Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament
Issue 3 - Fourth Report of the Committee
Thursday, June 9, 2005
The Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament has the honour to present its
FOURTH REPORT
Pursuant to its order of reference dated May 31, 2005 from the Senate your Committee is pleased to report as follows.
1. On May 31, 2005, the Senate adopted a motion by Senator Banks that the following question be referred to your Committee:
That the Rules of the Senate be amended in Rule 96 by adding, in subsection (7), the following:
In particular, clause-by-clause consideration of legislation shall not be dispensed with unless with leave.
2. On June 7, 2005, your Committee heard from Dr. Gary O'Brien, Deputy Clerk and Principal Clerk of the Senate, and Dr. Heather Lank, Principal Clerk, Committees Directorate of the Senate.
3. On May 18, 2005, a point of order had been raised in the Senate with respect to Bill C-15, An Act to amend the Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994, and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999. At a meeting the previous day, the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources had, by a majority vote of seven to three, adopted a motion to dispense with clause-by-clause consideration of the bill and to report unamended to the Senate. The Committee had, accordingly, reported the bill without amendment, but with observations. After a lengthy debate in the chamber, the Speaker pro tempore ruled that, while committees are regarded as the masters of their own proceedings, the motion to dispense with clause-by-clause of a bill appeared to be irregular, in that it had the effect of preventing members of the committee from having the ability to move amendments. The Speaker pro tempore did not feel that she had the authority to undo decisions that had already been taken by the committee and accepted by the Senate. However, the Speaker indicated that your Committee might wish to consider the practice with respect to clause-by-clause consideration of a bill, and the advisability that it be dispensed with through leave, rather than by motion, to ensure that no rights to which a Senator is entitled are unduly infringed.
4. Your Committee has reviewed the procedures and practices in the Senate and in other legislative bodies, and has considered various procedural authorities. The role of a committee to which a bill has been referred is to review the text in detail, and to approve it or to consider such changes as may be necessary or desirable to reflect the committee's legislative intentions. It is the right of any Senator to propose amendments to individual clauses, or to insist on the formal procedure whereby each clause of the bill is considered separately. There are times when for legitimate reasons the members of the committee are prepared to modify this procedure, but it can only be done with the agreement and consent of all members of the committee who are present. Your Committee notes the practice of Senate Committees whereby appropriate notice is given to the members of a committee before commencing clause-by-clause consideration of a bill.
5. After a careful consideration of the issues involved, your Committee agrees with the principles underlying the proposal of Senator Banks. We believe that this amendment to the rules respects the rights of all Senators, and the traditions of the Senate.
6. Your Committee has agreed to recommend a slight modification of Senator Banks' proposed rule change. We agree that this will clarify the situation for the future, and avoid any ambiguity, while at the same time achieving a balance between committees being masters of their own proceedings and the rights of individual Senators. Senator Banks has indicated that the re-worded provision is in keeping with the spirit and intent of his original motion.
Your Committee recommends that the Rules of the Senate be amended by adding after subsection (7) of Rule 96 the following:
(7.1) Except with leave of its members present, a committee cannot dispense with clause-by-clause consideration of a bill.
Respectfully submitted,
DAVID P. SMITH
Chair