Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? The Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in by David Gamache Hutchison Winner of the Alf Hales Research Award November 1999

Paper written for the Institute On Governance’s 1999 Alf Hales Research award

Institute On Governance, 122 Clarence St., , , Canada K1N 5P6 Tel.: 1 613.562.0090 – Fax: 1 613.562.0097 – e-mail: [email protected] – Website: www.iog.ca Ó 1999 All rights reserved

Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? The Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada

ISBN 1-894443-03-9

Published and distributed by: The Institute On Governance Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Phone: (1-613) 562-0090 Fax: (1-613) 562-0097 Web Site: www.iog.ca Table of Contents

ABSTRACT 1

INTRODUCTION 1

HISTORY 3

STATUS 6

SELECTION 7

CAREER PROSPECTS 9

RESPONSIBILITIES 12

JOB SATISFACTION 17

THE FUTURE OF THE POSITION 20

INTERVIEWS 24

NOTES 25 David Gamache Hutchison

David Gamache Hutchison served as a Parliamentary Intern in the Canadian House of Commons in the 1998-99 academic year. His previous experience in government included a tour guide position at the National Assembly and an internship at the Canadian Embassy in Washington, D.C. David is currently completing a Masters degree in political science at the University of .

Alf Hales Research Award

The Institute On Governance (IOG) created the Alf Hales Research Award in 1999 to recognise the valuable educational experience that the Parliamentary Internship Programme provides in Canada.

The award seeks to promote research excellence and young people’s understanding of governance issues. It is handed out annually to the best Intern essay on a particular aspect of the Parliamentary system.

This year's winning paper on Parliamentary Secretaries by David Gamache Hutchison, reflects the originality and spirit that Alf Hales demonstrated when he created the Programme 30 years ago. Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 1 Institute On Governance

Abstract As elevated backbenchers, are Parliamentary Secretaries able to achieve greater participation in the Canadian political debate and ultimately the decision making process? The office of provides government backbench MPs with the opportunity to gain some executive and departmental experience, while also allowing the Prime Minister and Ministers to gauge their abilities. Parliamentary Secretaries also find themselves in the ambiguous situation of having their position defined by a personal relationship – the relationship between Minister and Parliamentary Secretary. The author undertakes an examination of the office of Parliamentary Secretary in the Canadian political system. In doing so, he presents the position’s history, its legal status, and the experiences of some Parliamentary Secretaries in the 1st session of the 36th Parliament. He questions whether Parliamentary Secretaries enjoy a special influence in Canadian governance. He offers suggestions for reforming the institution of Parliamentary Secretary.

Introduction According to many observers of Canadian politics, the power and spoils of public office begin and end with appointment to Cabinet. In what has evolved into a centralized, executive-centred Parliamentary system, policy making and legislation are, with few exceptions, in the hands of the Members of Parliament (MPs) within Cabinet.* As a result, in the governing of the country, little is left to engage the remaining backbench MPs. Perhaps the most sought after consolation prize available to the government backbench is the position of Parliamentary Secretary.

Some MPs find rewards in other roles. Numerous MPs find fulfilment in focussing their energies on constituency matters and observing an ombudsman role in Ottawa. Certainly, opposition MPs often attain a degree of satisfaction from their ongoing and ever challenging task of criticizing the government. Meanwhile, those who reach the position of Committee Chair look to the influential role that they play in the preparation of reports and the revision of legislation. Yet, none of these responsibilities carry with them the implied stature or perceived influence of the Parliamentary Secretary.

The office of Parliamentary Secretary, first introduced in Canada during the First World War, has emerged as an institution of the modern Canadian Parliamentary system. The office of Parliamentary Secretary provides government backbenchers with the opportunity to gain some executive and departmental experience, while also allowing the

*For the purposes of this study, “Cabinet” will include the position of Secretary of State. Although the Secretaries of State only sit on occasion in full Cabinet and are not Ministers of , they are indeed Privy Councillors, members of the Ministry, and are responsible to Parliament for the particular responsibilities that have been assigned to them. Secretaries of State do not have the service of Parliamentary Secretaries. 2 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

Prime Minister and senior ministers to gauge their abilities. Although the position serves this twofold function, it has also been a useful tool of the government to reward loyal backbenchers or to restrain irritating mavericks. By co-opting the latter group, the position restrains those who once sought to challenge the governing party.

My work in the office of Eleni Bakopanos, MP (Ahuntsic) and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice, my conversations with current and former Parliamentary Secretaries and Ministers and my research have revealed an interesting consensus regarding the position of Parliamentary Secretary. All three indicate that the position’s legal status is ambiguous, that its roles and responsibilities are undefined, and that its impact is unpredictable. While so many offices in the Canadian parliament system are by their nature ill-defined*, this lack of definition has reduced the influence Parliamentary Secretaries have on Canadian Governance. While constitutional ambiguity has assisted Canadian Prime Ministers in the centralization of power, constitutional ambiguity has also prevented Parliamentary Secretaries from realizing their potential.

Beyond these systemically imposed limitations, Parliamentary Secretaries also find themselves in the ambiguous situation of having their position defined by a personal relationship – the relationship between Minister and Parliamentary Secretary. In essence, the position is as important as the scope of the work the Minister assigns to the Parliamentary Secretary. In some cases it is difficult for a Minister to share the political limelight. In other cases Ministers prefer to rely on their personal staff, whose loyalties are clear and who often possess an expertise in the portfolio area. Meanwhile, certain Ministers are simply unsure of how to use their Parliamentary Secretary or do not possess a portfolio that implicates their Parliamentary Secretary. However, in many cases a dynamic relationship evolves, which benefits the work of the Minister, the experience of the Parliamentary Secretary, and Canadian governance. In the words of the Justice Minister, Anne McLellan: “Like any human relationship, the success of the Minister- Parliamentary Secretary relationship is based on chemistry – consisting of shared values and common objectives.”1

In this study I undertake an examination of the position of Parliamentary Secretaries in the Canadian Parliamentary system. This examination of the office of Parliamentary Secretary in the Canadian political system presents the position’s history, its legal status, and the experiences of some Parliamentary Secretaries. Further to the aim of uncovering the work of Parliamentary Secretaries, the paper also addresses broader issues of governance and the experience of MPs in the Canadian Parliament. As elevated backbenchers, are Parliamentary Secretaries able to achieve greater participation in the political debate and ultimately the decision making process?

*Canada has inherited a largely unwritten constitution from Britain. While the BNA Act sought to clarify the role of the Senate and the power of the provinces, it did not address such things as the office or powers of the Prime Minister or those of his closest advisors. Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 3 Institute On Governance

History As with so many of our parliamentary practices, the Canadian Parliamentary Secretary has its origins in the British Parliamentary tradition. Although it is difficult to determine clearly how and when the generic position of “Parliamentary or Under Secretary” came into existence, most observers date its arrival to the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when the “monarch’s ministers” were transformed into the modern British ministerial form of government. As increased amounts of power were devolved to Ministers and Secretaries of State, the Acts of Parliament generally included a provision for an Under- Secretary of State and often, but not always, Ministers were provided a Parliamentary Secretary.2 The first mention of a Parliamentary Secretary position in Canada may have come in 1850, when Robert Baldwin, an earlier proponent of responsible government, recommended that the Province of Canada establish a second “political office” to assist Ministers in their departmental duties.3 Meanwhile, Canada had an early association with Parliamentary Secretaries. Sir Charles Adderly, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the colonies, piloted the British North American Act through the British House of Commons in 1867, for the Colonial Secretary Lord Carnavan who sat in the House of Lords.

As Canada entered the twentieth century and the demands on federal cabinet ministers began increasing, numerous proposals were made to relieve ministers of some of their duties, while at the same time to provide training for potential cabinet ministers. Prior to this time, in 1887, Prime Minister John A. Macdonald established three “sub-Ministers,” with the office of Solicitor General to assist the Minister of Justice and Comptrollers of Customs and Inland Review to assist respectively the Minister of Trade and Commerce and the Minister of Finance. Concerning these “sub-Ministers” Macdonald said: “It is also provided that the heads of these sub-departments shall be Under-Secretaries as it were – to go in and sit, but not to be members of the Cabinet.”4 Nonetheless, there existed an increasing desire among Parliamentarians to establish the formal position of Parliamentary Secretary under the Minister as the British had done with Under- Secretaries for Secretaries of State and Parliamentary Secretaries for Ministers. In 1912 Richard Cartwright, a cabinet minister under Prime Ministers Mackenzie and Laurier, suggested that “what we need very much is to have a few posts like the English Parliamentary Under-Secretary, to which young politicians would be appointed without giving them Cabinet rank.”5

However, as is so often the case in Canadian history, the development of the Parliamentary Secretary in Federal Parliament practice is ultimately attributed to the demands of war. In order to relieve the heavily burdened Minister for External Affairs and the Minister for Militia and Defence, Prime Minister Robert Borden appointed Hugh Clark, MP for North Bruce, and Fleming McCurdy, MP for Shelburne and Queens, as their respective Parliamentary Secretaries in 1916. In 1918, a third Parliamentary Secretary was appointed to assist the minister responsible for the Department of Soldiers’ Civil Re-establishment. These first Parliamentary Secretaries were appointed by Order in 4 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

Council and were given an additional $5,000 per year to supplement their basic salary as Members of Parliament.6 Although Borden’s experiment appeared to be a rather earnest attempt at replicating the British system, the three Parliamentary Secretary positions died a natural death with the 13th Parliament, in 1921.

The revival of the Parliamentary Secretary in Canadian Parliamentary practice did not occur again until Canada returned to war in the Second World War. In the 1943 Throne Speech, the Governor General, the Earl of Athlone, outlined the King government’s need for ministerial assistants: “You will be asked to make provision for the appointment of parliamentary assistants to those ministers whose duties have become particularly onerous because of the demands of war.”7 Via Order-in-Council, King appointed seven “parliamentary assistants.” The motion to provide salaries for the new assistants read:

… appointed by the governor in council to be a parliamentary assistant to assist a minister of the crown in such a manner and to such extent as the minister may determine and to represent his department in the House of Commons in the absence of the minister therefrom, a salary of four thousand dollars per annum…8

The wording of this motion and the ensuing debate first outlined the assumed role and responsibilities of the new position. King made it clear “that the assistant to a minister would be expected to help the minister in any way the minister may think his services are likely to be most advantageous.”9 He also emphasized that although parliamentary assistants would be “persona grata” to the minister, they would not be held responsible to government, as a minister normally would be. While King was devolving upon the new assistants the ability to act and speak on behalf of the department and the minister, ultimately it was still the minister who was responsible to Parliament. Nonetheless, the roles and responsibilities of the new position may have been as unclear as its name. In the same speech, King referred to the new position by three terms: “assistant minister,” “assistant to the minister,” and “parliamentary assistant.”10

This informal, non-statutory system of appointing Parliamentary Assistants continued until 1958, when the Conservative government of John Diefenbaker suspended it with the intention of introducing legislation aimed at giving these appointments a statutory basis. With the largest majority in the history of the Canadian House of Commons (at the time), the Diefenbaker government passed the Parliamentary Secretaries Act in 1959. Not only did this legislation give the position its present name, but it also took steps to formalize the position, which had been so ambiguous under the King and St. Laurent governments. As provided in Section 3 of the Act: “The Parliamentary Secretary or Secretaries shall assist the minister in such a manner as the minister directs.”11 In the Debate on the Bill, Diefenbaker said: “… the system is one that will bring about a degree of apprenticeship for members who are chosen to occupy this high and important position (cabinet minister).”12 This statement implied that the tasks of the Parliamentary Secretaries would be ministerial in nature and that Parliamentary Secretaries could be considered for future Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 5 Institute On Governance

cabinet positions. While the new statutory nature of the position provided a greater degree of credibility and definition to the position, Diefenbaker then exacerbated the ambiguous nature of the position in the Bill’s Second Reading debate. In response to a question from an opposition member, the Prime Minister said: “ Member from Kootenay West asked whether the parliamentary secretaries are to be given the status of junior ministers, and without any qualification in this regard I say that they are not.”13 In essence, Diefenbaker was ensuring that his Parliamentary Secretaries would enjoy the same limbo that the earlier parliamentary assistants had experienced and at the same time, establishing the precedent in which the role of the current Parliamentary Secretary is based. Of further consequence to contemporary Parliamentary Secretaries, the 1959 Bill also proposed that Parliamentary Secretaries should be appointed for a period of twelve months.

In 1971, the Parliamentary Secretaries Act was amended by Section 25 of the Government Organization Act. Rather than clarifying the role and responsibilities of the Parliamentary Secretary, this legislation authorized that the number of Parliamentary Secretaries holding office at any time was to correspond with the number of ministers receiving salaries under the Salary Act. The Trudeau government increased the number of Parliamentary Secretaries because of the “need to free ministers from administration and to devote more time to policy development and the need to promote greater sensitivity of the public service to popular opinions.”14 The Parliamentary Secretaries Act was further revised by an amendment to the Salaries Act of 1974-75, which placed their salaries within the general Act to be revised on an annual basis, adjusted for inflation. While it was war that ushered in the need for Parliamentary Secretaries in the Borden and King governments, one can conclude that it was the majorities of the Diefenbaker and Trudeau governments, which reinforced their need. Diefenbaker, with the largest majority in the history of Canada at the time and Trudeau with the first Liberal majority in eleven years, may have been motivated as much by the need to keep backbenchers busy and disciplined, as they were by the need to provide valuable assistance to over-burdened ministers.

Although there may have been some thought given to the legislative and policy making role that “up and coming” backbenchers could play, it appears that the primary motive for the creation of the Parliamentary Secretary was utilitarian. During the Borden and King incarnations, Ministers who once spent a great deal of time in the House were increasingly becoming administrators due to the war. Suddenly, with Diefenbaker’s substantial majority in 1959, there was an important need to keep backbenchers busy and implicated. Finally, in the Trudeau era, Ministers became professional administrators, spending little time in the Chamber and again, it was essential to keep otherwise neglected backbenchers busy. 6 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

Status As has been earlier outlined, the statutory strength of the position of Parliamentary Secretary rests on the 1959 Parliamentary Secretaries Act and the 1971 amendment provided by Section 25 of the Government Organization Act, which are now consolidated under Sections 46 and 47 of the Act. While the 1971 legislation enabled governments to appoint more Parliamentary Secretaries, none of Diefenbaker’s successors saw fit to elaborate beyond: “The Parliamentary Secretary or Secretaries shall assist the minister in such a manner as the minister directs.” For example, there is only one mention of Parliamentary Secretaries in the Standing Orders of the House of Commons. According to SO 31(2):

A minister of the Crown, or a Parliamentary Secretary acting on behalf of a minister, may, in his or her place in the House, state that he or she proposes to lay upon the Table of the House, any report or other paper dealing with a matter coming within the administrative responsibilities of the government, and, thereupon, the same shall be deemed for all purposes to have been laid before the House.15

Meanwhile, there have been two Speaker rulings concerning Parliamentary Secretaries. The first, in 1974, declared that Parliamentary Secretaries did not have the right to ask questions of the government, as they are responsible for answering for the Government. The second, in 1984, specified that Parliamentary Secretaries may make statements on behalf of ministers during House time dedicated to minister’s statements.16

The clear lack of statutory authority of Parliamentary Secretaries is only equalled by the murky constitutional footing of the office. Early in this Century, Edward VII objected successfully that the Colonial Under-Secretary, Winston Churchill, could not be taken into Cabinet on the grounds that a subordinate should not belong to the same body as his chief. While Edward made it abundantly clear that the British Cabinet was out of reach for the young Winston Churchill, he failed to provide an adequate legal explanation as to why a Parliamentary Secretary cannot sit at the Cabinet table.17 The legality or constitutional status of the Canadian Parliamentary Secretary is equally ambiguous. Is the position of Parliamentary Secretary part of the Executive? The Ministry? Or are Parliamentary Secretaries simply a manifestation of ministerial responsibility? In 1946, A.D.P. Heeney attempted to define the constitutional status of the Parliamentary Secretary when he declared that King’s Parliamentary Assistants were neither Ministers of the Crown, members of the Privy Council, a member of the Committee of the Privy Council (Cabinet), nor a member of the Ministry.18 Although Heeney described what Parliamentary Secretaries were not, like Edward, he was unsuccessful in noting what they were.

Since the inception of the Conflict of Interest Code in 1994, Parliamentary Secretaries are held to the same ethical standards as Cabinet Ministers. In accordance with this equal Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 7 Institute On Governance standard, Parliamentary Secretaries are given the status of public office holder, a designation they share with Ministers of the Crown, members of ministerial staff, and full-time Governor in Council appointees.19 Yet while their status as public office holder obliges them to practice the same ethics as their superiors, there is no evidence that this status grants them ministerial powers in Parliament or in the department.

In defining the constitutional status of the Parliamentary Secretary, one must first and foremost keep in mind that Parliamentary Secretaries are not sworn into the Queen’s Privy Council. As such, they may not subsequently be sworn into office as a Minister of the Crown and be a part of the Ministry.20 In Canada, the Ministry and the Cabinet have usually been considered as the same body. As a result, it can be said that Parliamentary Secretaries are ministerial or executive in nature, but not a Minister of the Crown or a possessor of Executive power. They are, in a certain sense, backbenchers who are connected to Cabinet vicariously through the Minister.

As is examined later in this paper, the Parliamentary Secretary’s roles and responsibilities are extraneous to ministerial powers. The work of Parliamentary Secretaries is primarily service oriented, in that they replace the Minister in routine House matters and play a role in committee and caucus. It is rare for a Parliamentary Secretary to initiate or oversee legislative proposals and Parliamentary Secretaries never approve or oversee the work of the Department. Despite many additional tasks, Parliamentary Secretaries do not ultimately hold the authority or responsibilities that are inherently ministerial. Thus, it is the lack of responsibilities that preclude the Parliamentary Secretary from ultimately being responsible to Parliament.

Selection In describing the selection process, , MP ( South) and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs said: “You can sense it when it’s your turn to be selected as a Parliamentary Secretary. On the other hand, I had no idea that I would be going to Intergovernmental Affairs.” 21 Meanwhile, Morris Bodnar, who served as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry from 1996-97, revealed: “I received a phone call out of the blue from the Prime Minister. He asked me if I wanted to go to Industry, and that was it. I hadn’t lobbied, although I knew others had, and I had little expectation for that appointment.”22

Parliamentary Secretaries are appointed by Order-in-Council to one-year (usually renewed for a second year) terms and are awarded annually an additional $10,700 to their basic MP salary of $65,600 and non-taxable expense allowance of $21,700-$28,700.

In 1943 Mackenzie King offered the following insights into the selection of Parliamentary Secretaries: 8 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

In the appointment of parliamentary under-secretaries it is necessary that responsibility for the appointment must be shared. The Prime Minister himself has to take that responsibility of making the appointment, but it is imperative that he should make it in consultation with the minister who is at the head of the department in connection with the affairs of which the under- secretary will be called upon to serve. I have found, in forming governments, that there is no task in the world more difficult, and in some ways more unpleasant, than having to select some persons as colleagues, and to pass over others, because of considerations of which we must take account in this country in most of the appointments we make, considerations of race, religion, and the like.23

Mackenzie King’s commentary is useful in looking at the contemporary selection of Parliamentary Secretaries. While selection is technically always at the exclusive purview of the Prime Minister, currently, Parliamentary Secretaries are advised and co-ordinated by , the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff. Although Ministers are usually consulted, the selection of Parliamentary Secretaries also serves the interests and objectives of the Prime Minister’s Office.

Traditionally, the obvious counterbalance between Minister and Parliamentary Secretary has been religious and linguistic. However, with an increasingly secular society and an unusually regionalized Liberal caucus, this is decreasing in value. Nonetheless, in terms of linguistics, eleven of the twenty-six Parliamentary Secretaries are maternal speakers of the opposite official language of the Minister. There are also examples where the government has effectively deployed bilingual and regional counterbalance. For instance, Eleni Bakopanos, a bilingual allophone speaker from , has assisted the unilingual Justice Minister, Anne McLellan, in departmental announcements and ministerial press conferences. In terms of regional counterbalance, the obvious example is Reg Alcock, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, Stéphane Dion. Considering that national unity is the primary preoccupation of Minister Dion, a Québécois, it follows logically that a Westerner would be named as his Parliamentary Secretary. With the rise of women in the House, an increasing factor in the selection process is gender. Currently, in a House of sixty women (20 percent of total seats), seven of the twenty-six Parliamentary Secretaries (or 27 percent) are women and seven out of twenty-six (27 percent) are of the opposite gender of the Minister.

However, beyond “these considerations of which we must take account in this country,” to which Mackenzie King referred, the evolution of the Chrétien government presents additional factors which have played a role in the selection of Parliamentary Secretaries. As , MP () and former Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers of International Co-operation and Heritage described: “From my perspective, there have been three rounds of Parliamentary Secretaries. The first round was characterized as the consolation prize to those of the class of ’88 who didn’t make it into cabinet. The second round (those selected between 1995-97) was characterized by new Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 9 Institute On Governance

people who didn’t make it into cabinet. Now, the third round is characterized by those who didn’t make it into cabinet and missed the first two rounds. As the Parliament matures it’s becoming clearer that there are fewer and fewer places to put people.”24 Godfrey’s point of view may lead one to suspect that the office of Parliamentary Secretary is not necessarily being used as a breeding ground of the bright “up and comers,” but a convenient instrument to appease those who did not quite make it to cabinet.

Career Prospects It would seem that for many, the position of Parliamentary Secretary is a stepping-stone in their parliamentary career. As Diefenbaker suggested, Parliamentary Secretaries should act as apprentices and learn the proverbial ministerial ropes. However, when one considers the trend of the Chrétien government, this does not appear to be the case. Rather than providing a training ground for the next cabinet ministers, the position has become a tool to reward the loyal, silence the rebellious, and to keep the otherwise unoccupied busy.

Many point to the two-year rotational system. Whether Parliamentary Secretaries are outstanding, mediocre, or awful, they are essentially guaranteed the position for two years. In February 1996, all twenty-three Parliamentary Secretaries were removed, given the same form letter from the Prime Minister, and replaced. Consideration was not given to job performance, to acquired portfolio expertise, nor to the working relationship that had been developed between the Parliamentary Secretaries and the Ministers. Accompanying this first major purge of Parliamentary Secretaries, was a PMO press release which stated:

The Prime Minister has adopted the practise of previous governments of completely rotating Parliamentary Secretaries. “We have such an abundance of committed and talented MPs in the Government Caucus that I believe it is important to give as many of them as possible a chance to gain this valuable executive experience,” said the Prime Minister.25

As Table 1 displays (next page), since the inception of the office, it has generally been the rule that Parliamentary Secretaries only serve between one and two and a half years. Yet, despite the evidence that tradition reinforces the practice of the Chrétien government, is this practice necessarily the best policy? Current and former Parliamentary Secretaries alike, offered strong views on the subject. Although the recently appointed , MP (Elgin-Middlesex-London) and Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, conceded that “everyone ought to be given their turn,”26 most argued that the two-year rotational system was an obvious weakness of the office. , MP (Hamilton West) and former Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport (1996-98) said: “You’ve built a relationship with the Minister, respect from the 10 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

department and expertise in the portfolio. Then suddenly you’re unplugged and replaced with someone with no experience. It calls into question the efficiency of government.”27 , MP (-King-Aurora) and former Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers of Labour and Human Resources Development (1993-96) noted: “If everybody deserves to have a turn at being Parliamentary Secretary, what does that say about the value of the office?”28 Meanwhile, Clifford Lincoln, MP (Lac-Saint-Louis) and former Parliament Secretary to the Minister of the Environment (1993-96) observed: “If it makes sense for Parliamentary Secretaries to automatically leave after two years, why not for Ministers, the Speaker or Committee Chairs? It is an artificial creation, which makes no sense at all. This is why increasingly, square pegs are found in round holes. In my view, it trivializes the Parliamentary Secretary structure.”29 While it is easy to understand the frustrations of former Parliamentary Secretaries who enjoyed and took pride in their work, Morris Bodnar provided another perspective on the subject. “Initially,” he remarked, “ it was clear that there were a few Parliamentary Secretaries that didn’t belong in that position; after all, with a new government not all the Members were known. The two-year rotation system is an excellent device to allow the Prime Minister to remove Parliamentary Secretaries without offending anyone. Two years is more than enough time to prove yourself and if you have, you’ll be taken care of in the future.”30

Table 1

Length of Tenure by Parliamentary Secretaries

Prime Minister Time Period No of P.S. Appointments Avg. Time

King 1943-1948 20 1.5 yrs. St. Laurent 1948-1957 28 2.5 yrs. Diefenbaker 1957-1963 36 1.1 yrs. Pearson 1963-1968 30 1.5 yrs. Trudeau 1968-1979 202 1.0 yrs. Clark 1979-1980 22 0.75 yrs. Trudeau/Turner 1980-1984 94 1.3 yrs. Mulroney/Campbell 1984-1993 180 1.5 yrs. Chrétien 1993-1998 (July) 81 1.5 yrs.

There remain notable examples in support of Bodnar’s optimistic commentary. Maurizio Bevilacqua now sits as the Finance Committee Chair; Mary Clancy, who served as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration from 1994-96, is currently Canada’s Consul General in Boston; John Harvard, MP (Charleswood- Assiniboine), who served as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works in 1996, currently heads the Prime Minister’s Task Force on the Western Provinces; , MP (London North Ctr.), who served as Parliamentary Secretary to the Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 11 Institute On Governance

Minister of Transport from 1993-96, is currently the National Caucus Chair; and finally, , MP (Kingston and the Islands), who served as Parliamentary Secretary to the Government House Leader from 1993-1996, is currently the Deputy Speaker.

However, the number of former Parliamentary Secretaries who have made it to Cabinet remains low. Of all those who have served as Parliament Secretaries since 1993, only (Minister of Veteran’s Affairs), (Minister of National Revenue), (Minister of Agriculture), and (Minister of Labour) have become ministers of the Crown. Meanwhile, is the current Secretary of State for the Status of Women. While five appointments is a significantly low number, what remains remarkable is that Prime Minister Chrétien apparently holds a great deal of personal attachment to the apprenticeship nature of the office. In Chrétien, the Prime Minister’s biographer, Lawrence Martin, describes at length the impact that his stint (1966-67) as Parliamentary Secretary to Mitchell Sharp, then Minister of Finance, had on his career. Martin writes:

“Sharp personally requested Chrétien as his parliamentary secretary. He liked the way Chrétien applied himself, with such seriousness and dedication and ambition. These were the qualities Sharp wanted in an apprentice. Under Sharp’s wing, Chrétien applied himself with steady devotion. Sharp would never have another student as dedicated and keen, and Chrétien would never have another teacher who looked after him so well.”31

The Pearson government was also marked by numerous other examples of star Parliamentary Secretaries who rapidly rose to Cabinet. Prime Minister Trudeau rose from being Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson in 1965, to Justice Minister in 1967, and finally to Prime Minister in 1968. Also, Prime Minister rapidly moved from Parliamentary Secretary to Northern Affairs and Natural Resources in 1963 to Minister without Portfolio in 1965. In the Pearson years, fourteen of the thirty (forty-seven per cent) Parliamentary Secretaries were appointed to Cabinet. However, the Chrétien government remains very different from the Pearson government. Since 1993, Chrétien has made only twelve new Minister of the Crown appointments. Of the twelve, four had previously been Parliamentary Secretaries (Van Clief, Mifflin, Macauley, and Bradshaw), two had been Government Whips (Gagliano and Boudria), one had been a Secretary of State (), a National Caucus Chair (Jane Stewart), and another a backbencher (). Also, in the months leading up to and following the Québec Referendum of 1995, the Chrétien government parachuted three prominent Québec figures into cabinet. Of these, one came from provincial politics (Robillard), another from the private-sector (Pettigrew), and finally, one arrived from academia (Dion). Low turnover has been endemic in the Chrétien government and considering that Parliamentary Secretaries are not always chosen to be groomed into Ministers, it appears as though Parliamentary Secretaries have stood a fair chance of advancing to Cabinet. 12 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

Responsibilities In describing the responsibilities of Parliamentary Secretaries, Stéphane Dion, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, wrote:

The role of the Parliamentary Secretary is a very valuable one in our parliamentary system. Parliamentary Secretaries are uniquely placed to provide feedback from Caucus to the Executive and communicate government policy to the Caucus. In addition to liaison with Caucus, my Parliamentary Secretary has provided me with valuable insight into the concerns of their constituents and their region of Canada. Of course, my Parliamentary Secretary also has ongoing responsibilities in the House of Commons, particularly when I am unable to attend .32

Meanwhile, Anne McLellan, the Minister of Justice, stated: “My Parliamentary Secretary plays the vital role of being my eyes and ears in caucus, in committee, and in the House.”33

As Dion and McLellan described, the Parliamentary Secretary’s role is to assist the Minister in carrying out routine tasks in relation to the House of Commons. While much of the Parliamentary Secretary’s time is occupied in the House, they also play an important role in committee, in caucus, and are often given extra-parliamentary duties. Yet, in all things concerning Parliamentary Secretaries, the scope of their work is at the discretion of the Minister.

In The English Constitution, nineteenth century British Constitutional authority and Parliamentary Democracy advocate Walter Bagehot suggested that without the power to sustain or to dismiss the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the House would become merely a debating society.34 In many ways, Bagehot’s words have proven to be prophetic in today’s Canadian Parliament. Rather than affecting legislation, House debates generally fulfil a procedural function. Today’s ministers are policy-focussed administrators and as a result, debates in the House are secondary to this principal function. While many ministers could be great House orators, in the tradition of Macdonald and Laurier, most are not, principally because they spend very little time in the Chamber. Instead, Parliamentary Secretaries serve the function of moving departmental legislation through the House, while also covering for the Minister in the handling of Opposition Days, Private-Members’ business, questions on the order paper (written questions) and questions on the adjournment motion (otherwise known as the “late-show”). Parliamentary Secretaries are also responsible for covering for their absent Minister during Question Period. Although the rewarding nature of these occasionally mundane tasks is debatable, they play an important function. While Ministers are occupied with governing the country, the Parliamentary Secretary takes care of the routine matters of the House. In terms of House duties, Parliamentary Secretaries tend to be as busy as their Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 13 Institute On Governance

portfolio dictates. As Table 2 indicates, not all portfolios are as busy as others. For instance, since Stéphane Dion’s portfolio of Intergovernmental Affairs does not cover legislative responsibilities, Reg Alcock has not been called upon to deal with legislation. Conversely, Eleni Bakopanos may be the busiest of the Parliamentary Secretaries. Not only is this a reflection of the importance of the Justice portfolio, but in her view is due to the priorities of an Official Opposition that was “elected on a ‘law and order’ platform.”35

Table 2

Breakdown of House Activity in the 1st Session of the 36th Parliament

Related Government Bills Private Members Opposition Portfolio Reaching 2nd Bills Reaching 2nd Days Total Reading Reading

Agriculture 1 0 1 2 Canadian Heritage 6 0 1 7 Citizenship and Immig. 1 0 0 1 Environment 1 0 1 2 Finance 11 0 7 18 Fisheries and Oceans 1 0 1 2 Foreign Affairs 2 0 2 4 Health 1 1 4 6 House Leader 0 0 2 2 Human Resources Dev. 1 0 4 5 Indian Affairs and N.D. 6 0 1 7 Industry 6 2 2 10 Intergov. Affairs 0 0 3 3 International Trade 0 0 2 2 Justice 7 5 7 19 National Defence 1 0 1 2 National Revenue 2 0 0 2 Natural Resource 2 0 0 2 Prime Minister 2 5 1 8 Public Works 2 0 0 2 Solicitor General 3 0 1 4 Transport 3 0 0 3 Treasury Board 10 0 0 10 Veterans Affairs 1 0 0 1

In dealing with public bills and private members bills at Second and Third Reading, Parliamentary Secretaries work in close co-operation with the Minister’s political advisors, the Minister’s department, and the Whip’s office. Parliamentary Secretaries consult these bodies while assembling speaking lists for the debate. In many cases, Ministers wish to address their legislation at Second Reading, which will leave the 14 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

Parliamentary Secretary responsible to speak at Third Reading. It has also occurred that the Minister does not speak to the legislation at all, in which case the Parliamentary Secretary is left to introduce it at Second Reading. Nevertheless, MPs are only permitted to speak to each piece of legislation once. Typically, on the day of the debate, the Parliamentary Secretary receives a prepared speech by electronic mail from the Minister's department. While Parliamentary Secretaries are encouraged to personalize the text, the core of the speech is, in practice, left untouched. Meanwhile, the Parliamentary Secretary also receives talking points and other speeches from the Department for distribution to government members who are on the speaking list.

Although Ministers occasionally attend opposition days*, they seldom address Private Members bills and motions. In both cases, Parliamentary Secretaries are responsible for co-ordinating the government’s contribution to the debate. Again, speaking lists are created and the department sends the necessary speeches. It is important to note that there is a great deal of pressure to fill the speaking lists; for if a debate collapses, it could lead to a premature vote and the possibility of a confused or lost vote. This can be challenging, as not all government members have an interest in the subject matter or are prepared to speak from the department and Whip’s closely guarded script. Of a more routine nature are government responses to written questions and the late-show. Written questions (questions on the order paper) are those questions involving a lengthy, detailed or technical response with which the MP gives forty-eight hours notice of his or her intention to ask such a question and whether they request the answer to be given orally. The Parliamentary Secretary routinely submits written answers, prepared by the Department, to the House and the text appears in Hansard. However, should written questions not be answered within a forty-five day limit, they can be dealt with during the late-show (adjournment proceedings).36 The late-show takes place at 6:30 p.m. on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, at which time Parliamentary Secretaries will respond to expired written questions or to questions that were not satisfactorily answered during Question Period.37 As with their contributions in legislative debate, Parliamentary Secretaries will again deliver statements prepared by their Minister’s Department.

For many , the work of their Government amounts to the ten-second sound bites from Question Period observed on the evening news. From the perspective of Parliamentary Secretaries, participation in the show that is Question Period remains a highlight of the job. Question Period provides Parliamentary Secretaries the opportunity to impress their caucus colleagues and to joust publicly with the opposition. Of further importance however, preparation for Question Period also allows the Parliamentary

*Also referred to as allotted days or supply days, these days are devoted to the debate of a subject of the opposition’s choosing. There are twenty opposition days per parliamentary calendar year.38 Currently, Reform is allotted eight days, the Bloq Québécois six days, the NDP three days, and the Progressive Conservatives three days. On fourteen of the days a formal motion is voted upon. Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 15 Institute On Governance

Secretary access to Cabinet strategy, Ministerial briefs, and departmental tactical meetings. Depending on the access accorded by the Minister, certain Parliamentary Secretaries are encouraged to attend Departmental briefing sessions, given a copy of the Minister’s Question Period book, and attend the daily Cabinet Question Period preparation meeting co-ordinated by the House Leader, .

Table 3

Number of Question Period questions answered by each Parliamentary Secretary September, 1998-June, 1999

Parliamentary Secretary Questions Answered

Peter Adams, Government Leader 0 Eleni Bakopanos, Justice 23 Mauril Bélanger, Heritage 26 Robert Bertrand, National Defence 27 Claudette Bradshaw, International Co-op.* 1 Bonnie Brown, Human Resources 29 , Natural Resources 7 , Health 36 Brenda Chamberlain, Labour 7 Stan Drominsky, Transport 14 , Fisheries and Oceans 37 , Treasury Board 1 David Iftody, Indian Affairs and N.D. 24 Gar Knutson, Prime Minister 0 Walt Lastewka, Industry 11 Joe McGuire, Agriculture 18 , International Co-op.* 2 Carolyn Parish, Public Works 1 , National Revenue 5 , Foreign Affairs 17 , Solicitor General 24 , International Trade 21 Andrew Telegdi, Immigration 12 Paddy Torsney, Environment 15 , Finance 27 Bob Wood, Veterans Affairs 7

* With appointment to Cabinet on November 22, 1998, Claudette Bradshaw was replaced by Denis Paradis on January 26, 1999.

As Table 3 indicates above, not all Parliamentary Secretaries can expect equal participation in Question Period. First and foremost, the opposition dictates the issues to be raised in Question Period. While the questions are often unpredictable, most are of the “headline news” variety. Second, not all Ministers equally attend Question Period. For 16 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance instance, the portfolios of Foreign Affairs and International Trade require a great deal of international travel, while many high-profile Ministers tend to travel across the country making departmental announcements and attending fundraising events. Additionally, Wayne Easter, MP (Malpeque) and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, replaced the Minister for a long period of time due to the Minister’s absence for health reasons. Third, not all Parliamentary Secretaries will answer questions directed to their portfolio. Most often with sensitive issues, Parliamentary Secretaries will defer to the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister or another senior Minister. The Parliamentary Secretaries to the Prime Minister and to the House Leader never answer questions in Question period.

In 1985, the voluminous McGrath Report recommended that the practice of Parliamentary Secretaries sitting on their portfolio committee be eliminated. McGrath sought to empower the House and Private Members. Since committees were viewed as vehicles of the House and not the Executive, it was deemed unacceptable to have Parliamentary Secretaries sit on committees as “agents” of the Executive.39 The Mulroney government accepted this recommendation and for several years Parliamentary Secretaries could only sit on unrelated committees. However, in 1991, holding a slimmer majority and increasingly aggravated that opposition critics could sit on their portfolio committee, the Mulroney government abruptly reverted back to the practice of having Parliamentary Secretaries play a significant role on their portfolio committee. On June 2, 1999, Reformer, Keith Martin, MP (Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca) presented a Private- Members motion, M-634, to revert back to the McGrath recommendation.40

There remain only sixteen Standing Committees of the House of Commons that are directly related to ministerial portfolio areas. It is on these committees which Parliamentary Secretaries play an important role. In committee, the Parliamentary Secretary acts as the Minister’s advocate. Usually, the Parliamentary Secretary will advance the Minister’s arguments and absorb the Committee’s views. The Parliamentary Secretary then takes these views back to the Minister, who will in turn, respond back to the Committee through the Parliamentary Secretary. Predictably, this challenging function can lead to friction between the Parliamentary Secretary and committee members. Furthermore, Parliamentary Secretaries often serve as acting Whip of the Committee, instructing government Members how to vote on important matters and ensuring that there is always a majority for important votes. In addressing this difficult aspect of the job, Karen Kraft Sloan, MP () and former Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment (1996-1998) advised: “It is very important that colleagues understand the pressure that Parliamentary Secretaries face. It is also important that Parliamentary Secretaries work sensitively and honestly with their colleagues.” Regardless, on occasion the unnatural fit of “independent” committees and rigid party discipline in the Canadian system can cause complications. In this session’s vigorous C-32, Canadian Environmental Protection Act proceedings in the Environment committee, Paddy Torsney found herself in such a situation. CEPA, which underwent Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 17 Institute On Governance

five years of development, inter-department struggles and heavy industry lobbying, was met in committee with the critical perspectives of opposition members and Liberal environmental advocates Clifford Lincoln, Karen Kraft Sloan, and , MP (Davenport) and Chair of the Environment Committee. Paddy Torsney and the Committee painstakingly negotiated through a remarkable 560 amendments to the bill. “At times it was difficult,” commented Paddy Torsney, “But it just shows how important the committee stage is to the legislative process.”41

Although work in the House and in Committee takes up most of the Parliamentary Secretary’s time, there are also several “extra-Parliamentary” responsibilities that come with the position. These extra-Parliamentary responsibilities appear to vary more than other tasks among the Parliamentary Secretaries. Some Parliamentary Secretaries are relied upon to be the Minister’s advocate and liaison in Caucus. Despite complaints by Parliamentary Secretaries that their position silences them in otherwise free-wheeling Caucus meetings, this advocate and liaison role appears to be important in some cases. An interesting example is the role that Tony Valeri, MP (Stoney Creek) and Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance played in the development of the 1999 Budget. It is reported that although he occasionally contradicted the Finance Minister, , Valeri was used by Martin as a “trump card” in intensive closed door deliberations. As a Finance staffer noted: “If Paul didn’t like the way an argument was going, he’d turn to Tony and put him on the spot and say, ‘Well I think caucus thinks this, so what do you think?’”42 Because staffers and bureaucrats are barred from Caucus, Tony Valeri played the role of Caucus authority, if not representative. “Extra- Parliamentary” duties can also call upon Parliamentary Secretaries to do anything from representing the Minister at public events in her or his absence, to meeting with lobbyists and civil leaders.

Beyond the more routine nature of many Parliamentary Secretary responsibilities in the House, the work of Parliamentary Secretaries in Committee and in “extra-Parliamentary” settings appears to offer the position more responsibilities and increased participation in the political debate. Nevertheless, in examining the responsibilities of Parliamentary Secretaries, it remains evident that the position is used primarily as a device of the Executive. Moreover, it is clear that Parliamentary Secretary responsibilities are limited as a means of empowering these “elevated” backbenchers.

Job Satisfaction Although most Parliamentary Secretaries are quick to point out that their position as Parliamentary Secretary was a positive step forward in their parliamentary career, many note that the experience and the impact of their work could have been improved. For every Parliamentary Secretary who described the rewarding nature of working along side a busy Minister, others lamented the fact that they were “shut-out” of decision making or that their Minister had no idea of how to exploit their skills. While many noted that it 18 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance was exhilarating to answer questions in Question Period, others complained that all their time was absorbed by mundane House duties.

For many Parliamentary Secretaries, the access and exposure to Executive government is one of the most rewarding aspects of the position. Karen Kraft Sloan remarked: “More than anything, the knowledge you gain as a Parliamentary Secretary dispels many of the myths and has made me a more effective backbencher. Since my time as Parliamentary Secretary, I have been able to keep and use the many contacts that I developed with departmental officials and environmental groups.”43 In other cases, Parliamentary Secretaries can be in the position of having a Minister assign to them special legislative responsibilities. Maurizio Bevilacqua described the challenge of being the government’s point-man in sixty-five town hall meetings of the Social Security Review of 1994. “My time as Parliamentary Secretary was a success,” he said, “because of the combination of the gracious Minister (Axworthy) I was working with, the legislation and the events of the time.”44 Stan Keyes described the gratification of developing a report (the Keyes Report) while Transport Committee Chair and eventually bringing it into the House as legislation (Canada Marine Act) while Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport. Meanwhile, Eleni Bakopanos described the value of working with a Minister (McLellan) who consistently considered her point of view and advice on legislation.45 Although it can be viewed as a burden, Parliamentary Secretaries can also find satisfaction in the role of intermediary – between the Minister and Caucus, between the Minister and the Committee, and occasionally between the Minister and opposition MPs.

Nevertheless, some expectations are never met. MPs expecting or at least hoping that they would have one foot inside the Cabinet room are often disappointed to realize that Parliamentary Secretaries are usually excluded from policy development and decision making in our political system. There is always the possibility that a constructive relationship will never be struck between the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary. Peter Adams, MP (Peterborough) and Parliamentary Secretary to the House Leader observed: “In some cases, the Parliamentary Secretary can be a spare wheel with a slightly flat tire. There are examples where departmental and ministerial staffs just don’t know what to do with the service of a Parliamentary Secretary. Then there are some Parliamentary Secretaries who can’t even get a meeting to discuss general issues with their Minister. Occasionally, the lack of institutional memory on the Hill, can hurt the experience of a Parliamentary Secretary.”46 John Godfrey added: “Generally, Ministers have an inability to fully utilize their Parliamentary Secretaries. This is usually due to the Minister’s predisposition – some are inexperienced, others are centralizers, while others still, can be insecure or even disorganized.”47 As has already been discussed, the scope and breadth of a Parliamentary Secretary’s responsibilities are limited, thus the experience is ultimately dependent upon the fundamental relationship between the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary. Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 19 Institute On Governance

Upon receiving the news of the removal of the twenty-three Parliamentary Secretaries in 1996, , MP ( East) and former Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Heritage (1993-1996) held a (retirement) party for all the removed Parliamentary Secretaries. One notable absentee from the festivities was Clifford Lincoln, who sent a letter that was read aloud to the celebrants. Beyond its sardonic tone, Lincoln’s letter* provides a light-hearted account of some of the frustrations of the position. It read:

March 11, 1996

To past P.S.’s Assembled c/o Ms. Albina Guarnieri, MP Mississauga East

Dear Colleagues and Friends,

How sad I am to miss the Official Wake of the distinguished late members of the “B” Team! However, allow me to rejoice that the Wake should take place on the eve of St. Patrick’s Day, and be imbued with the wild spirit of traditional Irish wakes.

As our collective burial as Low Team-members is being celebrated, let us look back on those momentous two years and some, and reflect on our amazing achievements. The list of the latter is so extensive, that I will confine myself to these shining examples:

1. Standing guard every Friday, before a near-empty and sleepy House, awaiting the question or questions that never came. 2. Travelling to Nowhere, Outer Canada, in mid-February, to deliver a barn-burner to the twenty-two adult citizens of the snow-bound and deep-frozen village. 3. Receiving constant delegations of lobbyists, hucksters and snake-oil peddlers of any and all varieties of shapes, sizes, and wares, which the dignity and grandeur of the members of the High Team prevented them from smelling or seeing, let alone addressing. 4. Applauding wildly while our Seniors fumbled the ball, in the hope they would be deceived into believing they and not our adversaries scored the touch-down. 5. Waiting for the Green Lim-ou-seene at the Bus stop whilst members of the High Team glided by in the splendour of their near-empty Blue Lim-ou-seenes. (Ed. Note: Nothing dramatizes Highs and Lows as the Green-and-Blue-Tango.)

While a P.S., I have been called many names directly, and also behind my back: Post- Scriptum, Puny Skunk, Pink Shadow, Performing Seal, Pious Sod, Parlour Soldier, and always, Poor Shit.

Despite the slurs, despite the offence, despite the humiliation, I bore my title with as much dignity and courage as my shame could allow. In public I smiled, in private I

*Reprinted with permission of the author. 20 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

sometimes sobbed, but nobody ever knew my grief – except for a colleague who once came upon me in the Gentlemen’s boudoir, wiping away my tears as I heaved the ultimate sob.

When I received the Prime Minister’s letter advising me in such lofty and sincere language that I had served my country with intelligence, nobility, dedication, and utmost efficiency. I knew it was true – because Prime Ministerial declarations are always true. Yet I could not help wonder why, if I had been so proficient, I was being fired at the same time. My inherent sense of respect and modesty has led me to conclude that even though I fail to understand, it must be right and just nevertheless – because Kings, Queens, and Prime Ministers are always right and just.

Now, when the Prime Minister actually called me to confirm how wonderful I had been, I believed it even more strongly than ever before – thinking I must be a really cool dude if the Great One himself alights upon my little self courtesy of Ma Bell. In respect and awe, I did not have the courage to ask Him how brilliance and firing fit together. So the mystery remains, and sadly I have no answer to share with you.

All jokes aside, I had the chance of toiling alongside a wonderful and caring human being in Sheila, ever thoughtful and never taking herself seriously – and always able to share a laugh. So I had a great time, as I will continue to have. For, after all, happiness and fulfilment are within oneself, and don’t take titles to achieve.

It has been great working with all of you, other Pink Shadows, and as I recall always in mutual and friendly understanding even when opinions differed and respective files forces us to divergent paths.

Onward and beyond, and may the Green Limmos be there promptly when the chill winds blow and frost bites the ears into submission.

As always,

CLIFFORD LINCOLN P.P.S. (Past Pink Shadow)48

The Future of the Position No study of Parliament could be complete without offering some suggestions to “reform” the system. Unfortunately, there is a predominant view in Canada that our system of governance is inherently flawed and magnificent changes (such as those that are often discussed for the Senate) are in order. This view often ignores the reality that the current Canadian political system has overseen the development of a nation that enjoys a dynamic economy, a quality of life second to none, and the admiration of the international community. This point of view also often disregards the consequences and indeed, the further complications that grandiose “reform” initiatives would bring. Nonetheless, as this paper observes, the functioning of the position of Parliamentary Secretary is not without its weaknesses. Weaknesses that, in my view, could be remedied with modest adjustments. The following observations are intended to provide a method of improving the experience and impact of the Parliamentary Secretaries, the assistance Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 21 Institute On Governance

to Ministers, and ultimately Canadian governance. Changes ought to be adopted which would enable Parliamentary Secretaries to move beyond routine House duties and play a greater role in the decision making process.

If one is to work exclusively on the presumption that the strengths and the weaknesses of the position of Parliamentary Secretary are based on the fundamental Minister- Parliamentary Secretary relationship, then there may be very few changes that can be made to the position. Although some would say, as did John Godfrey that “you cannot legislate a better relationship,” it would seem that more could be done to facilitate a more productive relationship. Peter Adams was quick to note that “the lack of institutional memory must be overcome. Should my Minister and I find the key to the Minister- Parliamentary Secretary relationship, it will be forgotten and lost as soon as my appointment is terminated.” 49 He suggested that new Ministers and new Parliamentary Secretaries attend a formal and frank briefing session with former Parliamentary Secretaries in which expectations, scenarios, and experiences could be shared. While this progressive initiative would undoubtedly be constructive, it may also ask parliamentary colleagues to do the impossible – display vulnerability and confide in each other. A more appropriate approach may be to put the onus on the Minister, the senior partner of the relationship, to embrace the work of their Parliamentary Secretary. Speaking on this theme, Anne McLellan observed: “The Minister must send the message to the political staff and the department that the Parliamentary Secretary is an integral part of the government team and in essence, an extension of the Minister.”50 Without question, the message must also come from the PMO. When the PMO speaks, MPs, Parliamentary Secretaries, and Ministers listen. Further guidance from this body, would surely strengthen the position of Parliamentary Secretary.

Evidently, the dissatisfaction that surrounds the current method of appointment and the two-year rotational system must be addressed. Would the position not receive an immediate surge of legitimacy if the two-year rotational system were removed? Despite the PMO’s understandable propensity to avoid unnecessary headaches, it would also be an effective innovation if the PMO undertook a regular review of the work of Parliamentary Secretaries. The Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff, the Minister, and the Parliamentary Secretary could meet annually to discuss the state of the working relationship. Parliamentary Secretaries could be permitted to remain under their Minister for a longer period of time, could be removed at anytime if they are not performing or be transferred to another Minister or position.

Interestingly, when asked what changes they would like to see brought to the position, many Parliamentary Secretaries commented that they require more staff for the workload. Evidently, since the time of many Parliamentary Secretaries is at a premium, so is the time of their staffs. The typical MP usually has two Ottawa-based assistants, who provide administrative and legislative assistance. It appears that when Parliamentary Secretary responsibilities are added to the already demanding work of the MP’s office, it 22 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance can occasionally put incredible stress on the MP’s resources. This seems to be most pronounced in the major portfolio areas of Justice, Health, Finance, Industry, and Foreign Affairs. Indeed, this problem accentuates the fact that, while all Ministers are equal on paper and all Parliamentary Secretaries are in theory also equal, their portfolios are not. Although ministerial staffs and departmental staffs vary greatly in size, those of the Parliamentary Secretary do not. Undoubtedly, additional resources for staff would be an important addition to busy Parliamentary Secretaries.

The difficulty of unequal portfolios also calls into question the need of every Minister to have a Parliamentary Secretary and whether some ministerial portfolios could utilize an elevated Junior Minister. As portfolios tend to be inherently ranked in importance, perhaps the government’s Executive offices should be tiered accordingly. While the British Parliamentary Secretary structure is much different, it may provide a guide to how the Canadian Parliamentary Secretary position could be altered. In Westminster, as Table 4 shows, Ministers of the Crown and Secretaries of State, who share equal power, have the service of not only Parliamentary Secretaries (or Under-Secretaries of State), but Private Parliamentary Secretaries (PPS). British Parliamentary Secretaries assist Ministers, as do Canadian Parliamentary Secretaries, in their parliamentary work, fulfil a liaison role with caucus and the department, and occasionally oversee the development of legislation. Although British Parliamentary Secretaries appear to be responsible for many of the same tasks as their Canadian counterparts, they are looked upon as Junior Ministers and as a result, possess more statutory power and responsibility. Also resembling the Canadian Parliamentary Secretary is the British PPS. The British PPS play a more informal role in the British Executive structure. Generally, they are the youngest of the government MPs, are hand chosen by the Ministers, do not receive extra remuneration, and play an informal role as apprentice and caucus representative. The PPS does not speak on behalf of the Minister in the House and is not viewed as an extension of the Minister.51

Table 4 situates the Canadian Parliamentary Secretary between tier 3 and 4. In my view, the optimal place for the Canadian Parliamentary Secretary should be in tier 3, where they would have greater status and further legislative and departmental responsibilities. Ideally, the number of Parliamentary Secretaries should be reduced to those Ministers who most need their services and where a Parliamentary Secretary could make a substantial impact on policy development. These “tier 3” Parliamentary Secretaries would optimally have a degree of expertise in the portfolio area, be experienced Parliamentarians, or be bright “up and comers.” Consequently, this proposal would also call for the addition of “tier 4” Parliamentary Secretaries to work with all Ministers and Secretaries of State. Like the British Private Parliamentary Secretary, the Canadian “tier 4” Parliamentary Secretary would not be paid, would not speak on behalf of the Minister in the House, and would have an informal relationship with the Minister. This would also provide “tier 4” Parliamentary Secretaries the opportunity to establish relationships with Ministers, learn the ministerial portfolio, and gain a degree of Executive experience. Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 23 Institute On Governance

By tiering the Parliamentary Secretary structure, Ministers requiring busy and vital Parliamentary Secretaries would be given Parliamentary Secretaries with increased legitimacy, responsibility, and ultimately capability. Meanwhile, portfolios that are less exigent or involved would be given the service of more appropriate assistance.

Table 4

Executive Structure Compared

Tier Britain Canada

1 Prime Minister Prime Minister

Minister Secretary of State Minister 2

Secretary of State Parliament Sec. Under-Sec. of State 3

Parliamentary Secretary

4 Private Parliamentary Secretary

This study examines the position and experiences of Parliamentary Secretaries in the Canadian parliamentary system. It would seem, that as “Executive Backbenchers,” Parliamentary Secretaries could possess an elevated standing and potentially a greater role in Canadian governance from other MPs. Unfortunately, as this paper presents, this is not the case. While often busy and exposed to Ministerial initiatives, as elevated backbenchers, Parliamentary Secretaries play a limited role in the process of decision- making and policy-making. The position of Parliamentary Secretary continues to be a device of the Executive, rather than an empowerment of backbenchers. In many ways, the experience of Parliamentary Secretaries may be a symptom of a Parliamentary system that is suffering a significant democratic deficit and lack of diffusion of powers. Like other Canadian legislative institutions, the potential role that Parliamentary Secretaries could play in the political process has yet to be fully realized. 24 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

Interviews I would like to thank all of the Parliamentarians and parliamentary staff who were gracious enough to take the time to meet with me. Their candid conversations contributed greatly to this study. The Hon. Anne McLellan, Minister of Justice, May 28, 1999. The Hon. , Secretary of State (Latin America & Africa), June 4, 1999. Paddy Torsney, MP, May 31, 1999. , MP, May 28, 1999. Peter Adams, MP, May 25, 1999. Eleni Bakopanos, MP, May 25, 1999. Morris Bodnar (former MP), May 20, 1999. Clifford Lincoln, MP, May 4, 1999. Karen Kraft Sloan, MP, April 29, 1999. John Godfrey, MP, April 27, 1999. Reg Alcock, MP, April 21, 1999. Stan Keyes, MP, April 20, 1999. Maurizio Bevilaqua, MP, April 20, 1999. Gar Knutson, MP, April 19, 1999. Camille Montpetit, Deputy Clerk of the House of Commons, March 1, 1999. Jamie Robertson, Constitutional and Legal Affairs Researcher, Library of Parliament, May 21, 1999.

I am also appreciative for the written correspondence I received from the following Ministers: The Hon. Sheila Copps, Minister of Canadian Heritage, June 11, 1999. The Hon. Marcel Massé, President of the Treasury Board, May 31, 1999. The Hon. David Anderson, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, May 25, 1999. The Hon. Stéphane Dion, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, April 16, 1999. The Hon. Claudette Bradshaw, Minister of Labour, March 25, 1999. Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 25 Institute On Governance

Notes

1 Interview conducted on May 28, 1999. 2 A.R. Kear, The Parliamentary Secretary in Britain and in Canada (Queen’s University,thesis, 1965), p. 7 3 Ibid. p. 6 4 Canada, House of Commons Debates, 1887, 190. 5 Richard Cartwright, Reminiscences (: William Briggs, 1912) 288, as quoted in W.A. Matheson, The Prime Minister and the Cabinet (Toronto: Methuen, 1976) 68. 6 J.E. Glenn, “Parliamentary Assistant: Patronage or Apprenticeship?” Fleming’s Canadian (Toronto: Press, 1997), 49. 7 Can. House of Commons Debates, 1943, 2. 8 Can. House of Commons Debates, 1943, 2,342. 9 Can. House of Commons Debates, 1943, 2, 344. 10 Can. House of Commons Debates, 1943, 2, 342-2, 366. 11 Statutes of Canada: 7-8 Eliz. II, c.15. 12 Can. House of Commons Debates, 1959, 2,187. 13 Can. House of Commons Debates, 1959, 2, 362. 14 Can. House of Commons Debates, 1971, 27,772. 15 Canada, House of Commons, Standing Orders (Ottawa: The House, 1998), 15. 16 Alistair Fraser, W.F. Dawson, and John Holtby, Beauchesne’s Parliamentary Rules & Forms, 6th Edition (Toronto: The Carswell Company, 1989), 122. 17 Kear, The Parliamentary Secretary in Britain and in Canada, 52. 18 A.D.P. Heeney, “Cabinet Government in Canada: Some recent Developments in the Machinery of the Central Executive” The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, August 1946, Volume 12, n.3) 284, 297-8 19 Office of the Ethics Councillor, Conflict of Interest Code. Website: strategis.ic.gc.ca/SSG/oe00002e.html 26 Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada Institute On Governance

20 Peter W. Noonan, The Crown and Constitutional Law in Canada (: Shipnoon Publications, 1998), 152-156. 21 Interview conducted on April 21, 1999. 22 Interview conducted on May 20, 1999. 23 Can. House of Commons Debates, 1943, 2,343. 24 Interview conducted on April 27, 1999. 25 Prime Minister’s Office, Press Release, February 23, 1996. 26 Interview conducted on April 19, 1999. 27 Interview conducted on April 20, 1999. 28 Interview conducted on April 20, 1999. 29 Interview conducted on May 4, 1999. 30 Interview conducted on May 20, 1999. 31 Lawrence Martin, Chrétien, Volume 1 (Toronto: Lester Publishing, 1995), 167. 32 Hon. Stéphane Dion, Letter, April 16, 1999 33 Interview conducted on May 28, 1999. 34 Originally published in 1867. Walter Bagehot, The English Constitution (London: C.A. Wats & Co., 1964), 150-182. 35 Interview conducted on May 25, 1999 36 Ibid., 33-34. 37 Ibid., 39. 38 Canada, House of Commons, Précis of Procedure (Ottawa: The House, 1996), 86. 39 Canada, House of Commons, Report of the Special Committee on the Reform of the House of Commons, (Ottawa: The House, 1985), 18. 40 Keith Martin, MP, Press Release, June 2, 1999. 41 Interview conducted on May 31, 1999. 42 Paul Wells, “How the Budget was Born,” The [Toronto], February 17, 1999, A3. 43 Interview conducted on April 29, 1999. Executive Backbenchers or Political Nobodies? Role of Parliamentary Secretaries in Canada 27 Institute On Governance

44 Interview conducted on April 20, 1999. 45 Interview conducted on May 25, 1999. 46 Interview conducted on May 25, 1999. 47 Interview conducted on April 27, 1999. 48 Clifford Lincoln, MP, Letter, March 11, 1996. 49 Interview conducted on May 25, 1999. 50 Interview conducted on May 28, 1999. 51 British Cabinet Office, Questions of Procedure for Ministers (London: Whitehall, 1992), paragraphs 45-48.