DOCSLIB.ORG

Time Allocation in the House of Commons T

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Time Allocation in the House of Commons T Silencing Parliamentary Democracy or Effective Time Management? Time Allocation in the House of Commons by Yves Yvon J. Pelletier 2000 CanLIIDocs 228 Is "time allocation" the best means by which to silence the opposition or does it allow rather for effective time management in the House of Commons? In 1969, the Trudeau government adopted, not without a vigorous reaction from opposition parties, a new procedure that allotted a certain period of time for a debate, reducing the use of closure. Despite promises that this measure would never be used, 150 time allocation motions were adopted by the House of Commons since December 1971. This article analyses the context in which time allocation was adopted and determines which government has used it most often. he centralization of political powers in the hands of of time could be allocated for debate. The partisan Tsenior management within the office of the Prime position when this measure was adopted did not prevent Minister and the central agencies of the federal its use by all federal govemments since 1971, on 163 government cannot alone account for the reduction in the occasions. This article examines the decline of the legislative role of Canadian Parliamentarians. In fact, legislative role of MPs as the result of time allocation and changes to the Standing Orders of the House of determines which government, from Trudeau to Commons by its members over the years have limited the Chrétien, have made most frequent use of it in terms of opportunities of private members to influence the final the number of seats held by the government, sitting days wording of government bills. With growing and bills introduced and passed. intervention by the Government of Canada in the post This article contributes to a new trend in political sci- war economy, the number of government initiatives ence that studies the centralization of powers within the increased rapidly, adding to the work of the House. executive to the detriment of Canada's Parliament. A Accordingly, it became necessary to set up mechanisms number of political scientists state that Prime Ministers to manage the time allocated to debate so that a final take advantage of the loyalty and the inexperience of decision could be made in a reasonable period of time. their members and use his/her persuasion skills to limit, However, a balance had to be struck between the right to if not silence, their opposition to government measures speak for an appropriate length of time and Parliament's on the public stage.' In caucus, however, government right to reach decisions. Since the use of closure upset backbenchers can express their disagreement with the this balance, the Trudeau government adopted a new content of bills and try to influence Cabinet. From this, procedure in the House of Commons whereby a period political scientist Donald Savoie concludes that Cana- dian MPs, even those on the government side, are not elected to govern but rather to ensure that those who do are held accountable for their decisions.2 In addition, in Yves Yvon J. Pelletier was a Parliamentary Intern from 1999-2000. order to maintain Cabinet dominance in the legislative This article is based on his research essay which was awarded the Alf process, government members have rejected the relaxa- Hales prize as the best paper submitted by the 1999-2000 Interns. 20 CANADIAN PARLIAMENTARY REVIEW /WINTER 2000-2001 tion of party lires in the House in 1985-86, a decision that vote pitting the members of the government against the would have increased the legislative role of members to members of the other parties. Not surprisingly, the oppo- the detriment of the executive.3 The introduction of time sition members described the amendments to the Stand- allocation is another example of the executive's desire to ing Orders as "the will of the government only". maintain full control over the legislative process in the Following a long debate and just one day before the House of Commons. House of Commons rose for the summer recess, the 6 Towards Tinte Allocation Trudeau government invoked closure on the debate. In response to this motion, the Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, Robert Stanfield, said: The passage of a bill in 1956 on public funding fora pipe- line by a company partly owned by American interests The use of closure to force through mle changes, which set a precedent in the history of Canada's Parliament. are opposed by every member of the opposition, is of course an aggravation, and the use of this method of The St-Laurent government, using its majority in the forcing through rules is so completely foreign to the House of Commons and imposing closure at each stage traditions of this House as to constitute a breach of of the bill, ensured its passage in less than fifteen days. privilege. If the rules can be changed in these Finding his right to speak denied at each stage of the bill, circumstances, and if closure can be resorted to in order 2000 CanLIIDocs 228 Conservative MP Donald Fleming said: "The Canadian to implement these rule changes, and can be used so as to alter fundamentally the very nature and role of the House of Commons has been gagged and fettered in this House of Commons, then we are in a very sorry state debate by a despotic government. You [the government] indeed in so far as democracy and freedom are are jeopardizing the institutions that have proven them- concerned.7 selves the bastions of democratic freedom and destroy- During this brief debate, the opposition members ar- ing the rights of the minority in the House. This gued as one that parliamentary procedure should give all stratagem was rot given birth in any democratic mental- parties equal privilege in a 'United debate and that ity".4 Despite the passage of this bill and the vigorous re- amendments to Standing Orders should be based on a action of opposition MPs and the public, the use of consensus. In the defence of his government's actions, closure in the pipeline debate gave rise to longstanding Trudeau listed the parliamentary reforms his govem- resentment. Clearly, the Pearson government's decision ment had put in place since 1968, such as the funding of a to apply closure to the debate on the Canadian flag in research service for the opposition and the institution of 1964 reinforced the need to pass a new means of time supply days. "Are these the acts of a government which management less stringent than closure. is seeking to muzzle the opposition" Trudeau wondered, Between 1964 and 1969, the House of Commons mod- in the context of replacing a measure that was precarious ernized its Standing Orders by adopting new rules for a and at times inefficients Despite a last ditch attempt by trial period in order to find another way to manage time. the opposition to send rule 75C back to committee with A number of procedural committees examined the ques- instructions to change it, the House of Commons passed tion as well, but in the absence of a unanirnous decision, it on July 24,1969. In a vote of 142 to 84, it agreed to adopt they all agreed that the Standing Orders of the House of the report of the procedure committee. Ironically, the Commons could rot be amended without unanirnous time allocation measure was passed only through the use consent. In June 1969, the government majority on a of closure, the very rule it was to suppose to lighten. newly created procedure committee proposed three new ways to apply time allocation to debate in the House. The First Use of Standing Order 75C Standing order 75A would permit the allocation of a specified period of time, when "there is agreement An important precedent was set in the December 1,1971 among the representatives of all parties"; Standing Or- proceedings of the House of Commons with the presen- der 75B would apply when "a majority of the representa- tation of the first time allocation motion in its current tives of several parties have come to an agreement in form. Under study was Bill C-259, The Incarne Tax Act, a respect of a proposed allotment of days or hours"; and voluminous tax bill of 707 pages, together with the 97 Standing Order 75C, the most contentious of the three, amendments proposed by the opposition, that was de- would permit "[when no] agreement could be reached bated in the committee of the whole for over 25 days. On under the provisions of Standing Order 75A or 75B (...), December 2 and 14, 1971, the House of Commons voted that a minister of the Crown [may] propose a motion for on two time allocation motions under Standing Order allotting time".5 Although the opposition parties sup- 75C, imposing a period of four days to complete debate ported the first two recommendations of the report, in the committee of the whole and three days at third Standing Order 75C was passed by the committee after a reading of the bill. The President of the Privy Council, WINTER 2000-2001 / CANADIAN PARLIAMENTARY REVIEW 21 the Honourable Allan MacEachen, and the Minister of From Precedent to Norm: The Use of Time Allocation Since 1971 Justice, the Honourable John Turner, supported the use of this rule to enable the government to assume its re- From December 1971, when time allocation was first sponsibilities and the House to assume its own by decid- used in the House of Commons, to October 2000, 163 ing on the bill. time allocation motions were presented in the Chamber.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Core 1..104 Hansard (PRISM::Advent3b2 6.50.00)
    CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 138 Ï NUMBER 116 Ï 2nd SESSION Ï 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Wednesday, June 11, 2003 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 7131 HOUSE OF COMMONS Wednesday, June 11, 2003 The House met at 2 p.m. challenged clients received a donation from Sun Country Cable, a donation that will enable the centre to continue its work in our Prayers community. Sun Country Cable donated the building. This building is next to Kindale's existing facility and both properties will eventually lead to construction of a new centre. In the meantime, the Ï (1405) building will be used for training and respite suites. [English] I am proud to be part of a community that looks out for those less The Speaker: As is our practice on Wednesday we will now sing fortunate. Charity does begin at home. O Canada, and we will be led by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. *** [Editor's Note: Members sang the national anthem] [Translation] SOCIÉTÉ RADIO-CANADA STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Mr. Bernard Patry (Pierrefonds—Dollard, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I would like to share some of my concerns about the recent decision [English] by Société Radio-Canada to cancel its late evening sports news. CHABAD Hon. Art Eggleton (York Centre, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I rise to I am worried, because last year this crown corporation had also decided to stop broadcasting the Saturday night hockey games, La pay tribute to Chabad Lubavitch which is the world's largest network Soirée du hockey.
    [Show full text]
  • The NDP's Approach to Constitutional Issues Has Not Been Electorally
    Constitutional Confusion on the Left: The NDP’s Position in Canada’s Constitutional Debates Murray Cooke mcooke@yorku.ca First Draft: Please do not cite without permission. Comments welcome. Paper prepared for the Annual Meetings of the Canadian Political Science Association, June 2004, Winnipeg The federal New Democratic Party experienced a dramatic electoral decline in the 1990s from which it has not yet recovered. Along with difficulties managing provincial economies, the NDP was wounded by Canada’s constitutional debates. The NDP has historically struggled to present a distinctive social democratic approach to Canada’s constitution. Like its forerunner, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), the NDP has supported a liberal, (English-Canadian) nation-building approach that fits comfortably within the mainstream of Canadian political thought. At the same time, the party has prioritized economic and social polices rather than seriously addressing issues such as the deepening of democracy or the recognition of national or regional identities. Travelling without a roadmap, the constitutional debates of the 80s and 90s proved to be a veritable minefield for the NDP. Through three rounds of mega- constitutional debate (1980-82, 1987-1990, 1991-1992), the federal party leadership supported the constitutional priorities of the federal government of the day, only to be torn by disagreements from within. This paper will argue that the NDP’s division, lack of direction and confusion over constitution issues can be traced back to longstanding weaknesses in the party’s social democratic theory and strategy. First of all, the CCF- NDP embraced rather than challenged the parameters and institutions of liberal democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Liberals: a House Divided Introduction
    The Liberals: A House Divided Introduction “I will fulfill my mandate and focus entirely on governing from now until February Focus 2004. At which time my work will be done and at which time my successor will be In an unprec- chosen. And then, at the age of 70, I will look back with great satisfaction as I take edented move against a sitting my rest with Aline, secure in the knowledge that the future of Canada is unlim- Canadian prime ited.” — Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, August 21, 2002 minister, a signifi- cant number of Struggle for Power media and political organizers, the buzz Liberal Party mem- The summer of 2002 will be remem- about his future grew louder and louder. bers appeared The Martin camp was particularly ready to vote bered for both the hot weather and the against Jean equally hot political battle waged within active in promoting their man for the Chrétien in a the ranks of the Liberal Party of next leadership campaign. They built a planned leadership Canada. Open political warfare raged powerful organization and raised sub- review next year. inside the heart of Canada’s most stantial funds. Incensed by this pressure The split in the to leave, Chrétien and Martin had a Liberal camp was successful political machine. A party highlighted this that traditionally rallied around its falling out, and Martin left cabinet. spring when Paul leader appeared ready to tear itself apart Liberals were increasingly divided Martin, one of the over the question of leadership. and feared an open battle at a planned main contenders to After the Liberal victory of 2000, convention to review Chrétien’s leader- replace the PM, attention was drawn to the question of ship in February 2003.
    [Show full text]
  • Omnibus Bills: Constitutional Constraints and Legislative Liberations Adam M. Dodek*
    Omnibus Bills: Constitutional Constraints and Legislative Liberations Adam M. Dodek Over the past decade, the use of au cOurs de la dernière décennie, le omnibus bills has become routine in the recours à des projets de lois omnibus Parliament of Canada. Omnibus budget est devenu une sorte de routine au sein implementation bills have grown in size du Parlement du Canada. Les projets to several hundred pages and acquired de lois omnibus d’exécution du budget their own political term with a decid- n’ont cessé de voir leur nombre de pages edly negative connotation: “omnibudget grossir au point d’atteindre plusieurs bills”. These omnibus and omnibudget centaines et on a même fini par les qua- bills have been a source of controversy lifier, avec toute la connotation politique and, at times, political protest. In its 2015 négative que cela suppose, de « projets 2017 CanLIIDocs 131 election platform, the Liberal Party of de lois omnibudget ». Ces projets de Canada promised to change the House lois omnibus et projets de lois omni- of Commons’ Standing Orders to end budget ont fait l’objet de controverses, the “undemocratic practice” of using voire parfois, de protestations politiques. omnibus bills. This article analyses Dans son programme électoral de 2015, the understanding, use, and history of le Parti libéral du Canada promettait de omnibus bills in the Parliament of Can- modifier le Règlement de la Chambre ada. It argues that such bills undermine des communes dans le but de mettre fin parliamentarians’ ability to responsibly à cette « pratique antidémocratique » and effectively carry out their duties to que représente le recours à des projets examine and debate legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • What Has He Really Done Wrong?
    The Chrétien legacy Canada was in such a state that it WHAT HAS HE REALLY elected Brian Mulroney. By this stan- dard, William Lyon Mackenzie King DONE WRONG? easily turned out to be our best prime minister. In 1921, he inherited a Desmond Morton deeply divided country, a treasury near ruin because of over-expansion of rail- ways, and an economy gripped by a brutal depression. By 1948, Canada had emerged unscathed, enriched and almost undivided from the war into spent last summer’s dismal August Canadian Pension Commission. In a the durable prosperity that bred our revising a book called A Short few days of nimble invention, Bennett Baby Boom generation. Who cared if I History of Canada and staring rescued veterans’ benefits from 15 King had halitosis and a professorial across Lake Memphrémagog at the years of political logrolling and talent for boring audiences? astonishing architecture of the Abbaye launched a half century of relatively St-Benoît. Brief as it is, the Short History just and generous dealing. Did anyone ll of which is a lengthy prelude to tries to cover the whole 12,000 years of notice? Do similar achievements lie to A passing premature and imperfect Canadian history but, since most buy- the credit of Jean Chrétien or, for that judgement on Jean Chrétien. Using ers prefer their own life’s history to a matter, Brian Mulroney or Pierre Elliott the same criteria that put King first more extensive past, Jean Chrétien’s Trudeau? Dependent on the media, and Trudeau deep in the pack, where last seven years will get about as much the Opposition and government prop- does Chrétien stand? In 1993, most space as the First Nations’ first dozen aganda, what do I know? Do I refuse to Canadians were still caught in the millennia.
    [Show full text]
  • 1866 (C) Circa 1510 (A) 1863
    BONUS : Paintings together with their year of completion. (A) 1863 (B) 1866 (C) circa 1510 Vancouver Estival Trivia Open, 2012, FARSIDE team BONUS : Federal cabinet ministers, 1940 to 1990 (A) (B) (C) (D) Norman Rogers James Ralston Ernest Lapointe Joseph-Enoil Michaud James Ralston Mackenzie King James Ilsley Louis St. Laurent 1940s Andrew McNaughton 1940s Douglas Abbott Louis St. Laurent James Ilsley Louis St. Laurent Brooke Claxton Douglas Abbott Lester Pearson Stuart Garson 1950s 1950s Ralph Campney Walter Harris John Diefenbaker George Pearkes Sidney Smith Davie Fulton Donald Fleming Douglas Harkness Howard Green Donald Fleming George Nowlan Gordon Churchill Lionel Chevrier Guy Favreau Walter Gordon 1960s Paul Hellyer 1960s Paul Martin Lucien Cardin Mitchell Sharp Pierre Trudeau Leo Cadieux John Turner Edgar Benson Donald Macdonald Mitchell Sharp Edgar Benson Otto Lang John Turner James Richardson 1970s Allan MacEachen 1970s Ron Basford Donald Macdonald Don Jamieson Barney Danson Otto Lang Jean Chretien Allan McKinnon Flora MacDonald JacquesMarc Lalonde Flynn John Crosbie Gilles Lamontagne Mark MacGuigan Jean Chretien Allan MacEachen JeanJacques Blais Allan MacEachen Mark MacGuigan Marc Lalonde Robert Coates Jean Chretien Donald Johnston 1980s Erik Nielsen John Crosbie 1980s Perrin Beatty Joe Clark Ray Hnatyshyn Michael Wilson Bill McKnight Doug Lewis BONUS : Name these plays by Oscar Wilde, for 10 points each. You have 30 seconds. (A) THE PAGE OF HERODIAS: Look at the moon! How strange the moon seems! She is like a woman rising from a tomb. She is like a dead woman. You would fancy she was looking for dead things. THE YOUNG SYRIAN: She has a strange look.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    TABLE OF CONTENTS THE CHRETIEN LEGACY Introduction .................................................. i The Chr6tien Legacy R eg W hitaker ........................................... 1 Jean Chr6tien's Quebec Legacy: Coasting Then Stickhandling Hard Robert Y oung .......................................... 31 The Urban Legacy of Jean Chr6tien Caroline Andrew ....................................... 53 Chr6tien and North America: Between Integration and Autonomy Christina Gabriel and Laura Macdonald ..................... 71 Jean Chr6tien's Continental Legacy: From Commitment to Confusion Stephen Clarkson and Erick Lachapelle ..................... 93 A Passive Internationalist: Jean Chr6tien and Canadian Foreign Policy Tom K eating ......................................... 115 Prime Minister Jean Chr6tien's Immigration Legacy: Continuity and Transformation Yasmeen Abu-Laban ................................... 133 Renewing the Relationship With Aboriginal Peoples? M ichael M urphy ....................................... 151 The Chr~tien Legacy and Women: Changing Policy Priorities With Little Cause for Celebration Alexandra Dobrowolsky ................................ 171 Le Petit Vision, Les Grands Decisions: Chr~tien's Paradoxical Record in Social Policy M ichael J. Prince ...................................... 199 The Chr~tien Non-Legacy: The Federal Role in Health Care Ten Years On ... 1993-2003 Gerard W . Boychuk .................................... 221 The Chr~tien Ethics Legacy Ian G reene ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Thursday, May 7, 1998
    CANADA VOLUME 135 S NUMBER 101 S 1st SESSION S 36th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Thursday, May 7, 1998 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent 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 6631 HOUSE OF COMMONS Thursday, May 7, 1998 The House met at 10 a.m. Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding the member- ship of the Standing Committee on Transport. _______________ If the House gives its consent, I intend to move concurrence in Prayers the 32nd report later this day. _______________ * * * [Translation] ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS ROYAL CANADIAN MINT ACT D (1000) Hon. Alfonso Gagliano (Minister of Public Works and Gov- [Translation] ernment Services, Lib.) moved for leave to introduce Bill C-41, an act to amend the Royal Canadian Mint Act and the Currency GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS Act. Mr. Peter Adams (Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the (Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed) Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in * * * both official languages, the government’s response to two peti- tions. [English] * * * INDIAN ACT Mr. Jim Hart (Okanagan—Coquihalla, Ref.) moved for leave COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE to introduce Bill C-402, an act to amend the Indian Act (obligations ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT of landlords and tenants on reserve land). Mr. Guy St-Julien (Abitibi, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I have the He said: Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of the constituents of honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Okanagan—Coquihalla to introduce my private member’s bill Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Develop- entitled an act to amend the Indian Act, obligations of landlords ment.
    [Show full text]
  • Core 1..146 Hansard (PRISM::Advent3b2 8.00)
    CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 140 Ï NUMBER 098 Ï 1st SESSION Ï 38th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Friday, May 13, 2005 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 5957 HOUSE OF COMMONS Friday, May 13, 2005 The House met at 10 a.m. Parliament on February 23, 2005, and Bill C-48, an act to authorize the Minister of Finance to make certain payments, shall be disposed of as follows: 1. Any division thereon requested before the expiry of the time for consideration of Government Orders on Thursday, May 19, 2005, shall be deferred to that time; Prayers 2. At the expiry of the time for consideration of Government Orders on Thursday, May 19, 2005, all questions necessary for the disposal of the second reading stage of (1) Bill C-43 and (2) Bill C-48 shall be put and decided forthwith and successively, Ï (1000) without further debate, amendment or deferral. [English] Ï (1010) MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE The Speaker: Does the hon. government House leader have the The Speaker: I have the honour to inform the House that a unanimous consent of the House for this motion? message has been received from the Senate informing this House Some hon. members: Agreed. that the Senate has passed certain bills, to which the concurrence of this House is desired. Some hon. members: No. Mr. Jay Hill (Prince George—Peace River, CPC): Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislators Forum
    9TH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATORS FORUM MANITOBA| MINNESOTA| NORTH DAKOTA| SOUTH DAKOTA GIMLI MANITOBA • JUNE 24-26 2009 FRONT ROW (left to right): Representative Val Rausch-SD, Representative Lois Delmore-ND, Ms. Mavis Taillieu-MB, Ms. Jennifer Howard-MB, Honourable RosannWowchuk-MB SECOND ROW: Representative Paul Dennert-SD, Senator Tom Hanson-SD, Senator Jim Peterson-SD, Senator Rich Wardner-ND, Mr. Ralph Eichler-MB THIRD ROW: Senator Rod Skoe-MN, Mr. Larry Maguire-MB, Representative Morrie Lanning-MN, Senator Gary Hanson-SD, Senator Arden Anderson-ND, Senator Dan Skogen-MN, Representative Dennis Johnson-ND FOURTH ROW: Senator Tom Fiebiger-ND, Senator Tom Saxhaug-MN, Mr. Greg Dewar-MB, Mr. Peter Bjornson-MB, Representative David Monson-ND LEGISLATORS FORUM STEERING COMMITTEE The Steering Committee, appointed to continue activity between annual meetings, is composed of legislators from each of the four jurisdictions. Members are: • Manitoba: Honourable Rosann Wowchuk and Ms. Mavis Taillieu • Minnesota: Senator Tom Saxhaug and Representative Morrie Lanning • North Dakota: Senator Tom Fischer and Representative Lois Delmore • South Dakota: Senator Gary Hanson and Representative Carol Pitts. 2009 LEGISLATORS FORUM ATTENDEES MANITOBA • Honourable Rosann Wowchuk • Ms. Mavis Taillieu • Mr. Larry Maguire • Mr. Rob Altemeyer Th e ninth annual meeting of the Legislators THE DELEGATES TO THE NINTH • Mr. Ralph Eichler Forum began with a reception at the Lakeview ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL • Ms. Jennifer Howard Resort in Gimli Manitoba on Wednesday, June LEGISLATORS FORUM GRATEFULLY • The Honourable Bill Blaikie 24, 2009. Th ere to greet delegates, presenters, ACKNOWLEDGE THE SUPPORT OF • Mr. Peter Bjornson spouses, and staff were co-hosts of this year’s THE FOLLOWING SPONSORS: • Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Wednesday, June 1, 1994
    VOLUME 133 NUMBER 076 1st SESSION 35th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Wednesday, June 1, 1994 Speaker: The Honourable Gilbert Parent HOUSE OF COMMONS Wednesday, June 1, 1994 The House met at 2 p.m. and not merely wishful thinking, and urge the CBC to provide adequate television coverage of our disabled athletes at the next _______________ Summer Games. Prayers In doing so, we will express the admiration and respect which their exceptional achievements deserve. _______________ * * * STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS [English] [English] BILLS C–33 AND C–34 LAW OF THE SEA Mr. John Duncan (North Island—Powell River): Mr. Speaker, yesterday we had the introduction of Bills C–33 and Hon. Charles Caccia (Davenport): Mr. Speaker, straddling C–34 which would ratify land claims and self–government the 200 nautical mile limit there is a fish stock which is of great agreements in Yukon. Last week we were told the government importance to the existence and well–being of many coastal wished to have these bills introduced later in June with the communities in Atlantic Canada. understanding that MPs would have time to prepare properly. Designed to avoid crisis in the fisheries, the law of the sea These bills represent the culmination of 21 years of mostly affirms the responsibility of all nations to co–operate in con- behind closed doors work without the involvement of federal serving and managing fish in the high seas. It is in the interests parliamentarians. Today, 24 hours after tabling, Parliament is of Canadians that the Government of Canada ratify the law of being asked to debate these bills at second reading.
    [Show full text]
  • Postwar Foreign Policy in Canadian Federal Elections 1949-1957
    From Moderates to Mythmakers: Postwar Foreign Policy in Canadian Federal Elections 1949-1957 Kristopher Kinsinger 2 The popular narrative of a Canadian diplomatic golden age is one still evoked by politicians and pundits alike. Such a narrative recalls an era following the end of the Second World War when the country established itself as a helpful presence on the world stage, where, free of the confines of British imperialism, Canadian politicians and diplomats offered constructive foreign policies that fostered multilateral dialogue and promoted global peace.1 Or so the narrative goes. However, as numerous historians have argued, Canadian foreign policy in the postwar era, rather than punching above its weight, was continually beset by the need to defer to the policies of Canada’s North Atlantic allies, in particular that of the United States and Great Britain.2 In keeping with this theme, this paper focuses on the evolving role of foreign policy in the rhetoric of the Liberal Party, the Progressive Conservative Party and (to a lesser extent) the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation in the three federal elections held between 1949 and 1957. This analysis confirms the general unimportance of foreign policy in public discourse during this period, as well as the relative lack of golden age imagery in partisan debate. Given their similarities with regard to policy and their proximity to major international events, the majority of this paper’s content will focus on the 1949 and 1953 elections, concluding with a brief summary of foreign policy in the 1957 election. The 1949 election can be viewed as a turning point in the history of Canadian federal politics.
    [Show full text]