timeline be something you're comfortable with? Or should we be doing this when we get into a post-pandemic situation with permanent changes like this? I worry again about these studies we've been tasked with, remote voting in this current context. Do you have any concerns?

Mr. Smith, I had to smile at your article that said the majority of the committees never let a crisis go to waste. Does anybody have any comments about that, our timeline and the permanency we're talking about?

[Bill Blaikie]

I made it clear, and I think others did as well, that the committee should be looking only at what is necessary in the pandemic and not using the committee as it's now structured to do the normal work of parliamentary reform, which should be ongoing and which should take place in the post-pandemic environment.

I'm worried about the word “modernization”. I prefer to talk about parliamentary reform because modernization has an edge to it, and some of the things that are best about Parliament are very long-standing, quite unmodern, pre-modern and very valuable. I always resisted, although I wasn't always successful, in not talking about reform in the House of Commons as modernization. Certainly there's some of that with respect to technological possibilities, and a lot of that is taking place in the committee right now. I think other witnesses would agree—at least if I understood them correctly—that what the committee is doing here should not be precedent setting for the post-pandemic Parliament.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

I appreciate that. I'm not sure, Mr. Smith, I think you might have a comment on that; I did invoke you.

[Dale Smith]

My comment about not letting a crisis go to waste is because a lot of these suggestions mirror some that were made in previous Parliaments this committee was studying, which were ultimately rejected. That's my concern there.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

You would agree with me though that the context as you mentioned, if we're talking about reforms, modernization, whichever word, that permanent changes are not the study right now, and the time frame we've been given would not be appropriate?

[Dale Smith]

Absolutely.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Thank you. I appreciate that.

To all four of you, and I'll build again on Mr. Gerretsen's comment, one of the things I had as well was about the how. We've talked about the if, but not the how. Do any of you have specific preferences on how remote voting may take place, maybe not using electronic devices, but in person? Do you have any comments or advice for us as we consider what type of remote voting you would prefer that you think may be the safest, most transparent and perhaps easiest to go back to in our regular post-pandemic world, whenever that may be?

I'm going to start with Mr. Bosc.

[Marc Bosc]

I'm more of a person who thinks it shouldn't be A, B or C. It could be A, B and C. So you would have some in-person voting. You could have some online remote voting, and you could have proxy voting. I understand some members have trouble. They could write a letter to their whip or House leader, or any other member for that matter, saying they had their proxy for this coming vote. I think you can combine different methods so you have maximum participation and full coverage.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

I appreciate that.

In the interest of time, Mr. Deveaux, do you have any comments on that or preferences on the how?

[Kevin Deveaux]

Yes. The U.K. members were using an app on their phones. I don't know if you have it in your House, but in the U.K., every MP has an app that a lot of information is transferred to, through their smart phones. They were building up a system that was allowing them to vote virtually through the phone.

The EU, I think, originally was using email. I don't know if they still are. Maybe these are things that have been brought up with the committee in the past—

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

I'm sorry to cut you off. Do you have a preference, though, of the different ones? If you were to give us advice, what would you suggest?

[Kevin Deveaux]

I think I'd agree with Mr. Bosc's comment around a blended system, but I think you need to ensure that it's transparent, and I think you have to give MPs different options.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ruby Sahota]

Thank you. I provided a lot of leeway. I thought it was important questioning.

Next up we have Mr. Alghabra.

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here.

I want to repeat what I said prior to the meeting; it's good to see Mr. Blaikie on here. I had a chance to serve with him in previous Parliaments, and he's always been seen as a voice of wisdom and integrity. Of course, all the other witnesses as well have similar reputations.

Let me clarify something, because in some of the testimony today I'm hearing a mixture of worry about the permanence of changes and also interim changes. We need to be very clear here. The purpose of this committee, the purpose of the study, is to study temporary measures under a pandemic, under an exceptional circumstance.

I understand the reluctance and the fear about permanent changes and unintended consequences, and I know Mr. Blaikie has been clear about this, but I'm going to ask a question to Mr. Bosc.

If we agree on proxy, block or voice voting, and then a single or a couple of MPs object that it's an infringement on their privilege, what can we do? Could that be ruled as an infringement on an MP's privilege who could not be there in person?

[Marc Bosc]

I don't think you can force an individual MP to submit to block voting, which is why you need to have a stopgap measure, an option for a member to opt out of that by dissenting, which is why I mentioned A, B and C. If you have all the options available, the member will have the opportunity to make that determination themselves.

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Mississauga Centre, ON]

You agree, Mr. Bosc, that we need at least an option for virtual voting under this exceptional or pandemic circumstance.

[Marc Bosc]

I think on a temporary basis, yes. I think that is reasonable to expect, given the health circumstances.