Spotlight on 42: Changes, Challenges and Conclusions.

AuthorStos, Will
PositionCanadian Study of Parliament Group

In the year leading up to an anticipated federal general election in 2019, the Canadian Study of Parliament Group gathered together parliamentary officials, interested observers and parliamentarians to examine what has transpired in the current parliament and what may lie ahead. This well-attended conference included four panels which explored "the changes and challenges facing each Chamber in light of recent procedural and structural innovations." In this article, the author provides summaries of each of these panels and some of the discussion that followed the presentations.

The Changing Bicameral Relationship

Cathy Piccinin, Acting Principal Clerk of Chamber Operations and the Procedure Office in the Senate, outlined a series of changes which occurred in the upper chamber prior to and during the 42nd Parliament. Following a decision by Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau to remove Liberal Senators from caucus in 2014, for the first time in Canadian history a government had no Senate representative when the Liberals took office following the 2015 election. Peter Harder was subsequently named to act as the government's representative in the Senate. Facing a historic number of vacancies in the upper chamber, Prime Minister Trudeau created a new appointment process to select independent Senators. The composition of the Senate has thus changed dramatically in the past few years with Conservative senators continuing to sit with the party's MPs, a group of Senate Liberals who function as a partisan caucus but who are not affiliated with the Liberals in the House of Commons, a new plurality of Independent Senators who have organized themselves in an Independent Senator Group (ISG) caucus, and other senators who sit as independents without affiliation to any group.

Piccinin explained that with these changes, the work of the Senate has become much less predictable. While contending that using metrics to gauge the effect of amendments is not a great way to just legislative work, she said it does bear noting that in this parliament the number of Senate amendments per year has tripled. There has also been an increase in the numbers of bills that have been amended. But, Piccinin says, the Senate still seems to respect the Commons' ability to reject amendments by not insisting upon amendments.

Recognizing the absence of cabinet ministers sitting in its ranks, the Senate has begun inviting cabinet members to the chamber to answer questions. There have been no changes to the rules to accommodate this practice; rather, it's been a matter of negotiations among members.

Piccinin also provided several examples of legislation that has been dealt with in novel ways:

* Bill S-3--Aboriginal Peoples Committee decided to defeat the bill, then adjourned, but then changed its mind and instead proposed many changes and amendments.

* Bill C-49--If a Senate insists on an amendment, a committee must be struck to explain why. It did this expeditiously. When the Commons rejected the amendment a second time the Senate did not proceed.

* Bill C-45--Various Senate committees discussed the subject matter (recreational cannabis legalization), but one social affairs committee dealt with the legislation in substance. Senate party leaders and facilitators agreed to structure debate thematically during third reading, similar to the assisted dying bill. It added a sense of organization that Senators seemed to appreciate.

She concluded by stating the Senate has become more multi-centred in terms of power and highlighted that many things have been accomplished through negotiations among members rather than formal rule changes.

Jeremy LeBlanc, Principal Clerk of Chamber Business and Parliamentary Publications in the House of Commons, discussed some themes evident in the 42nd Parliament (timing pressures for the government, financial prerogatives, and procedural changes) and the impact they have had what's happening in the lower chamber. He reported there has been a marked increase in legislation being returned to the House of Commons with amendments from the Senate (27 per cent of bills have been amended) and noted that the House of Commons rejected all of these amendments in only two cases.

LeBlanc pointed out that there have been more instances of double ping-pong between the chamber --legislation going back and forth a number of times--and also an increase in the number of sitting days where Senate amendments are considered. He explained that time pressure is most keenly felt before long adjournments.

Two pieces of legislation, C-14 and C-45, were complex bills with many different issues to consider, yet adjustments, amendments and messages between the two houses were exchanged...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT