• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 137 Ï NUMBER 147 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, February 22, 2002 Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire´´ at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 9131 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, February 22, 2002 The House met at 10 a.m. administration service. Second, the creation of a separate Federal Court of Appeal. Third, a change in the status of the tax court to that Prayers of a superior court. The most significant structural modification to the bill is the consolidation of the administrative services of the courts and the GOVERNMENT ORDERS establishment of the courts administration service. The service would provide the administrative needs of the federal court, the tax court Ï (1000) and the court martial appeal court. This would entail common [English] management of all aspects of administration, including court COURTS ADMINISTRATION SERVICE ACT facilities, registries and related real property and common corporate services. The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-30, an act to establish a body that provides administrative services to the Federal As hon. members know, our constitution establishes that Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court responsibility and power for courts administration be shared between and the Tax Court of Canada, to amend the Federal Court Act, the the judiciary and the government. The government is responsible for Tax Court of Canada Act and the Judges Act, and to make related providing and is publicly accountable for the necessary resources and consequential amendments to other acts, as reported (with required to support the courts' functions while chief justices are amendment) from the committee. responsible and accountable for the effective administration of the Hon. Ralph Goodale (for the Minister of Justice) moved that courts as it relates to the judicial function. the bill be concurred in. The Supreme Court of Canada has held that to ensure the courts' (Motion agreed to) institutional independence the judiciary must control all matters Ï (1005) bearing directly on the adjudicative function. The Acting Speaker (Ms. Bakopanos): When shall the bill be read the third time? By leave, now? However, delineating the respective authority and accountability of the government and the judiciary is not always a simple task. Some hon. members: Agreed. There is a large operational and policy area in which both Hon. Ralph Goodale (for the Minister of Justice) moved that government and the judiciary have an interest and a role. the bill be read the third time and passed. Thus, in addition to the constitutional imperative that any model developed must respect the role of the judiciary and the government Mr. Paul Harold Macklin (Parliamentary Secretary to the in the administration of the courts, the practical realities of this Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Lib.): shared responsibility necessitated collaboration between the govern- Madam Speaker, it is my pleasure to rise to lead off the debate on ment and the judiciary in the development of the proposed structure third reading of Bill C-30, an act to establish a body that provides of the courts administrative service. administrative services to the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court and the Tax Court of Canada. The bill would establish a structure that would permit both the The principal objective of Bill C-30 is to improve the efficiency government and the judiciary, through the office of the courts and effectiveness of the administration of the Federal Court of administration service, with the chief administrator at the head, to Canada and the Tax Court of Canada through certain structural collaborate in such a way as to maximize public accountability and modifications to these courts. At the same time, these amendments judicial independence. are intended to fully respect the courts' independence and to ensure the continued provision of the high quality of justice that Canadians In addition to being supported by the courts affected by the have a right to expect from these courts. reforms, these reforms will be welcomed by those served by the courts. The establishment of a single administrative structure will The bill contains three important structural modifications to the enable administrative improvements and efficiencies to be effec- courts. First, the consolidation of the current administrative services tively realized while maintaining the high quality of service that of the two, the federal court and the tax court, into a single courts Canadians expect from our national institutions. 9132 COMMONS DEBATES February 22, 2002 Government Orders I am very pleased to report that during the second reading debate, lawyers. It is still a great mystery how this thing, which was created all parties indicated their support for Bill C-30. I would ask all hon. in the early 1970s, fits in with the rest of the court system. members of the House for their continued support. I do not see any specific plan or quality objectives enunciated by The bill represents an unprecedented opportunity to put in place a the government. The government says that there will be improved model for court administration that will balance judicial indepen- quality but I do not see a plan or a process to improve quality. I am dence and public accountability as well as create opportunities for rather dubious about it. realizing economies and efficiencies. The Liberals seem to assume that if a process is centralized and As hon. members are aware, the bill was introduced by the former consolidated, and if more power is concentrated in the centre of minister of justice. I am very pleased to carry forward legislation that Ottawa then that automatically translates into quality improvements, in my view creates an innovative structure. despite the fact that almost every public administration academic Ï (1010) person or public management person would say that is a false assumption. I believe that with its appropriate balance between public accountability and the requisite institutional independence of the In the private sector good organizations use ISO standards to courts the service will become a model for other jurisdictions. measure quality. This is a very objective way of determining quality and standard and making sure that services and products meet I thank the hon. members of the House for their attention today and ask for their support in the passage of Bill C-30. standard quality services. Mr. Brian Fitzpatrick (Prince Albert, Canadian Alliance): I surmise that if the government started using ISO standards, the Madam Speaker, the Canadian Alliance supports the aims of the bill court system would fail miserably and not meet the standards. If ISO which are efficiency, presumably cost savings, which the Canadian standards were applied to the department of Indian affairs it would Alliance would certainly agree with, and improved quality. However, certainly fail miserably. We only have to look at the results of we are not so sure about judicial independence. programs in that area. It is a disaster and there is no quality in that department. I want to comment on some of these points because the government has a habit of putting some good aims into its legislation If ISO standards were applied to immigration, I wonder what and then forgetting about them after the legislation comes into effect. would be said about the 27,000 refugee claimants who were subject The government does not review or monitor its legislation. We then to deportation orders by a government that does not even know become frustrated to learn that the aims were never achieved. where they are any more or what has become of them. I will begin with efficiency and cost savings. How will there be efficiency and cost savings through these consolidation procedures? What about the military? How in the world could any person I presume duplication will be eliminated and positions will be apply objective standards of quality, in terms of materials, resources eliminated. Obviously if all the personnel are being brought under and equipment, and say that the military meets ISO standards for one roof, with one chief clerk of the court, positions will be quality? eliminated. Ï (1015) I have not seen anything from the government as to how many What about Correctional Service Canada and the parole system? It people will lose their jobs through redundancy. I am not exactly sure is a dismal disaster in terms of providing quality there. what kind of standardized procedures will be brought in to bring about greater efficiency. What about the fisheries department? There are probably more I suspect that in five years we might see a report from the auditor people working in the fisheries department than there are actual general saying that in the administration of the court system there are fishermen and fisher ladies. more employees than there are today and the costs are higher than they are today. I expect to hear that but the aim is good. The An hon. member: Maybe even more than there are cod. government has problems executing the legislation to get the results Mr. Brian Fitzpatrick: Yes, may even more than there are cod. that are talked about. Some people feel we should give the federal government more The government is also talking about the need for improved power because we will somehow get better quality. Well I do not quality. For most Canadians access to our court system is next to share those comments. impossible. Unless people are very wealthy, unless it is a government or unless it is a group that is funded by the government, A third area that I am not exactly excited about is the talk about they do not have access to the court system.

Load more

  88

Copy Link