Procedure and House Affairs committee  I simply haven't seen the issue come up. I teach a very large first-year course now. It's at the second-year level. It's called Canadian democracy. The textbook is over 600 pages. The word “prorogation” appears once in it, and it's not defined. It simply says that the Governor General has these powers to summon, prorogue, and dissolve Parliament, but in practice they're in effect exercised by the Prime Minister.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Okay. If you read my paper, it was essentially written before you started to meet. I'm not as familiar as you are with parliamentary procedure and the Standing Orders, and I'm not a lawyer. I thought the only way these things would count would be in an election when they're made to be an issue.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I looked him up. His name is Robert Hazell. Canada is not his specialty. This quote appeared in a Canadian Press report, and it appeared last year... No, it appeared this year, after this second prorogation.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  You know that you just raised all these very heavy terms: democracy, accountability, deference. Where to begin? I don't share the same view of what democracy is. Democracy isn't something you define in terms of elections or not. It's something you experience, you feel, you sense when something's democratic or not.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  These two prorogations were very, very different, except that this one was really a slam dunk. Ned Franks said--and I shared this with Scott Reid outside--and I was struck by this comment, that the Constitution is what happens. He also cited a case in King Charles in the 1600s.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you. I'm trying to recollect the question.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I'll respond. Mr. Reid raised the issue of the last two prorogations. They were very different, of course. The last one, the most recent one, was a slam dunk. The one that was really contentious was the first one. This one stirred up a hornet's nest because it was perceived by the public as being unfair.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  That was a suggestion by the clerk, Mr. Walsh, and I thought it was quite innovative. I thought he gave you a number of good ideas there. Of course, and this is just my understanding—I have to defer to constitutional lawyers and other constitutional experts—what you put in your Standing Orders doesn't matter.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you for inviting me. I haven't benefited from having been in a constitutional law class, or any class, so I'm learning from Eric's comments, as I've learned from the comments of the witnesses who have appeared before you. My comments were drafted right after I was invited here.