Procedure and House Affairs committee  Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was very interested in some of Professor Pelletier's remarks, and I don't agree with some of them. As I go through, I'll try to explain that. I did produce a written document, which I believe is being translated and passed on to you.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Okay, good. But that does mean I can read out some pieces here.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I begin by saying that prorogation is not a dirty word. Prorogation is a necessary and useful tool for ending a session of Parliament and beginning a new one between general elections. Then I go on to a section of what prorogation is. I make the distinction between prorogation

Procedure and House Affairs committee  In normal times, I would say Standing Orders would suffice because Standing Orders are the rules of Parliament and should be respected as such. They aren't always. That's why I suggested that if something is done, it should be done through legislation. To carry it through, my be

Procedure and House Affairs committee  That would not be a convention, in my view.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes, but you can't assert a convention by saying “this is a convention”. What you're saying is “we think this ought to be a convention”. It doesn't mean that it is. I will quote what a British Member of Parliament said, which I think applies to this sort of thing: “The Constitut

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Yes, but I have given examples—I didn't read the full paper—of sessions that lasted less than a day. I've given examples of prorogation that lasted a year. If I wanted to give examples of lengths of sessions, I could go up to over three years, or again, less than a day. My mind

Procedure and House Affairs committee  There's an expression, if I can remember it: one swallow does not make a summer. I don't think one motion in Parliament establishes a convention.

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Absolutely, and there are options like that. What you're doing is not restricting the right or the power, or whatever you want to call it, to advise prorogation; we are insisting that the House of Commons have a hand in making the Prime Minister accept responsibility for the cons

Procedure and House Affairs committee  No, I don't think the voters establish conventions either. I think they're much more complex than that. The point of these issues is that they can be argued in many different directions. Conventions, by and large, are loose. I mean, there are some pretty tight ones. For instanc

Procedure and House Affairs committee  I think that is a more dubious approach than legislation. I can look at it and see so many ramifications that I have worries. It's sort of the parliamentary equivalent of a school teacher saying, “Go stand in the corner and don't say anything for the next two hours.” I don't thin

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Some conventions can be enforced in the courts, and I believe that the confidence convention could be. But many conventions are simply what one might call a condensation of expert opinion on what actually happened in the past, and that is open to contestation. That is why I empha

Procedure and House Affairs committee  Well, yes. Again, I can't see prorogation being a major election issue, but I do think that when people vote...you know, it's only putting a mark on a piece of paper, but it's one of the most complex acts that we do in our lives, because it's the summation of everything we have t

Procedure and House Affairs committee  You are right. I do not agree with Professor Pelletier. The reason I don't agree is that the British Parliament has legislated on prorogation, and my reading of that legislation--I've read the text of the three acts--is that it says nothing about the powers of the crown. It sim

Procedure and House Affairs committee  They have never been challenged in England. There is no doubt in my mind, however, that they would be challenged here in Canada.