A declaration of ethics for presiding officers?

• Author: O'Brien, Gary W.
• Position: Report

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.

**********

Parliament has taken action with regard to the governance of the ethical conduct of its members, at least in matters of conflict of interest. With the passage of legislation in 2004 creating the position of an Ethics Commissioner and a Senate Ethics Officer, and the adoption in 2006 of the Conflict of Interest Act, both senators and members of the House of Commons have demonstrated their seriousness in wanting to establish public trust in the integrity of their positions and to demonstrate that private interests can be properly reconciled with public duty.

Yet these initiatives deal with the ethical standards by which parliamentarians relate to their external environment: they do not deal with how members should ethically relate to each other in the chamber or committee. It appears that quite often the long-standing tradition of parliament that members are to respect the integrity of their colleagues and to demonstrate proper behaviour while fulfilling their parliamentary duties gets lost in the heat of question period and in the cut and thrust of debate. There is evidence that more effort could be made to reinforce basic ethical norms. As noted in the recently published Samara Report Welcome to Parliament: A Job With No Description, many newly arriving parliamentarians to Ottawa have little or no knowledge of the methods, traditions or culture of parliament and feel they receive inadequate training. (1) There may be a need to provide incoming parliamentarians with better instruction on the many rules of order and decorum, and to send out a reminder to the more long-serving members, since such rules are fundamental to the proper functioning of the chamber. (2)

Ethics may be defined as "a set of moral principles or values to guide behaviour." (3) Although there are a number of branches of ethics, in simplified terms the two which appear to exhibit the most tension toward each other and are at opposite poles are ordinary ethics which holds that it is always wrong to lie or to harm other persons and professional ethics where it seems "a professional has the right to infringe someone else's rationally grounded moral rights because this is required for carrying out the specific role-based ends or values of his profession." (4) The dilemma professionals are constantly struggling with is the troubling question of whether the end of providing professional services justify using any means related to their expertise. For example, is it ethical for doctors to lie to patients about the seriousness of their illness in order to protect their mental well-being or for a trial lawyer to try to falsify true testimony? Such questions are at the heart of the many still unresolved problems within various professions.

Their relevancy may be important to parliamentarians. U.S. Congressman Omar Burleson once defined ethics as being "a barrel of worms" (5) which pretty much sums up the problem of deciding who can be ethical in politics or in diplomacy. As an American statesman once said, "Falsehood ceases to be falsehood when it is understood on all sides that the truth is not to be spoken." (6) In professions such as these, there are always pressures to conceal the truth, to bluff and to exaggerate in order to persuade others to agree with them. There is often a mindset that if one enters the game, one must become...