Speaker's Report

Senator Dan Hays SPEAKER’S REPORT Fall 2004 Inside This Edition ... Page 2 The Senate of Canada: An example of Functional Adaptability Page 3 Canada’s tenth minority government Page 4 The Alberta Round-up: Speaker Dan Hays and Mrs. Kathy Hays met Her Imperial Highness Princess Takamado of Japan during Canada Day and the her visit to Canada on June 16, 2004. In this photo, Her Imperial Highness sits in Judge Emily Murphy’s Calgary Stampede chair at the Famous Five Monument on Parliament Hill. Please see the Speaker’s website for more information about her visit. From left: Ambassador Hiroaki Fujii, Head of Suite, Special Assistant to Japan’s Minister of Foreign Affairs; Speaker Dan Hays; Her Imperial Highness Princess Takamado; Mrs. Kathy Hays; Mrs. Takiko Hogen and Ambassador Kensaku Hogen. Page 5 A tribute to three Alberta senators; Dear Reader, Changing faces th On October 4, 2004, the 38 Parliament began under the leadership of Prime Page 6 & 7 Minister Paul Martin. This is the first minority government in Canada since 1979 and I am pleased to continue serving as Speaker of the Senate and Parliamentary senator with the designation for Calgary, Alberta. Included in this Report are Diplomacy articles about the Senate and minority governments and the Senate as an example of functional adaptability. Page 8 Senate news My office launched a new website in August. It provides visitors with more information about the Speaker’s office, as well as resources for other government services. I encourage you to visit it at www.sen.parl.gc.ca/dhays. As always, we look forward to hearing from you. Visit the Speaker’s Web site: Regards, www.sen.parl.gc.ca/dhays Dan Hays Page 2 Speaker’s Report Fall 2004 The Senate of Canada: An example of functional adaptability Since it was created in 1867, several important internal reforms since they eliminated several of the measures they could use to have helped the Senate of Canada modernize itself and play its slow the progress of government business. Chief among these role more efficiently. Among them are the creation of research controversial amendments were rules 38, 39 and 40. Rule 38 and discretionary budgets for individual senators; significant introduced a time limit on senators’ speeches, and was a major modifications to rules governing proceedings; the streamlining departure from previous practice. As for Rules 39 and 40, they of committees, and the television broadcast of committee delib- introduced the concept of time allocation in the Senate. erations. The adoption of Rule 18 was another major 1991 amendment, When I came to the Senate in 1984, and in fact until 1987, sena- and it concerned the Speaker’s authority. Although very similar tors had no research or discretionary budgets and were limited to Rule 16 of 1906, which allowed the Speaker to preserve or- to one staff member, which greatly restricted the range of the der and decorum, it clarified and enhanced that right. As well, issues they could consider, as well as their impact on the na- rule 18 (3) provides the Speaker with the authority to determine tion’s business. By comparison, members of the Commons when sufficient arguments have been made before he or she have been able to hire a second assistant since 1974. decides any question of privilege or point of order. These changes, though not radical, represent, as James R. Robertson The creation of a $3,077 discretionary budget in 1987 ushered has noted, a “continued evolution towards a more powerful role in a process that would lead to an unprecedented modernization [for the Speaker]” and significantly contributed to the orderli- of senators’ offices. By 1988-1989, discretionary budgets had ness of proceedings in the Chamber. been increased to $10,000 and senators were provided with a second budget for research contracts up to a maximum of Another significant example of the Senate’s modernization is $30,000 per senator. Many of them took advantage of this to the major restructuring of committees that took place in 1968. hire assistants on a contractual basis, And in 1996, research In an effort to streamline committee operations, the terms of assistants achieved full-time employee status and began receiv- reference and areas of jurisdiction were more clearly defined. ing comprehensive benefits. Some committees were abolished, such as Divorce, Railways, Telegraphs and Harbours, and Miscellaneous Private Bills, In 1997-1998, global budgets for senators’ offices were created, while others were created, such as Transport and Communica- and set at $90,000, by merging the secretary budget with the tions, and Legal and Constitutional Affairs. As well, member- research and office expenses budget. Today, the global budget ship was greatly reduced from the 25-member norm that had stands at $130,700. At about half the amount of office budgets previously been the case (some committees had grown to as in the Commons, which range from $234,600 to $251,400, many as 50 members). The result of this reform has been a senators’ global budgets provide value for the money by ena- committee system that is far more manageable and attentive to bling members of the Upper House to perform their various issues that concern Canadians. duties with help from administrative and research staff. The introduction of television to the Upper House is another Changes to the Senate’s rules and procedures have also made a important example of the institution’s continuing evolution. significant contribution to modernizing the institution. The first Although debate on this issue has been going on for many major change occurred in 1906, and among the more significant years, it was only in 1998 that Senate committee deliberations amendments was the creation of notices of inquiries and inquir- began to be regularly broadcast. It was then that a six-month ies. Inquiries appear unique to the Senate of Canada; they en- agreement was signed with the Canadian Public Affairs Chan- courage debate on issues without a question having to be sub- nel (CPAC), whereby 8 hours per week of committee delibera- mitted to the House for decision, and “sometimes result in the tions would be televised. In April 2004, a new agreement was establishment of a committee on the subject matter of the in- signed between CPAC and the Senate, whereby CPAC agreed quiry or the introduction of legislation.”1 However, the most to broadcast twenty hours of Senate proceedings per week when far-reaching amendment brought about in 1906 was the intro- the Senate is sitting. duction of rule 16, which granted new powers to the Speaker. Previous to the creation of this rule, it had not been the tradition This article has attempted to demonstrate that the Senate of in the Senate for the Speaker to maintain the dignity of the Canada has evolved over time by implementing various internal House or deciding on points of order unless another senator reforms. Though the examples chosen are by no means exhaus- asked him to do so. tive, I certainly hope they have helped you see the Senate of Canada as a modern, effective and responsive institution. The second major change to Senate rules occurred in 1991, as a ______ result of the debate over the creation of the Goods and Services 1 Gary W. O’Brien, "The Senate Order Paper", Tax. Though many of the new rules were necessary and non- Canadian Parliamentary Review, Vol. 4, issue 4, 1981. controversial, opposition senators vehemently opposed others, Page 3 Speaker’s Report Fall 2004 and a bill abolishing the death penalty. Although fewer bills Canada’s tenth generally pass through Parliament during minority governments, since they require a great deal of discussion, negotiation minority government and consensus building with the opposition parties, they can be said to be of a very high quality, given all the work put into On June 28, 2004, Canadians elected a minority government for them. the first time in 25 years, creating a great deal of speculation over the administration’s duration, legislative agenda and abil- So where does the Senate fit in all this? Although it isn’t a con- ity to govern. fidence chamber which determines whether a government stands or falls, the Senate does feel the effects of a minority Minority governments basically occur when no party manages government in various ways. For example, since the govern- to obtain a plurality of seats in the House of Commons, which ment’s agenda depends on careful negotiations with opposition is to say 155 of the 308 seats. In such circumstances, the gover- parties, fewer bills, and even fewer contentions ones, are likely nor general asks the party with the most seats to form the gov- to be sent to the Senate. One benefit of this would be the greater ernment, as happened in this case, when the Liberals elected time afforded senators to carefully examine and consider legis- 135 MPs.1 lation. Furthermore, in a minority context, the government, which has a majority in the Senate, may attempt to pressure Although minority governments are the exception in Canadian senators not to amend bills due to the compromises already politics, since our first-past-the-post electoral system tends to negotiated with the opposition in the Commons. The challenge favour majorities, they have occurred several times since Con- in this case is for senators to balance the government’s need to federation2 and often produced significant reforms. They have pass legislation with their duty of providing sober second lasted an average of one year five months and 27 days, and only thought, as well as perspective, balance and careful considera- one minority government, that of Mackenzie King between tion of the long-term interests of all Canadians.

Load more