Private Members’ Business / Miscellaneous

October 23, 1997

Debates, pp. 1003-4

On October 2, 1997, following Oral Questions, Jay Hill (Prince George—Peace River) raised a question of privilege about a backlog in the preparation of items of Private Members’ Business, which, he argued, had accumulated due to the reduction in House staff responsible for the production of private members’ bills (Editor’s Note: legislative counsel are the House of Commons staff who draft private members’ bills and private members’ amendments to government bills at committee and report stage). The Speaker declared that this was not a question of privilege and suggested that the member speak with his representative on the Board of Internal Economy, the body responsible for administrative and financial management of the House of Commons.^[1] On October 7, 1997, after Oral Questions, Roger Gallaway (Sarnia—Lambton) again raised a question of privilege concerning the shortage of legislative counsel in the House. He argued that there were too few legislative counsels to meet members’ needs and that this was an “obstruction to the member in performing his parliamentary work”. The Speaker stated that he would review the whole question and come back to the House if necessary.^[2]

At the beginning of the sitting of October 23, 1997, the Speaker delivered a ruling on the questions of privilege raised by Mr. Gallaway and Mr. Hill. The Speaker pointed out that administrative matters should be brought to the attention of the Board of Internal Economy and should not be raised on the floor of the House either as a point of order or as a question of privilege. Referring to two rulings by Speaker Sauvé in 1982 on related matters,^[3] the Speaker ruled that these questions did not deal with privileges of members or of the House because, under section 52.3 of the Parliament of Canada Act, the Board of Internal Economy is empowered to consider any matter concerning House services and staff. The Speaker added that he had asked the Board of Internal Economy to conduct a review of these issues.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: I am now ready to render a ruling on the matters raised by the honourable member for Sarnia—Lambton on October 7, 1997, and by the honourable member for Prince George—Peace River on October 2, 1997. These matters concern the delivery of legislative counsel services to all private members.

I want to thank other members who also made comments on this question.

Following the earlier submission made by the honourable member for Prince George—Peace River, I suggested that he speak with his representative on the Board of Internal Economy, since administrative matters of this sort come under its responsibility.

When dealing with similar questions, my predecessors have repeatedly indicated that these should be brought to the attention of the Board of Internal Economy and should not be raised on the floor of the House as a point of order nor as a question of privilege.

Although presented as a question of privilege, the matters raised by the honourable member for Sarnia—Lambton involve, in my view, basic administrative issues.

As Speaker Sauvé indicated in two rulings on December 15, 1982, complaints or grievances dealing with the delivery of services by the legislative counsel, and in particular the drafting of private members’ public bills, do not constitute the basis for a question of privilege but are, indeed, questions concerning the services of the House. I refer honourable members to the Debates of December 5, 1982, pages 21603 to 21605.

I must therefore rule that the matters raised by the honourable member for Sarnia—Lambton do not deal with privileges of members or of the House.

That being said, I wish to reassure honourable members that the matter will be revisited by the Board of Internal Economy. As a governing body of the House of Commons, the Board of Internal Economy has a long statutory history, originating in 1868. Initially composed of five members, its powers were essentially the same as they are today.

In 1985, however, in order to meet members’ demands for opposition and backbench representation from that body, the membership of the Board was increased to nine members. The intent of this recommendation was to enable private members to have “an effective voice in the decisions governing the management of the House”.

Despite the fact that only four of the nine members are from the backbenches, their opinions and input are crucial, as the practice of the Board is to arrive at its decisions by consensus.

Let me now refer to the power and authority of the Board as provided in section 52.3 of the Parliament of Canada Act:

The Board shall act on all financial and administrative matters respecting

(a) the House of Commons, its premises, its services and its staff; and

(b) the members of the House of Commons.

In other words, the Board of Internal Economy is entrusted with specific administrative oversight functions such as the delivery of legislative counsel services to members.

I understand the concerns of members in respect of the legislative counsel services provided to them by the House. As your Speaker and also Chair of the Board of Internal Economy, I would like to take this occasion to briefly comment further on this matter.

The Board reviewed this matter in the last Parliament when it established a subcommittee to consider proposed options and alternatives for the delivery of legislative counsel services to House committees and to private members.

At the time, the subcommittee considered many related issues which are still relevant today and which make this matter more complex than simply throwing more resources at it.

There is, for instance, the matter of what exactly is the proper function of legislative counsel, whether in respect of private members’ public bills or government bills at committee or at report stage.

On some occasions, counsel, who are House staff responsible to the Speaker, are asked to play the role of advocate in the sense of explaining and defending private members’ legislative initiatives.

There is also the practice of legislative counsel giving priority on a first­come, first-serve basis which is sometimes challenged by caucus and legislative priorities.

Finally, there is the fact that over half the private members’ bills drafted in the last Parliament were never introduced in the House by private members.

As your Speaker I have taken to heart the concerns expressed by members regarding these services. In my capacity as Chair of the Board of Internal Economy, I have already asked the Board to conduct a review of these issues as it is the body designated to, by statute, act on all financial and administrative matters of the House.

I therefore invite members to submit their concerns directly to the Board.

I thank you for allowing me to clarify the Chair’s position on this very important matter.

P1003-e

36-1

1997-10-23