Category: Feature

Elementary Kinship Structures in Parliament since 1867

This entry is part 5 of 12 in the series Vol 34 No 3 (Autumn)

Elementary Kinship Structures in Parliament since 1867

The title of this study is a nod to the distinguished ethnologist Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908–2009) who demonstrated that multiple family structures (monogamous, polyandrous or polygynous; patrilineal, matrilineal or bilateral, extended or restricted) all serve the same social functions to varying degrees. Since 2000, the Library of Parliament’s PARLINFO service has made available on its website kinship ties of senators and MPs from 1867 to the present on its website. This database is the source for this article. It allows us to look at the considerable number of parliamentarians who are spouses, brothers, sons or daughters of other parliamentarians.

A Declaration of Ethics for Presiding Officers?

This entry is part 6 of 12 in the series Vol 34 No 3 (Autumn)

A Declaration of Ethics for Presiding Officers?

Speakers have a particular interest in reinforcing proper ethical behaviour. All presiding chairs are cognizant that a respectful and courteous demeanor on the part of members can take the poison out of the atmosphere, can calm a stormy house, and facilitate the restoring of parliament to its ideal state where the fiercest controversies can take place within an ambit of mutual respect, personal honour, and regular procedure for the protection of all opinions, even those of the smallest minority. Other professions, including Judges, have attempted to apply ethical theory to real-life situations and to establish standards for ethical conduct. Since 2000, the Canadian Centre for Ethics and Corporate Policy together with the Conference Board of Canada has been holding a Business Summit to talk about the challenges and potential for business ethics in Canada. Many federal government departments have established the position of Officer of Public Service Values and Ethics for their employees, while smaller departments and agencies assigned additional responsibility for values and ethics to existing executives. This article suggests that Speakers could adopt a Declaration of Ethics for Presiding Officers to outline the importance of ethics in parliamentary institutions.

Private Members’ Bills in Recent Minority and Majority Parliaments

This entry is part 7 of 12 in the series Vol 34 No 3 (Autumn)

Private Members’ Bills in Recent Minority and Majority Parliaments

This article compares the use of Private Members’ Bills (PMB) during the 40th Parliament with the four previous Parliaments, two of which were minorities and two were majorities. Among other things it compares the number of bills, the bills introduced by party and the few bills that eventually receive Royal Assent. The article shows how Private Members’ Bills have been effected by the shift from majority governments (1997-2004) to minority ones (2004-2011) and suggests some reforms for consideration as we head back to a period of majority government. Continue reading “Private Members’ Bills in Recent Minority and Majority Parliaments”

Heckling in the House of Commons

This entry is part 8 of 12 in the series Vol 34 No 3 (Autumn)

Heckling in the House of Commons

Visitors and observers of the House of Commons have long remarked on the prevalence of heckling in the Chamber. But what are the consequences or benefits of this behaviour? This study offers an analysis of an original set of quantitative and qualitative data gathered in an anonymous survey completed by Members of Parliament near the end of the 40th Parliament. The survey addressed perceptions of heckling in the House of Commons as well as the impact MPs believe heckling has on their work. A significant number of MPs reported that heckling causes them to participate far less frequently, or not at all, in the work of the House. In addition, many of the words used against fellow MPs in heckles are contrary to Charter values. These words include racism, ageism, sexism, religious discrimination, discrimination against physical disabilities and homophobia.

Continue reading “Heckling in the House of Commons”

The Transformation of Question Period

This entry is part 9 of 12 in the series Vol 34 No 3 (Autumn)

The Transformation of Question Period

This article provides descriptive data on the number of prime ministerial interventions in Question Period from the 35th to the 40th Parliaments, including the ministries of Jean Chrétien, Paul Martin, and Stephen Harper. Cataloguing a total of 7,227 questions, this study classifies prime ministers’ answers by policy area and controls for the number of responses that relate to ethics and scandals across both majority and minority governments. The study underscores the stunning growth of prime ministerial interventions from a comparative, historical perspective with the advent of four-party politics in the House of Commons. The analysis suggests that while scandal was a central component in Question Period during the Chrétien and Martin ministries, and to a lesser degree in the last Harper minority government, allegations of wrongdoing typically comprised fewer than a third of all questions answered by the Prime Minister from 1994-2011.

The Future of Province House PEI

This entry is part 1 of 11 in the series Vol 34 No 2 (Summer)

Vol 34 No 2The Future of Province House PEI

On April 29, 2010, the Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly considered a motion for review of the 1974 federal-provincial agreement regarding the general management of Province House. The following extracts are from debate on the motion by the Leader of the Opposition, the Premier and the Dean of the House.

Continue reading “The Future of Province House PEI”

The Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly

This entry is part 3 of 11 in the series Vol 34 No 2 (Summer)

The Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly

Province House is perhaps best known to Canadians as the Birthplace of Canada, where the Fathers of Confederation met in 1864. A sandstone structure with Greek and Roman architectural lines, it was completed in 1847. It is now a national historic site, tourist mecca and still continues as a legislative chamber. Over the years, it has been witness to Royal visits, state funerals, countless demonstrations, protests, sit-ins, celebrations, rallies, vigils, debates, deliberations and occasional random acts of graffiti artists. This paper will examine the evolution of the legislature, the electoral system, the Island’s political culture and how it is reflected and legislative procedures and processes.

The Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly, established in 1773, is the second-oldest parliament in Canada, the first having been established in Nova Scotia in 1758. The establishment of the colonial government, and its subsequent evolution, was the result of one of the most unusual arrangements in British colonial history. Land in the colony, then part of Nova Scotia, was awarded by lottery to proprietors in 1767 who undertook, as part of the conditions of their grants, to settle the colony with Protestants, pay quitrents (a form of taxation) to the Crown and to fulfill various other conditions. The new proprietors, many of whom were to not fulfill the conditions of their grants, petitioned the Crown for the establishment of a separate government free from the influences of Nova Scotia. In return, the proprietors agreed to defray the expenses of the new colonial government. Prince Edward Island thus became a separate colony in 1769. The subsequent conflicts between absentee proprietors and tenants, known as the “Land Question,” dominated Island politics for more than a century.

Continue reading “The Prince Edward Island Legislative Assembly”

Discretion and the Reserve Powers of the Crown

This entry is part 4 of 11 in the series Vol 34 No 2 (Summer)

Discretion and the Reserve Powers of the Crown

A recent article by Nicholas MacDonald and James Bowden1 quite rightly stressed that in the democratic age the reserve powers of the Crown should be rarely used. They say that “most scholars” agree that it is only under the “most exceptional circumstances” that the governor general may reject the prime minister’s advice. I entirely agree with that statement, and would go further and say that virtually all scholars agree on that general proposition. That indeed is the constitutional convention that enabled a parliamentary system dominated by the Crown to evolve into a parliamentary democracy. But that convention clearly implies a corollary convention about the exceptional circumstances when the Crown might exercise discretion and say “no” to a prime minister. If there is a convention that governors general normally accept the advice of prime ministers in exercising their legal powers in relation to parliament, there must be a convention or principle that enables us to identify those “most exceptional circumstance” when the governor general would be constitutionally correct to reject the prime minister’s advice.

On that question, it is my view, and it is a view that I believe is shared by a great many constitutional scholars, that “in this democratic age, the head of state or her representative should reject a prime minister’s advice only when doing so is necessary to protect parliamentary democracy.” Those words of mine are quoted, with what I take to be approval, by MacDonald and Bowden in their article. The justification for the convention is to ensure that parliamentary government is democratic and not controlled by an hereditary head of state or her representative. It follows that if a prime minister’s advice seems seriously adverse to the functioning of parliamentary democracy, it should not be followed. An authoritarian prime minister might be as much a threat to parliamentary democracy as an authoritarian sovereign. In each case we rely on conventions, a body of constitutional or legal ethics”, as A.V. Dicey explained, for guidance on the proper use of legal powers.2

Continue reading “Discretion and the Reserve Powers of the Crown”

Tax Bills and the Ways and Means Process

This entry is part 5 of 11 in the series Vol 34 No 2 (Summer)

Tax Bills and the Ways and Means Process

The consideration by Parliament of the Crown’s requests for taxation is one of the cornerstones of our system of government. Although the rules of procedure are fairly straightforward for the introduction of a tax bill, there are many parliamentary issues which are brought into play and merit reflection. Among them are the amount of consideration and resources required for increasingly large and complex Budget Implementation Bills; the repetition found in some debates; the inclusion of non-budgetary matters in the Budget Implementation Bill; the implementation of tax initiatives before legislation is enacted; the effect of tax alleviations proposed by private Members on the government’s management of the fiscal plan; and the preclusion of any debate on private Members’ bills which propose tax increases. These and other issues related to ways and means are examined in the following article.

One of Parliament’s fundamental roles is to give consideration to the Crown’s requests for spending and taxation. The procedures in the House of Commons relating to spending protect the financial initiative of the Crown by requiring that a royal recommendation – solely obtained by a Minister – be attached to any item proposing an appropriation. The procedures relating to taxation are slightly different. Unless a change to a tax law is contemplated, tax provisions continue from year to year. Whenever the Crown wishes to propose a new tax, to continue an expiring tax, to increase an existing tax, or to extend a tax to a new class of taxpayers, it is accomplished through what is known as the “ways and means” process – a procedural term referring to the manner that revenues are raised to meet government expenditures. The rules of the House stipulate that the adoption of a ways and means motion (outlining any increase in the incidence of taxation) must precede first reading of a tax bill. As only a Minister may give notice of a ways and means motion, the financial initiative of the Crown is thus protected for tax purposes.1

Continue reading “Tax Bills and the Ways and Means Process”

Top