The Virtual Parliament's "Accountability Sessions"The Canadian Parliament has been holding virtual "Accountability Sessions" since April 28. They are much hyped by official media, as well as the parties which form the cartel party system of government, as a form of accountability. Keep in mind that already the government has passed legislation giving itself a mandate to use exceptional powers during the COVID-19 crisis. Despite this, Canadians are told that the new "accountability sessions" are an arrangement which defends Canada's democratic institutions by making sure the government is held to account.
The motion adopted on April 20 calls for one in-person sitting and two virtual sittings per week -- on Tuesdays and Thursday -- until at least May 25. It also continues the new special COVID-19 Committee, now chaired by House Speaker Anthony Rota, which will meet virtually while the House stands adjourned. Its first meeting was held on April 28. It is being billed as an opportunity for MPs to scrutinize the government's response to the pandemic by posing questions to the ministers and Mr. Trudeau, as well as giving them the ability to present petitions. The method for holding votes on motions and bills has yet to be finalized by the House Procedures Committee. The Senate, for its part, agreed to extend its adjournment until June 2. Media report that ways are being found by the Prime Minister, the opposition parties, the provincial premiers and business and union leaders to "work things out" without a sitting parliament. The example is given of "positive input" by Canadian Labour Congress President Hassan Yussuff in direct conversations with the Prime Minister and with Perrin Beatty, the head of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, on the implementation of the rescue package. In an April 9 note, the House Speaker's office explained why the Chamber couldn't just hook everyone up to Zoom and call it a day for House business outside of committees: "The House of Commons has additional requirements, including, and most importantly, the need to ensure that the solutions fully support simultaneous interpretation, so that Members of Parliament and Canadians can follow the proceedings in the official language of their choice." The Toronto Star's Jaime Watt writes that "Real challenges remain for the Speaker and his staff. There are MPs who represent rural ridings where broadband connectivity is spotty at best. The most popular teleconferencing software is insufficiently secure. Many MPs struggle with the technology. There is, surprisingly, no easy way to arrange for simultaneous translation. It is not clear if the laws of parliamentary privilege that protect members from defamation and libel lawsuits apply in the virtual realm. And, of course, other quaint, many would say anachronistic, customs, such as the tradition of directing remarks to the Speaker instead of a specific member, may also need to be revisited. As you can see, the list goes on and on.... "Yet the pressing need for checks and balances remains. As I wrote in this space two weeks ago, democracy is never as precarious as during a pandemic. The government has already shown itself unafraid of anti-democratic overreach. Its attempt to invest the Minister of Finance with sweeping emergency powers that would last 18 months being exhibit A. Only in the face of fierce public criticism, led by the opposition, did the government back down." In his daily press briefing on April 20, ahead of the vote in the House, Prime Minister Trudeau said "I think it's all of our collective responsibility to do the best we can through this difficult situation.[...] It is really important for me that we continue to uphold our democracy, our democratic principles, the principles of accountability, the ability to move forward with new legislation to help Canadians. That really matters. But it really matters that we do so responsibly." The Conservatives objected to the government's motion. "Mr. Trudeau needs to explain why he is trying to replace Parliament with press conferences," Interim Leader Andrew Scheer said. The Conservatives first proposed that live, on-the-floor "accountability sessions" take place four times a week and finally, at the time of the April 20 vote, they settled for two times a week in an amendment to the Liberal government's motion, which failed to pass. "Conservatives continue to believe that frequent accountability sessions in Parliament get better results for Canadians," Scheer said. "We have repeatedly demonstrated how debate, discussion and opportunities to question the Prime Minister and his other ministers improve government programs and policies." The Toronto Star's Susan Delacourt pointed out that what Scheer didn't say was that various arrangements have been reached outside of the "accountability" sessions in the Chamber and "accompanying political theatrics." She said, "This sounds an awful lot like democracy and accountability -- all managed without theatrics and tiresome political potshots," referring to the back-and-forth between political parties on pandemic relief which has been happening over the phone, or in small private meetings on Parliament Hill, far away from the cameras, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said he wants the House to sit once a week, which would allow Parliament to adopt legislative amendments and improve benefits to Canadians affected by the pandemic. The Bloc Québécois and the Green Party consider the debate over accountability during the pandemic a "nuisance" and that pressing matters brought by the health crisis require immediate, unencumbered action, news agencies report. Bloc Québécois Leader Francois Yves-François Blanchet said having the House sit once a week, supplemented with virtual sittings, will still allow MPs to have a substantive debate on the government's measures. Green MP Paul Manly, raised a question of privilege in the April 20 sitting, saying that many MPs' rights are "violated by any motion to proceed with regular sittings of the House in which they cannot participate." Green Party parliamentary spokesperson Elizabeth May has said even the limited sittings held so far, involving about 40 MPs, felt unsafe to her because physical distancing was difficult within the confines of the Chamber. These sessions also force political staff, cleaners, translators, and others, to come into work when they should be staying home, she said. She noted that she and Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre had become particularly adept at using the dial-in technology to press the government and public servants on details of planned legislation. May concedes these are extraordinary circumstances and would resist the first sign of government "running roughshod" over its political opponents. But, she says, so far that is not the case. "I don't think Canadians will appreciate people and parties that seek partisan advantage right now," she added. "We have those daily question and answer sessions," May said. "I know that not all of us get our questions in every single day. Some of us do well." Bloc Québécois Leader Blanchet also prefers the online option of House sittings in the interests of containing the virus. He said it was "silly" to continue debates among MPs over parliamentary procedures at this time. "I don't think this is of interest to so-called real people," he said. "I must confess it doesn't interest me much as well." He said the current discussions are showing a "disconnect" between politicians and the population. The Globe and Mail's Daniel Leblanc reports: "The pandemic has made strange bedfellows of Canadian politicians and other top decision-makers from across the economy, all engaged in an unprecedented exercise in policy design and implementation."
This article was published in Article Link:   Website: www.cpcml.ca Email: editor@cpcml.ca |
The House of
Commons and Senate were shut down mid-March as
part of the country-wide measures of social
distancing to slow
the spread of the coronavirus. They were initially
scheduled
to re-open on April 20 or to be further
postponed on the
basis of an all-party consensus. During a live
session of the
House of Commons on April 20, with the
participation of 37 MPs, a
government motion to adjourn the House until May
25 was passed.
Methods for in-person "accountability sessions"
were adopted (the
expression coined by Opposition Leader Andrew
Sheer) along with
those for virtual sessions. The Liberal
government's motion was adopted
by
a vote of 22 in favour to 15 against. The NDP,
Bloc
Québécois and
Green Party supported the motion. The sessions are
not considered
"normal, constitutional sittings" of the House.
They are sessions
of the COVID-19 Committee that was put in place in
March to
develop the rescue package and chaired by Chrystia
Freeland. All
338 MPs are members of the special COVID-19
Committee but in the
"live sessions" only 37-40 MPs sit at a time, with
a quorum of seven
MPs (as opposed to the usual 20).