Main Page

Churchilliad
Online Index


"THE GOVERNMENT
 IS THE SERVANT
 OF THE PEOPLE
 AND NOT ITS MASTER"

Winston Churchill
Oslo 1948

 

 

 

Reviewing the role of the MPP- Part II

By Philip Bousquet

Volume 15  Issue 2 Fall 2003

In the previous issue of Churchilliad, we looked at several ideas that were being considered by an Ontario legislative committee during its investigation into enhancing the role of the Member of Provincial Parliament (MPP). In this issue, we will summarize the recommendations of the committee.

On December 3rd, 2002, the Chair of the Standing Committee on the Legislative Assembly, Mrs. Margaret Marland, MPP, reported back to the House on the work of the committee. The Committee Chair moved the adoption of the recommendations and the report was referred to the government for a comprehensive response.

Recommendations

The committee recommendations are contained in the “Report on enhancing the role of the private member”. These may be broadly grouped into three categories: legislative committees, private members’ public business, and technological innovation.

Recommendations for enhancing the role of the legislative committees

  1. the report recommends that more use should be made of the provision that allows for bills to be referred to committees following first reading (i.e. following the introduction of a bill);
  1. the government should make more use of the procedure of referring draft bills to committee for pre-legislative scrutiny;
  1. select committees should be struck more often; and,
  1. bills should be referred to committees in a consistent fashion in order to allow private members to develop expertise in a committee’s area of responsibility.

These reforms are intended to improve upon the MPP’s legislative and accountability functions. Sending bills to committee at an earlier stage may encourage individual members to serve a more significant role in the review and improvement of draft legislation. As well, the use of select committees to investigate and report on particular issues can lead to greater public involvement in the consideration of public policy, and the development of greater expertise among elected members.

Recommendations for enhancing private members’ public business

  1. there should be more opportunities for the consideration of private members’ business, specifically an additional two hours per week (i.e. establishing an earlier start to the Thursday schedule);
  1. voting on private members’ public business should be deferred to the afternoon’s routine proceedings;
  1. up to three private members, regardless of party affiliation, should be permitted to co-sponsor a private member’s public bill or resolution; and,
  1. a private member’s public bill that is supported by at least 75% of the membership of the House (i.e. 78 members in a 103 member House) should be entitled to be ‘fast-tracked’ for early consideration of, and voting on, all post-second reading stages of the legislative process.

These reforms are intended to ensure that private member’s business receives due consideration by the House. More debate time would be allocated to bills and to resolutions, and, subject to the support of MPPs, bills would more frequently receive consideration at the third reading stage (for debates and votes). 

Technological innovations  

The Committee recommends that the Speaker and the Clerk of the House should examine the efficacy of the Chamber having the kind of technology that exists or is being proposed for the Table and the dais in the Canadian House of Commons and in the Senate of Canada. 

These reforms could potentially improve service to the members and to the staff of the legislative assembly. Other jurisdictions have implemented technological innovations that improve access to information without detracting from the Assembly’s primary function of convening a forum for debating public issues.

Party platforms and the prospects for democratic reform 

At the time of this writing, Ontario is in the midst of a general election. Each party that is in contention for government has unveiled a platform that includes recommendations for improving the accountability of our democratic institutions. This is an encouraging sign, though the true test will come later as the newly elected MPPs take their seats in the legislature and begin to fulfill their duties.  

It is hoped that the recommendations developed by the Legislative Assembly Committee and adopted by the House will assist in enhancing the role of our MPPs. However, given Caucus discipline and the centralized nature of our system, substantive improvements will only be achieved with the support of the party that forms government.  

Some of these changes may come about as a result of a government’s desire to appear consultative on issues that defy easy resolution. This could lead to additional support of the committee system, both standing and select. As well, members who are not appointed to Cabinet will be looking for other ways in which to make publicly-recognized contributions. This could support the recommended changes to private members’ public business.  

In fact, it could be argued that reforms that enhance the role of MPPs are not only supportive of the legislature, but of the government as well. While a particular issue or initiative may run counter to a government’s agenda, the overall effect of democratic reforms could enhance the public’s impression of both institutions. 

Postscript 

The role of the MP is fundamental to the protection of our democratic freedoms. At Westminster, in the midst of the Second World War, Members of Parliament debated a motion to appoint a Select Committee that would “consider and report upon plans for the rebuilding of the House of Commons” (which had been destroyed by aerial bombing in 1941). This debate, during a time of great peril, resolved the practical issue of reconstruction, and celebrated the very foundations of our parliamentary democracy. The British Prime Minister used the occasion to remind his listeners that MPs “wish to see our Parliament a strong, easy, flexible instrument of free debate.” He went on to say the following: 

“Our House has proved itself capable of adapting itself to every change which the swift pace of modern life has brought upon us. It has a collective personality which enjoys the regard of the public, and which imposes itself upon the conduct not only of individual Members but of parties. It has a code of its own which everyone knows, and it has means of its own of enforcing those manners and habits which have grown up and have been found to be an essential part of our Parliamentary life.”

 - Winston Churchill, House of Commons, October 28, 1943