Mr. Speaker, I rise with respect to Bills C-31 and C-32, the foreign affairs and international trade bills, and the suggestion by the opposition that the government is somehow in contempt of Parliament.
With your indulgence, Mr. Speaker, I would like to add a few comments to those made by the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons on February 17. I would like to provide this additional information for you, Mr. Speaker, and for the benefit of other members of the House.
There has been, in our view, no contempt of Parliament. Far from being in contempt of our democratic institutions, the Prime Minister's authority to organize the government is central to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy.
Parliament is at the heart of this system. When organizing the ministry and shaping the structures and machineries of government, the government works within a framework that has been established by Parliament through duly enacted statutes. The government does not create new authorities or powers. Structures are reorganized using existing authorities already legislated by Parliament.
The flexibility of our system has many benefits. It enables the government to respond to new organizational requirements and urgent issues in a timely and effective manner, for example, with the creation of the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness to respond to emerging concerns in a changed security environment. It enables the government to quickly adapt the mechanisms by which it delivers services to Canadians.
The system I have just described does not in any way operate in contempt of Parliament. On the contrary, its merits have been recognized by successive governments on both sides of the House and by successive Parliaments since Confederation.
Parliament has given successive governments the legislative tools to manage this responsibility quickly, efficiently and with a minimum of disruption. It was for this reason that Parliament passed the Public Service Rearrangement and Transfer of Duties Act. That act facilitates the transfer of organizations within the government as well as the transfer of responsibilities for acts or parts of acts from one minister to another.
I want to return briefly to a point which I mentioned earlier. In reorganizing or organizing a cabinet and making use of the Public Service Rearrangement and Transfer of Duties Act, the government does not create new statutory authorities or powers. Rather, the government rearranges pre-existing authorities that have already been created by Parliament and does so in accordance with a legislative mechanism that has also been created by Parliament. Far from contempt, this is a clear case of the government and Parliament recognizing and respecting one another's proper roles.
I would also note that Canadian practice, unlike that of other Westminster democracies, including the United Kingdom and Australia, has generally been to confirm major changes in government organization through legislation. Use of this prerogative power alone is constitutionally and legally valid, but it is much more common in the United Kingdom and Australia than here in Canada.
It is inaccurate to suggest that there has been a contempt of Parliament. Indeed, in our opinion, such a claim shows a lack of understanding of the system and machinery of government.
The Prime Minister's responsibility to organize the machinery of government is essential to establishing the ministry and to determining its mandate. That in turn is fundamental to the role and accountability of the Prime Minister and the government in Canada's Parliament.