Journals of the Senate
45 Elizabeth II, A.D. 1996, Canada
Journals of the Senate
Issue 17
Thursday, May 9, 1996
2:00 p.m.
The Honourable Gildas L. Molgat, Speaker
The Members convened were:
The Honourable Senators
Adams Anderson Atkins Bacon Balfour Beaudoin Bonnell Bosa Bryden Carney
Carstairs Cochrane Cogger Cohen Comeau Cools Corbin Davey De Bané DeWare Di
Nino Doyle Fairbairn Forrestall Gigantès Grafstein Graham Grimard Hays Hébert
Hervieux-Payette Johnson Kenny Kinsella Kirby Landry Lavoie-Roux LeBreton Lewis
Losier-Cool
Lynch-Staunton MacDonald (Halifax) MacEachen Maheu Marchand Milne Molgat
Murray Nolin Oliver Ottenheimer Pearson Petten Phillips Poulin Prud'homme Riel
Rivest Rizzuto Robertson Robichaud Rossiter Roux Simard Stanbury Stewart
Stollery Stratton Taylor Tkachuk Twinn Watt Wood
PRAYERS.
SENATORS' STATEMENTS
Some Honourable Senators made statements.
DAILY ROUTINE OF BUSINESS
Presentation of Reports from Standing or Special Committees
The Honourable Senator Carstairs, Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, presented its Fifth Report (Bill C-9, An Act respecting the Law Commission of Canada) without amendment.
The Honourable Senator Pearson moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Anderson, that the Bill be placed on the Orders of the Day for a third reading at the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Government Notices of Motions
With leave of the Senate,The Honourable Senator Graham moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Robichaud, P.C.:
That when the Senate adjourns today, it do stand adjourned until Tuesday next, May 14, 1996, at 2:00 p.m.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
SPEAKER'S STATEMENT
On Thursday, March 28, 1996 Senator Nolin put a question to the Deputy Leader of the Government regarding the status of some questions that were still unanswered when the first session was prorogued. The Senator pointed out that there were now 91 delayed answers awaiting a reply and most of them were from the previous session. The Deputy Leader replied by saying that the Government was trying to answer all questions as promptly as possible. And Senator Graham also noted that questions asked in the previous session of Parliament are not automatically restored.
This position was contested immediately by the Leader of the Opposition. Senator Lynch-Staunton asked for a ruling from the Chair. He explained that it was his understanding that delayed answers do not fall from the Government's agenda as a result of prorogation. He went on to state the practice that was followed when he held the position of Deputy Leader of the Government in the previous Parliament. According to him, it was his practice to provide answers to all unanswered questions within two weeks. As he put it, "with one or two exceptions, we held to that unwritten rule."
On Tuesday, April 30, Senator Comeau sought an answer during Question Period from the Leader of the Government on the matter of exports of groundfish from southwestern Nova Scotia. In putting his question, he noted that it had been originally placed on the Order Paper as a written question last autumn. In her answer, Senator Fairbairn indicated that she was awaiting a decision from the Speaker on the issue of outstanding questions from the previous session.
The original issue was raised again last Thursday, May 2, by Senator Nolin. Thus is the Chair sometimes reminded of its duty. I apologize to the House for the time that has been taken in making my ruling.
Before going any further with my ruling, I want to make clear what I have been asked to rule on. Senator Nolin has asked about the status of delayed answers which arise when notice is taken of an oral question asked during Question Period as stipulated under Rule 24(3). The information Senator Comeau is seeking, on the other hand, is based on a written question that was given to the Clerk to be placed on the Order Paper until answered in accordance with Rule 25.
Orders for Returns comprise a third category by which information can be solicited from the Government. This involves a procedure whereby the Senate itself adopts a motion to obtain information from the Government. While this practice is long established, it is not often used, but it is recognized in our written rules under Rule 131.
One further note, the responses to written questions are not printed in the Debates. They are simply tabled with the Clerk. The decision that I have been asked to make concerns only the status of delayed answers and written questions following a prorogation.
I have reviewed the authorities and discussed this matter with the Table Officers who are charged with the responsibility of preparing the Senate's records including the Order Paper and the Notice Paper. The authorities and the Table Officers both confirm that virtually all items standing on the Order Paper die with a prorogation. Erskine May and Beauchesne describe the consequences of prorogation in identical language. "The effect of a prorogation is at once to suspend all business until Parliament shall be summoned again. Not only are the sittings of Parliament at an end, but all proceedings pending at the time are quashed." (Erskine May, 21st edition, p. 222; Beauchesne, 6th edition, cit. 235, p. 66).
The only exception relates to Orders for Returns. Since they are an order of the Senate itself, an Order for Return will remain on the Order Paper from session to session within a Parliament until an answer has been provided. This practice is confirmed in Beauchesne at citation 451(2) at page 132.
Written questions, on the other hand, are among the casualties of a prorogation and they disappear from the Order Paper. Like bills, they must be re-introduced; they are not reinstated automatically.
Delayed answers fall into another, but similar, category to written questions. In fact, they are more ephemeral since they never actually appear as a specific item on the Order Paper and they do not have any existence except in the understanding between the Government and the Opposition. With respect to both written and delayed answers, there is nothing in our Rules obligating the Government to provide a response within a certain period of time, if at all, and there is certainly no provision for their automatic reinstatement after a prorogation.
It is my understanding, however, that the House of Commons and some provincial jurisdictions have incorporated procedures into their practice through specific Rules or Standing Orders that require the Government to provide responses within a set time during a session, at least with respect to written questions. Standing Order 39 in the House of Commons states that a Member may request that a written question be answered within 45 days. If the answer to such a question is not given by the end of that time, the Member may seek to raise the substance of the question on the adjournment of the House. A written question can also be transferred to Notices of Motions or, if the Minister agrees, be made an Order for Return.
In the Legislature of Saskatchewan, there is a rule which requires the Government to respond to a written question within five sitting days. If the Government cannot meet this deadline, it can request that the question be converted into an Order for Return. And according to another rule, the Order for Return must be brought down by the Government within 180 calendar days.
The Standing Orders of the House of Commons and the Rules of the Saskatchewan Legislature are silent on the subject of delayed answers and when they should be provided, though both Houses allow Ministers to take notice of questions.
As I already noted, in his explanation as to how he managed delayed answers, Senator Lynch-Staunton stated that it was the Government's policy when he was Deputy Leader, to answer questions within a set period of time. This was an unwritten rule which he recommended to the consideration of the Leadership of the current Government. This statement fairly reflects the nature of the problem and defines my role with respect to its resolution. If the Opposition is dissatisfied with the disposition of written questions and delayed answers that remain outstanding from a previous session, it can perhaps approach the Government and work out a solution. As Chair, I have no explicit authority to rule on the issue.
MESSAGES FROM THE HOUSE OF COMMONS
A Message was brought from the House of Commons in the following words:
Thursday, May 9, 1996
ORDERED,-That a Message be sent to the Senate inviting their Honours to give leave to the Chair of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, to appear before the Standing Committee on Government Operations in relation to the Main Estimates 1996-97 respecting the Senate - (Vote 1 under Parliament) which were referred to the Committee by the House of Commons on Thursday, March 7, 1996.
ATTEST
Le Greffier de la Chambre des communes
ROBERT MARLEAU
The Clerk of the House of Commons
ANSWERS TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS
Pursuant to Rule 25(2), the Honourable Senator Graham tabled the following:
Reply to Question No. 21, dated March 19, 1996, appearing on the Order Paper in the name of the Honourable Senator Kenny, respecting the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.-Sessional Paper No. 2/35-140S.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
GOVERNMENT BUSINESS
Bills
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Third reading of Bill C-18, An Act to establish the Department of Health and to amend and repeal certain Acts.
The Honourable Senator Corbin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Landry, that the Bill be read the third time.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Bill was then read the third time and passed.
Ordered, That a Message be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint that House that the Senate have passed this Bill, without amendment.
Motions
The Order to resume the debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Bacon was called and postponed until the next sitting.
OTHER BUSINESS
Senate Public Bills
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Cools, seconded by the Honourable Senator Haidasz, P.C., for the second reading of Bill S-4, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (abuse of process).
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Kinsella moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Wood, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
Commons Public Bills
The Order for resuming debate on second reading of Bill C-275 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Reports of Committees
Order No. 1 was called and postponed until the next sitting.
Consideration of the First Report of the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration (guidelines for Senators' research), presented in the Senate on February 28, 1996.
The Honourable Senator Kenny moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Lewis, that the Report be adopted.
After debate,
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
With leave of the Senate,
The Honourable Senator Kenny tabled the following:
Document entitled: "Guidelines for Senators Research Expenditures."-Sessional Paper No. 2/35-141S.
Other
Orders No. 5, 3 and 2 (inquiries) were called and postponed until the next sitting.
MOTIONS
The Honourable Senator Beaudoin moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Lynch-Staunton:
That a special committee of the Senate be appointed to examine and report upon the issue of Canadian unity, specifically recognition of Quebec, the amending formula, and the federal spending power in areas of provincial jurisdiction;
That the committee be composed of twelve Senators, three of whom shall constitute a quorum;
That the committee have power to send for persons, papers and records, to examine witnesses, to report from time to time and to print such papers and evidence from day to day as may be ordered by the committee;
That the papers and evidence received and taken by the Special Committee of the Senate on Bill C-110, An Act respecting constitutional amendments, during the First Session of the Thirty-fifth Parliament be deemed to have been referred to the committee established pursuant to this motion;
That the committee have power to sit during sittings and adjournments of the Senate;
That the committee submit its final report no later than December 15, 1996; and
That, notwithstanding usual practices, if the Senate is not sitting when the final report of the committee is completed, the committee shall deposit its report with the Clerk of the Senate, and said report shall thereupon be deemed to have been tabled in this Chamber.
After debate,
The Honourable Senator Gigantès moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Hébert, that further debate on the motion be adjourned until the next sitting.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Honourable Graham for the Honourable Senator Rompkey, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Adams:
That the Special Committee of the Senate on the Cape Breton Development Corporation be authorized to permit coverage by electronic media of its public proceedings with the least possible disruption of its hearings.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
The Honourable Senator Marchand, P.C., moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Milne:
That the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples have power to engage the services of such counsel and technical, clerical and other personnel as may be necessary for the purpose of its examination and consideration of such bills, subject-matters of bills and estimates as are referred to it.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
REPORTS DEPOSITED WITH THE CLERK OF THE SENATE PURSUANT TO RULE 28(2):
Reports of the Northern Pipeline Agency required by the Access to Information Act, and the Privacy Act for the period ended March 31, 1996, pursuant to the Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1, s. 72.(2) and the Privacy Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21, s. 72(2).--Sessional Paper No. 2/35-139.
ADJOURNMENT
The Honourable Senator Graham moved, seconded by the Honourable Senator Gigantès:
That the Senate do now adjourn.
The question being put on the motion, it was adopted.
_______________________
Changes in Membership of Committees Pursuant to Rule 85(4)
Standing Senate Committee on National Finance
The names of the Honourable Senators Nolin and Taylor substituted for those of the Honourable Senators Kelly and Pearson (May 8).
The name of the Honourable Senator Pearson substituted for that of the Honourable Senator Taylor (May 9).