:
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.
[Translation]
First let me thank the committee for inviting us here today to discuss issues of national protocol.
As Mr. Moore mentioned, my name is Nicole Bourget and I am the Assistant Deputy Minister of Sport, Major Events and Regions at the Department of Canadian Heritage. I am joined by Denis Racine, Executive Director, Major Events and Celebrations and Joel Girouard, Director, State Ceremonial and Protocol.
Although the issue of protocol is not generally given a lot of outside attention, it is foundational to all of the national ceremonies in Canada and defines the etiquette for the treatment of national symbols such as the national flag of Canada.
Today we would like to take this opportunity to provide the committee with an overview of the types of protocol issues we are responsible for. We will then be happy to answer any questions you may have.
The responsibility for national protocol falls under the mandate of the Department of Canadian Heritage under the Department of Canadian Heritage Act. Protocol, by definition, has to be flexible and adapt to the various players on the political or social stage. Developed through years of experience, officials at the Department of Canadian Heritage have significant experience in the area of national protocol. This experience is put into practice in the delivery of numerous events such as royal tours, state funerals, installations of governors general.
The department also acts as a centre of expertise on issues of domestic protocol and procedures. This includes the rules surrounding the national flag of Canada, its half-masting, display and use. We respond to inquiries from the public on national symbols, the use of royal images, the prefix “royal” and the use of symbols for commercial purposes. This role also involves on-going communication and liaison with provincial and territorial government protocol offices.
[English]
I would like to take some time to provide more details on protocol in national events, specifically royal tours and state funerals.
Her Majesty The Queen has toured Canada 22 times. Her Majesty's most recent visit to Canada was in 2010, and in 2011 Canada received Their Royal Highnesses, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. This month, as you know, Canada will host the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall as part of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee celebrations.
It is important to note the distinction between official and private visits. An official visit is at the invitation of the Governor General. A private visit is one where a member of the royal family undertakes engagements with or on behalf of private organizations. The Department of Canadian Heritage is only involved in official visits.
Royal tours are truly a team effort. The department is not only responsible for planning the tour and ensuring coordination between various partners. We also work with several other federal departments, the Office of the Secretary to the Governor General, representatives from the provinces and territories as well as the royal household, and the Canadian Secretary to the Queen.
Next I'd like to highlight the role the department plays in managing state funerals. A state funeral may be held to honour and commemorate present and former governors general, present and former prime ministers, sitting members of the ministry, and other eminent Canadians at the discretion of the Prime Minister. These national ceremonies provide the occasion for the public to participate in a demonstration of national homage and mourning.
Each state funeral is different, depending on the predetermined wishes of the deceased and the wishes of the family. They do, however, contain some common elements. The department is responsible for the overall coordination of all aspects of the event including the lying in state; the funeral procession; the funeral service; the committal, which may include components of military honours; and the post-committal reception.
The Department of Canadian Heritage is the lead federal department. However, many other government departments as well as provincial, territorial, and municipal governments are involved in the organization and delivery of a state funeral, depending on the complexity and size of the funeral.
[Translation]
While the Office of the Secretary to the Governor General manages issues of protocol for the sitting Governor General, once a new Governor General is identified, it is the responsibility of the Department of Canadian Heritage to provide support for the Governor General Designate until she or he officially assumes office.
The installation ceremony is a major protocol event. It sets the tone for the new Governor General's term and serves as a reflection of the important issues that the Governor General Designate wishes to highlight. As with other significant political events, the department works with numerous partners.
Finally, as I mentioned earlier, the department acts as a centre of expertise on numerous aspects of issues including the proper use of the national flag of Canada.
In this respect, the most visible contribution of the department is in terms of the administration of the Rules for Half-masting the National Flag of Canada. Half-masting being a well-established procedure to bestow an honour and express a collective sense of sorrow.
[English]
I thank you all for your time and we'd be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
:
The department has various documents, administrative templates, I call them. It's a how-to list for various events. For example, with state funerals there are certain procedures to follow. The same with a royal visit or a massive state event.
These documents, I call evergreen, because they're based on convention and past practice. We have a lot of background information that we hold in the department, for both past royal visits and past state funerals. We don't have one single one, because it's in constant evolution. Each visit or funeral is unique. A royal visit, for example, is based on the size and the scope, the number of cities visited, the events, and maybe whether it's part of our Canada Day celebrations. All the workings vary and we adapt each visit based on some basic premises.
A state funeral is really based on the wishes of the deceased, if they were predetermined, as was the case with Monsieur LeBlanc and Mr. Hnatyshyn and their family members.
If you want a lying in state, for example, we saw with Mr. Layton's funeral that we sometimes need to do it in two cities. We had it in Toronto as well as Ottawa, which had not been done in the past. Some families may choose not to have a lying in state.
There is basic information that we use as reference material. The reason that we don't have something firm is that it's evergreen. Protocol evolves with time, personal wishes, and the people we are serving. Guidelines exist and they have existed since way before my time at the department, back to the earliest royal visits that were handled years ago.
We work very closely with our partners, and they have information too. When we're working with DND, for example, they have their own procedures that they walk through with the RCMP, for security purposes. We also work with Public Works, which specializes in helping to plan the venues and the physical aspects of the space. Then there is what we do. We work within the federal family, with the provinces, and with the cities. We lend that expertise.
In the case of Mr. Layton, we offered the City of Toronto advice on how to plan, how to work with the police, how to do the various steps.
Of course there are communications materials and templates for announcing a royal tour, or for putting out a media guide for visits.
I would say we have a variety of documents, administrative templates, that help us realize our work.
My thanks to the witnesses for joining us this morning.
For royal visits, for example, there is clearly a lot of protocol involved. I remember once when someone touched the Queen. That caused quite a problem. I have no doubt that, in that kind of situation, protocol is very much stricter.
Our present study, which is going to occupy the next four meetings of this committee, comes as a result of the protocol that was in place during the late Jack Layton's funeral. A number of people have observed how that state funeral demonstrated a degree of flexibility while keeping up the protocol at the same time. People have often told me about the extent to which they had been struck both by the state funeral and the celebration of the individual's life. It even caused some to think about their own funerals and they were struck by that as well.
At the event, you were able to maintain the required standards while remaining very flexible. I even think that the first pages of the Canadian Heritage site mentions the flexibility. Could you tell us about your contribution to Mr. Layton's funeral?
:
My simple answer is yes. Why? Because there are....
There are books published on protocol, by the way. There are some that provide their works, their studies.
It would become set in people's expectations. They would say, “Okay, this is the A, B, C, D list I have to accomplish in order for this event to be successful.” We're saying that's not always the case. You can have element A and Z, and blend it with that, and you can make your event with that. It's not a one recipe, one-size-fits-all. You can't say, “Okay, a state funeral will look like this.” That would be inflexible. You can't say, “A royal visit—you can't adapt to that. You have to follow this to the rule.” Then we're creating a set of expectations that I think strips away that flexibility that we're talking about that allows people, governments, and persons affected by state funerals to really design and have a say in how it's done.
Of course, you mentioned that National Defence cadets have protocol, because it's part of their doctrine. These are historical institutions that have very long-standing traditions. We would never impose on that. They have manuals about how to conduct a parade—honours, colours, regiments. It's a body of knowledge unto its own and it is important because that's part of our history as well.
If you're asking me if we could have a manual, there have been attempts in the past where we have collated information. But we find very quickly that it's no longer.... It's a useful baseline and guide, but you cannot prescribe any events because they move from the local. People will say they are local, provincial, national, international events, and there are various rules that apply in each of those circumstances. The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, for example, has a protocol section because they are dealing with heads of state who come to visit Canada, and they have to adapt to that circumstance.
In our case, what we have and what we can put out publicly, we put on our website. As I said, we do have these administrative templates, but I think it would be kind of.... We don't want to be prescriptive. We want people to follow and to be inspired by what they do, and to make sure that people who are creating events.... We get a lot of calls, as I say. We share. There's an informal network of chiefs of protocol across the country. We share best practices. We discuss. But as I say, it's a constant evolution.
:
Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for being here. This is a really interesting conversation we're having about important events and the symbolism that we present to Canadians as an expression of who we are as a country. I do really appreciate this. I think it's important here in this committee to acknowledge the professionalism of the department as it pertains to these and so many other things.
All Canadians saw an extremely elegant and professional state funeral for the late Jack Layton. It was organized in a very short period of time. I was there at Nathan Phillips Square for some of the proceedings that occurred just prior to the state funeral. I could see that on the ground these things require professionalism, a deep understanding of the traditions, and an awareness that things happen and that you need to be able to respond to those things.
You've been pretty clear about your take on whether this can be codified in a specific way. In fact, I understand that your sense is that at least as it pertains to your department, the framework is there. What's important here—and correct me if I'm wrong—is that the framework is strong and that it's built on a foundation of precedents. Maybe you can walk me through, from your department's perspective, because you're one of many departments that have protocol frameworks, and then there are, of course, the other levels of government that have protocol, and then there are various other civil society organizations that have protocol.
So if we were to attempt some kind of manual of protocol, how would we proceed with such an attempt?
How would we proceed? As I say, we have the framework. We have the templates. It would be labour-intensive to put all this information together and try to distill what is useful for public consumption. We would need to give some thought to presentation and packaging, in the sense that if you're seeking something that is relevant for citizens as a guide, the optic for that is different from what it is for the professional who has to do the job.
We would need to determine the audience, the scope, the format, how we would make it accessible, and some really clear objectives of what we're trying to achieve with this. Those impact the audience. As I say, something that is for citizens to understand, or to know how to do a local event, is very different from something for a professional putting on a state funeral.
My staff would probably say that they work 18 hours a day or around the clock when there is a state funeral. Trying to collate anything would probably kill them off in very quick order. But in trying to bring this all together, I think we would want to make sure it was relevant and that it not only clearly stated what the precedence and traditions were but that it was also flexible.
To answer cold—I would like to think this through—in my view, these are the kinds of questions we would need to think through before considering.
Denis?
:
In the specific case you're referring to, I'm somewhat surprised, because my understanding of police forces is that they have traditions within their own forces of how they conduct such ceremonies.
In terms of flag folding and how the ceremony is conducted using the flag, I'm surprised, because our website details even how to fold the Canadian flag, the techniques to it. It's there and it's illustrated—I'm sorry, it isn't on our website yet—but if somebody were to call the department, we have a video that was produced by one of our protocol officers, Paul “Smokie” LeBlanc, a former military gentleman. We do have that knowledge.
Our work in the department is to preserve and promote all Canadian symbols that matter. We try to do it through educational material. We do it through our website. The section of our website that pertains to state ceremonies is the most frequently visited one in the department. Teachers use it a lot. We have guides on national symbols. We have books on symbols. We have A Crown of Maples. We just issued another version recently. We have a tremendous amount of information designed to preserve, promote, and create awareness of historical milestones. There are special days.
In the case of the fallen police officer, I'm very surprised that by either looking on the website or calling the department, they were not able to get assistance and answers to their questions.
:
I think this is where the idea of a manual.... I know you probably cringe, you don't want to hear about a manual, but I think that's kind of sometimes where a manual would help. There are a lot of different protocols for the military as Mr. Simms and everybody was saying, even with Mr. Layton's funeral.
We have changed it, but the basic tenets remain the same. Somehow, I could be wrong but I just feel that somehow that message is not getting back down to other people, be it the provincial or municipal level, and even sometimes ourselves in our own functions in our communities.
Should we not be a bit more arrogant with our traditions, frankly? Should we not at some point in time say that Canada was founded on the basis of two founding peoples, these are the traditions, and if you are going to go down the road of requiring something, think about it now, and when you do make a mistake should we not be in there and say, “Yes, you did something good, but here's how you could have improved on that”?
It might be a policy question; you can answer that.
:
On your question, I would say that members of this committee are best placed to judge the level of involvement the government wants to have in matters of protocol and how aggressive...or how much promotion occurs.
We do take our mandate seriously, and with the tools we have, as I said, we do disseminate a lot of information.
I think there's a distinction to be made, and I'm not against a manual of sorts. We do have our various manuals, as I say, because we wouldn't be able to accomplish our work. I think it's important to understand that we are responsible for national protocol of national events.
If you're talking about a state funeral, nobody is going to be doing that except us. A royal visit? Nobody will be doing that except the department.
Those are clearly national protocol elements. When you get into the flag or local ceremonies then it's a different story. That's where the provincial, municipal, or an organization's internal protocol—such as the RCMP, or police forces—each has their own traditions. We cannot impose that on people.
:
Thank you very much. I didn't expect a question. I truly appreciate it.
I've been thinking about this, and certainly it seems to me that it's very clear, as you've stated, that every province has its protocol. I can recall as an MPP in Ontario talking to protocol on various occasions. You have gone to every effort to make protocol accessible to people and available so that we can indeed follow positive traditions.
One of the questions that Mr. Calandra asked and I wanted to follow up on, is that in terms of traditions of the founding peoples—the English founders, the French founders, first nations—those are, of course, very important and certainly we have to be respectful there.
In the case of newer traditions, those that have come to us from the many immigrants who have made Canada their home and brought a rich tradition with them, do we incorporate those in any way? I'm thinking back to Jack Layton's funeral and the very touching, and I think, appropriate participation of the Muslim community and various others.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's a pleasure to appear before you today as you embark upon this study.
As you've heard, the protocol requirements of the government for state visits, funerals, and other events are served by the protocol offices at the Department of Canadian Heritage and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. The protocol requirements for the Parliament of Canada are the responsibility of the office of parliamentary protocol, headed by Elizabeth Rody, within the international and interparliamentary affairs directorate of the Parliament of Canada, and that's headed by Eric Janse.
I would like to take a few minutes to provide the committee with an overview of the role and mandate of the Protocol Office, our role in the events you're considering, and the differences between federal government protocol and parliamentary protocol.
[Translation]
The Office of Parliamentary Protocol is part of the International and Interparliamentary Affairs Directorate of the Parliament of Canada. IIA is the only joint service of Parliament reporting through both clerks to the internal economy committees of both the Senate and the House of Commons.
The chief of protocol reports to the director general of International and Interparliamentary Affairs, Clerk Assistant, Eric Janse, who is on my right. The protocol team is led by the Chief of Protocol for Parliament, Elizabeth Rody, who is on my left.
[English]
The office of parliamentary protocol assists the speakers of both Houses in their diplomatic and ceremonial roles, supports parliamentary exchanges and parliamentary associations, organizes parliamentary conferences, and lends expertise and advice on all matters of protocol. This also extends to activities outside of Ottawa, and a good example of this is parliamentary delegations visiting various regions of Canada. A timely example is the work being done for the upcoming 127th Assembly of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, to be hosted by the Parliament of Canada in Quebec City in October 2012.
The office is also involved as a partner in the delivery of government-sponsored activities that take place in the Parliament Buildings.
Parliamentary protocol ensures that official visits and events for foreign parliamentarians and dignitaries are properly identified, organized, and acted upon; that all visits and events on Parliament Hill are conducted in a manner that befits the dignity and stature of the Parliament of Canada; that visiting dignitaries receive all the diplomatic courtesies in accordance with international protocol practices; that dignitaries, while visiting Parliament, receive a positive image and understanding of the institution; and that guidelines and procedures for parliamentary protocol are developed and maintained based on precedents and knowledge of the institution.
[Translation]
In certain cases the role of the Parliamentary Protocol Office in assisting government visits and events can be minimal, for example in the case of the Prime Minister simply meeting in his Centre Block office a counterpart from another country. In many other cases, however, our involvement is much more significant.
[English]
The vast majority of visits by heads of state, heads of government, or other high-level events occur on Parliament Hill or have a large parliamentary component. The resources required to successfully deliver these activities are not insignificant and they touch on a number of services at the House of Commons and in the Parliament—for example, security services, maintenance, room allocation to name but a few.
[Translation]
Examples of protocol events held on Parliament Hill are welcoming ceremonies of foreign heads of state and government or other high level parliamentarians and international dignitaries; addresses to Parliament; welcoming ceremonies; openings of Parliament; investitures of Governors General; unveiling ceremonies and parliamentary legacy projects, including portraits and windows; state funerals; and commemorations of national events.
[English]
To successfully execute the above mentioned activities, the office of parliamentary protocol partners and collaborates with foreign affairs protocol, state ceremonial at the Department of Canadian Heritage, provincial or territorial offices of protocol, and other government agencies, for example, the Department of National Defence. A recent example of that is Operation MOBILE in Libya and the ceremony to salute that effort.
[Translation]
As a specific example, the overall responsibility for a state funeral lies with the Department of Canadian Heritage. However, when the lying-in-state occurs on Parliament Hill, and it almost invariably does, we play a key role in arranging logistics, greeting VIPs, developing scenarios, coordinating security, and so on.
One of the key challenges is assisting with such events while respecting the fact that Centre Block is a working building with a specific legislative purpose. This challenge was referred to by Speaker Scheer in a recent ruling.
[English]
I quote the decision of Speaker Scheer:
As we all know, the parliamentary precinct and its buildings exist primarily to support the functions of the legislative branch. The Centre Block in particular, housing as it does the House of Commons and Senate chambers, is a working building where parliamentary proceedings are carried out and where members must be free to perform their duties without interference even when other activities are taking place. Needless to say, these heritage buildings, especially Centre Block, are also ideal venues for all sorts of events and we are all proud to showcase them for our distinguished visitors. However, when activities, such as the visit of the Prime Minister of Israel on March 2 take place, extra care is needed to ensure that competing requirements regarding the use of the buildings and precinct are understood, with due accommodations and with the proper balance.
Different protocol practices are applied when an event is deemed parliamentary in nature or is deemed a state or national event. The parliamentary Protocol Office executes events regularly on Parliament Hill that bring together the executive and the legislative branches, and it ensures that both protocols are incorporated to avoid offence and misunderstandings.
[Translation]
Our protocol office adds the parliamentary components, precedents and practices to events hosted by the executive on Parliament Hill, such as the official welcome of dignitaries by the speakers or the role of party leaders during an address to Parliament. The federal order of precedence does not reflect the composition of the House of Commons—I'm thinking of party standings, for instance—or the leadership role exercised by some members of the House of Commons. For parliamentary events, where the role of the speakers, party leaders, House leaders and whips must be taken into account, party standings will determine precedence and not the federal order of precedence. Thus, for example, seating arrangements for a dinner hosted by the Governor General or the Prime Minister will be different than those for a hospitality event hosted by the Speaker.
[English]
Protocol requires flexibility, common sense, and is negotiated between the different parties involved in crafting an event. Many principles need to be considered when scripting an event: the role of the hosts, the nature of the institution, and the objectives and desired results. Protocol is more art than science. A review of the organization behind the lying in state of the late leader of the New Democratic Party demonstrates that well.
All parties involved—the executive, the legislative, the province, and the City of Toronto—applied and incorporated in their scenarios their particular protocol, the nature of their institutions, but most importantly the wishes of the family, while respecting the overall protocol for state funerals as dictated by the Department of Canadian Heritage.
That is basically the overview of how we fit into things as the office of parliamentary protocol.
[Translation]
I thank committee members for their attention. We will be pleased to answer any questions members may have.
:
If I may stray a little bit, Mr. Chair, I'd like to use Mr. Layton's funeral as an example.
At 10:30 a.m. on the day his death was announced, I was in the office of the Sergeant-at-Arms. Elizabeth was there too, as was a key person from the Prime Minister's Office. We knew that there would be a situation to manage. We didn't know at that point if the Prime Minister would offer a state funeral, as he did, but we know that management would be provided, and we wanted to make sure that we made contact with the key people right away. There was someone from the Prime Minister's Office, since it was the Prime Minister's decision to grant that honour to Mr. Layton, and we wanted to know immediately what it was. We also guessed, naturally, given Mr. Layton's personality, that the party and the family would play a major role in the event.
Right off the bat, we all agreed that, naturally, we would respect the protocol for state funerals, in accordance with Canadian Heritage protocol, while respecting the wishes of the family as much as possible, which was essential. It was important that it all be worthy of the great Canadian that Mr. Layton was, whose life we wanted to honour and celebrate.
Everyone was instantly in agreement that the last thing we wanted was to have each side claim responsibility for the right to make decisions. I'm very proud to speak to you about this cooperation, which even involved the security services of the Senate and the House of Commons. The Senate security services helped the Sergeant-at-Arms and the House security service when necessary to provide enough hours so that people who wanted to could pay their respects to Mr. Layton. We also called on the pages who had worked with Mr. Layton the previous year so that they could direct people to the book of condolences. The day the coffin had to return to Toronto, Andrea McCrady, the carillonneur, prepared a special program in consultation with the family so that the music had a special meaning for the family and for Ms. Chow.
I think that's an example of something we can be very proud of. Of course, we had no notice and had to face fairly special challenges, since things happened at several levels all at once. I think this is a very good example of how things work.
:
There is a set program, and I'll ask Elizabeth to speak to that directly.
Of course, with the current world in which we live, the security posture is dictated by the risk assessment that is done on the danger posed to the visitor so that, for example—this is perhaps not the time to talk about the Secret Service—the relationships with the Secret Service and the security surrounding the President of the United States are such that they are well known for sort of taking over wherever they go to protect the President. We have managed that on a number of presidential visits.
Similarly, for example, again given the situation in the world, Prime Minister Netanyahu was recently visiting. Again there the security was very major, but I doubt, say, the President of Ireland would necessitate a similar level of security.
We are very flexible on the security front. Our Sergeant-at-Arms and the security services in the Senate work very closely with the RCMP to ensure that the security measures that need to be taken are in place.
With regard to the flag question, Elizabeth...?
There are standards of visits so we, in our protocol jargon, will determine if it is a state visit or an official visit. For a state visit, the person is the guest of the Governor General and for an official visit, the person is the guest of the Prime Minister. It is a Speaker-led visit. There are different types of visits for which we have different types of protocol, if you want.
To come back, the question about security is very good. I've been in this business for a long time. Often we get trumped. Security trumps protocol, because we have to adapt to certain realities of the world. So even if a protocol officer decides there would be a great photo op outside, if the Secret Service says, “No way. This is not going to happen”, then we have to dress up a different area.
You will hear from my colleagues at Foreign Affairs next week. They are the ones who set the official standards for official visits to Canada. When they call me and say that on Monday we will have the President of Israel visiting, they will say it is a state visit and that he will be here on the invitation of the Governor General. So you will see the streets lined with flags, the Hall of Honour, the red carpet, and military honours at Rideau Hall. These all come into play when we have this level of visit.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our special guests today for coming.
Protocol is obviously something that Canadians are interested in, and they often get faced with situations that require them to learn a little more about it, and usually on very short notice, as we saw with the situation with the passing of Mr. Layton last year. There was a lot of information out there about what protocol was, but I didn't see it anywhere coming from a reliable source.
As well, Elizabeth, as you know, I've dealt with visiting members of Congress in my role as the chair of the Canada-United States Inter-Parliamentary Group, and we saw some situations there.
Often there are other things when we go as members of Parliament to events in our ridings. People often talk about the protocol of who's going to speak in what order, and somebody just says it, but nobody actually sees it printed anywhere. I know we've talked a little about this information being available, so maybe there's a way that Canadians can benefit a little bit from that, if we make it more accessible to them. Is that something we might be able to make more accessible to Canadians?
:
One of my continuing hopes is that at some point we will be able to free up Elizabeth and her rather astounding corporate memory for protocol events, certainly before she goes into the happy climes of retirement—not that she's thinking of doing that any time soon—and pull together what could be a helpful sort of guidebook or guidelines on the principles of protocol.
I believe the earlier witnesses were talking about that and saying that they were disinclined to have something like this, because people would be then stuck with the written word. I know that this is a danger, but I've been on the flip side of it, whereby you try to tell people it's a convention that the Hall of Honour is used in this or this way, and they say, where is it written down? So it all depends.
I wouldn't like to see us hamstrung by what would seem to be rules that are poured in concrete, but I do think that basic principles, which Elizabeth has told me many times, don't change from one event to another. What you're trying to do is arrange with a kind of invisible courtesy to ensure that everybody who takes part in an event is duly recognized for what they bring to the event and has the attention paid to them that they believe they merit by virtue of their participation, for whatever role they might play. That's where I think the negotiation comes in.
One of the things I've discovered in my time, certainly as deputy clerk when I became deputy clerk in 2000, and since I was named Clerk in 2005, is that the levels of protocol from one country to another may change quite dramatically. If you accompany the Speaker on a visit abroad, you might find yourself with motorcycle escorts and outriders and what have you; it's all very exciting. Then you think to yourself, oh heavens, when we reciprocate and these people come here, there's going to be some difficulty in explaining to them that we don't do it quite that way. “There are no motorcycle escorts except for very unusual guests, and sadly, you're not one of them.”
That's always a bit of a trick. What we try to do there is to say, what we are offering you is this. We want you to feel comfortable in Canada with Canadian norms and Canadian customs, and so this is what we would do for a person of your rank. As I say, it can be a tricky conversation to have, but we have people who are very good at doing it.
:
International protocol also evolves. We get a lot of our international guidelines from the United Nations, such as, for example, concerning flags. When there's a summit, how do we display flags? UN convention will tell us that it's by alphabetical order in English, unless it's a Francophonie summit. So there are some general guidelines.
As you know, summiteering has become quite the art and is out there a lot, so there are a lot of groups that get together when they put together some of these summits. They have developed some sorts of protocols, and you see these a lot in international meetings. When you're watching on television, you'll always recognize the same type of format—how the flags are displayed, where people are seated, and all of these kinds of protocols.
The fundamentals are always the same because everything comes back to the fact that it's based on precedence. If, at a G-20 summit, you have heads of state and then heads of government, the heads of state will go first, depending on when they were either elected or named to their positions. It's the same thing here in Canada when we have an event—for parliamentarians, who was elected first; who is a member of cabinet, and so on and so forth. These principles always are applied at different levels.
International protocols are very similar. They were all developed many years ago at the Geneva Convention talks, when Europe was deciding on all of their after-war splits. When ambassadors came together, they had to figure out an order. This has been passed along to different offices of protocol, and we have just applied them differently.
:
When I say it's more art than science and then say it would be kind of nice to have guidelines down, part of that is basically trying to ensure a transfer of knowledge from veterans and a documentation of precedents in what is here. Parliament, understandably enough, is very often an oral culture. You know it's been done like this, but it's not ever written down anywhere.
At the same time I wouldn't like to see something written down that became a kind of commandment that you couldn't deviate from even though it meant that it would be a more successful event—it would answer the needs of the participants, and the circumstances of the moment in a given situation.
It's more a question, I think, of perhaps providing a framework that people can operate within, to say these are the principles you need to take into consideration. Now once they're taken into consideration—so long as you're sure those principles are being respected and this is the usual framework that things operate on so you know you're deviating from it—there's a consensus that you will deviate from it, or you can under the circumstances.
I don't want to throw cold water on a noble endeavour, but I would think it would be very difficult to come up with a national framework for something like this, partly because people are very jealous of their territory, and partly because they know their territory very well and they tend to consider their way of doing things within that territory as sacrosanct. As soon as you get involved in a kind of negotiation, you necessarily water it down—everybody has to put a little water in their wine—and I would just wonder by the time you did that if you would have anything really very meaningful in terms of guidelines.
I see Eric.... Eric is always responsible for keeping me from, like Wile E. Coyote, going off the cliff so I better turn this over to Eric.
:
I don't know that we're trying to say—at least I'm not—that all protocols be set in stone and this is just the way it is. My thought is that it's more of a guideline. This is how it has been done in the past and these are perhaps the elements that you should strongly consider.
For instance, when I was first elected it was written down. This is what your first day in the House was going to look like. This is what would happen on a throne speech. The Usher of the Black Rod would come in and pound on the door. You couldn't go past a certain spot in the Senate. It was all written down. The ceremony, it seems to me, has been the same since I was watching it on TV as a kid, and nobody strayed from that. But the ceremony is what it is and I have to assume that it's written down somewhere that's what happens—well, I know it is because I have it.
That's not to say our traditions won't change at some point and maybe the usher will do something different, but until that happens I just feel that sometimes it's nicer to be able to provide better resources. This might be our saying to the government, make it easier for others to get access to this type of information.
I'm going to ask you to stray in a little bit of a different direction because I have you here.
On half-masting the flag, for instance, I'm told on Parliament Hill, Canadian Heritage might say “This is the protocol to half-mast it”, but it's actually Public Works that has to order the flag down because they are in control of the building.
How much do we get in the way of protocol because the Parliament Buildings are controlled by Public Works and not by members of Parliament? Can you answer that? Or do we ever get in the way?
:
Right. My own feeling is that regardless of who would be in control of the building, somebody would be upset at some point. It's just the nature of the beast.
I think that, generally speaking, parliamentarians and Canadians are well served by the protocol at Public Works. As for the business of half-mast, I think that's understood and it's respected. It's obviously a case, though, as well, where there's a cut-off point.
At the risk of venturing too far, there was some degree of unhappiness at one point and some degree of concern that the flag wasn't put at half-mast when the news of a casualty in Afghanistan was announced. That raises a whole host of other questions that have nothing to do with paying tribute to the person who's made the ultimate sacrifice, but they have to do with logistics. Does this happen on the day of the funeral? Does it happen when the news arrives? How does that work?
I think that, generally speaking, the rules for the half-masting of the flag are very well respected by Public Works. We don't get involved in that and I wouldn't want to.
:
It's interesting that you would mention that event because I think the event took place at 2:30, and it was 1:45 when Speaker Milliken came into my office with the government House leader to say that there had been a change in plans and they wanted the representatives of the first nations on the floor of the House.
So we went into full improvisational mode, but improvising on the principles that are still sacrosanct. We figured that we wanted people on the floor of the House and that we would do that by having a motion to go into committee of the whole. The motion would provide for the Speaker to actually be chairing, even from the committee of the whole, and the motion would specify that, so we were drafting the motion as we went.
The one hiccup that we ran into was the fact that we only had one microphone that was working and could be passed around—of course, Murphy's Law would follow an O'Brien clerk—and we figured we'd go with that and they would just pass it around. That worked and seemed to be part of the choreography of the thing.
As you said, it was tremendously moving and it was just an absolutely tremendous event for the entire country.
I think that part of me, even though I'd like to see things sort of written down in terms of principles, to pass that on to people.... One of the other things that I find is that certainly the whiter my hair gets, the more I see the generation gaps that don't take 20 years any more, where people just don't seem to be particularly aware of what I would have viewed as basic courtesy. Maybe it's too much texting, who knows; I'm too old. But anyway, all of that is to say that writing it down and then adhering to it slavishly would be a terrible mistake because I think, again, you have to go with the idea of what your objective is. Your objective here is to indicate, with the greatest respect and dignity, the sorrow of the nation because of the circumstances that people were forced to live through. And again, you can't quite throw the rule book out. You have to have it choreographed so that people know what it is they have to do so that is done with due ceremony, if you will.
But I wouldn't like to see flexibility lost, either, because I think that really is the essence, the art.