Officers ofParliament: A Study in Government Adaptation A Thesis Submitted to the College of Graduate Studies and Research In Partial Fulfillment ofthe Requirements For the Degree ofMasters ofArts In the Department ofPolitical Studies University ofSaskatchewan Saskatoon By Megan Michelle Furl Fall 2002 Copyright Megan Michelle Furl, 2002. All rights reserved. Permission To Use In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Postgraduate degree from the University of Saskatchewan, I agree that the Libraries of this University may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying ofthis thesis in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor or professors who sUPervised my thesis work or, in the their absence, by the Head ofthe Department or the Dean ofthe College in which my thesis work was done. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis or parts thereof for fmancial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be give to me and to the University of Saskatchewan in any scholarly use which may be made ofany material in my thesis. Requests for permission to copy or to make other use of material in this thesis in whole or part should be addressed to: Head ofthe Department ofPolitical Studies University ofSaskatchewan Saskatoon, Saskatchewan sm 5A5 1 Abstract This thesis explores the concept ofOfficers ofParliament and their place in the much older concept ofresponsible government. It argues that the changing nature of responsible government allows a place for Officers ofParliament to assistParliament in holding government accountable. Since Officers ofParliament act as a check on government, it is necessary for the Officers to be independent from government. This thesis argues that independence is one ofthe defining characteristics ofthe Officers. Finally, by examining the relationship ofOfficers ofParliament with both the Senate and the House ofCommons it is possible to see how Officers of Parliament fit into the complex structure ofparliamentary government. This examination illustrates how the Houses ofParliament relate to their Officers as well as to each other. ii Acknowledgements I am indebted to many for their involvement in this project. The support and encouragement of friends and family made the completion of this thesis possible. Particularly, I would like to thank Ian Burgess, Ryan Dollimore, Russ Isinger, Megan Murphy, Paul Kopas and Carrie Tait who, despite their busy schedules, offered help whenever it was needed. I am grateful for assistance from the Office of the Auditor General, the Office of the ChiefElectoral Officer, the Office ofthe Commissioner ofOfficial Languages, the Office of the Information Commissioner and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner. Specifically, I would like to thank the following people: Antonine Campbell, Office ofthe Auditor General Anne Marie Smith, Office ofthe Auditor General Genevieve Breton, Office ofthe Auditor General Sheila Fraser, Auditor General ofCanada Gilbert Langelier, Office ofthe Commissioner ofOfficial Languages Dyane Adam, Commissioner ofOfficial Languages ofCanada John Reid, Infonnation Commissioner ofCanada Anne Goldsmith, Office ofthe Privacy Commissioner Hedy Kirkby, Office ofthe Privacy Commissioner The enthusiasm and sincerity of Georges Tsai and Nadia Ponce-Morales of the Canadian Centre for Management Development is also greatly appreciated. I would like to express my gratitude to the Department of Political Studies at the University of Saskatchewan. Students of this department are fortunate to work with educators who are not only terrific professors and distinguished scholars but who are also wonderful people. I am honoured to call many of the faculty members friends. I would especially like to thank Professors Duff Spafford, D. C. Story, Joe Garcea, Peter Ferguson and Cris DeClercy for their contributions to this thesis and to my education throughout the years. I would like to extend a special thank you to Professor lC. Courtney who introduced me to the topic ofOfficers of Parliament. His support and encouragement have been invaluable. Finally, I would like to offer a heartfelt thank you to my supervisor Professor David Smith for his hard work, patience and guidance. Without his assistance this thesis would not have been possible. 111 Dedieation To my dad who frrst acquainted me with politics. IV TABLE OF CONTENTS PERMISSION TO USE i ABSTRACT ii ACKN"OWLEDGEMNETS iii DEDICAnON iv TABLE OF CONTENTS v IN"TRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER ONE: OFFICERS OF PARLIAMENT AND RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT 6 CHAPTER TWO: INDEPENDENCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY 23 CHAPTER THREE: RELATIONSHIP WITH A BICAMERAL PARLIAMENT 45 CONCLUSION 62 APPENDIX A 66 APPENDIX B 70 APPENDIX C 72 BIBLIOGRAPHY 73 v Introduetion The Auditor General (1878), the Chief Electoral Officer (1920), the Commissioner of Official Languages (1969) and the Information and Privacy Commissioners (1982) are Canada's Officers of Parliament. According to Senator Michael Pitfield, Officers of Parliament are ''the direct and immediate servant[s] of Parliament itself:"1 One way this is represented is by the reporting ofthese Officers directly to Parliament through the Speaker ofthe House ofCommons, and in the case of the three commissioners, through the Speakers of the House of Commons and of the Senate. There is no single term that defines an Officer ofParliament; however, one of the most important criteria to an Officer of Parliament is independence. In order to be seen as Parliament's servants these Officers must have, and be perceived to have, a significant degree of independence from the government ofthe day. This independence is acquired through reporting and removal procedures, the guarantee of financial independence, tenure, and the Officer's general control over the operations ofthe office. While there may be some confusion as to who is and who is not an Officer of Parliament, this thesis will deal only with the Auditor General, the Chief Electoral Officer, and the Commissioners ofLanguage, Information and Privacy. Other "near officers," such as the Canadian Human Rights Commission and the Public Service Commission, will not be examined. Furthermore, Officers of Parliament should not be confused with the Clerk ofeither House, the Sergeant-At-Arms, the Parliamentary Counsel and the like. Senator Pitfield explains that these Canada, Senate, Debates 27 June 1990,2199. 1 positions are known as "officers of the House," but at the same time they are "the nominations ofthe government and serve Parliament.,,2 Although Officers ofParliament playa central role in Canadian government, as a group these positions have largely gone unstudied. While some articles and a few books examine individual Officers, mainly the Auditor General, few of these sources attempt to discuss the contribution ofOfficers ofParliament as a collective to the Canadian parliamentary system. This contribution at its most basic level is to serve as a check on government accountability. The lack of scholarly attention to Officers of Parliament is surprising since in modem Canadian government and politics the general concern about the restraint of executive power grows in importance. For a demonstration of the truth of this assertion, one may tum to the debate over the position of the Ethics Counsellor who, as of June 2002, is not an Officer ofParliament.3 Despite the role Officers of Parliament play in holding the government accountable, these Officers are a contradiction to the very principle on which Canadian government is based. The foundation of the Canadian parliamentary system is responsible government, a theory that dictates that the executive is directly responsible to Parliament. It is through Parliament that government is to be held accountable and responsible to the people. By this description, there is no room for other agents of accountability. Officers ofParliament represent some ofthe changes that that have occurred in the Canadian system of government and the way that 2 Ibid. 3 For example see Andrew McIntos~ "Counsellor powerless in the eyes ofcritics," National Post. 20 November 2000, A7; Joel-Denis Bellavances "Liberals Defeat Their Own Policy," National Post 14 February 2001, AI; Andrew McIntos~ "Guide to Chretien's 8-point reform plan," National Post 24 May 2002, A7. 2 governments have chosen to adapt to these changes; however, an explanation for the place ofOfficers ofParliament in the Canadian system still needs to be provided. Chapter One explores the difference between the theory of responsible government and its perception and application to the Canadian parliamentary system. The chapter argues that responsible government can no longer function according to a theory that dictates that the executive is directly responsible to Parliament. Rather, responsible government has come to mean, at least in colloquial usage, that the government is responsible to the people, not to Parliament. Due to the growth in government and the bureaucracy, members ofParliament and political parties are no longer seen as effective representatives of the people. As such, governments have been forced to implement other means to ensure that governments are both responsible and responsive. Officers ofParliament are one mechanism governments have used to adapt to the changing ideas and expectations ofresponsible government. As government in Canada has evolved, the ideas associated