The Liberals are pushing for the hybrid sitting model of the House of Commons to continue for up to a year despite what appears to be an improvement in the public health situation and amid concerns about liability and the impact on parliamentary interpreters.
At a press conference on Monday on the upcoming end of the Spring Sitting, Government House Leader Mark Holland announced that he planned to introduce a motion proposing that the virtual elements of the House of Commons and committees be extended until 2023.
Holland said he had spoken with the House leaders of the opposition parties about the proposal, which he intended to put on notice overnight, then spend Wednesday and Thursday debating and voting, before get up for the summer. The current motion allowing hybrid sessions expires Thursday.
The government’s lead on House affairs and its legislative agenda said that as many Canadian workplaces readjust to in-person work, he thinks it’s important to continue the hybrid model to MPs to allow those who are ill to continue to participate.
“We are still in a pandemic reality, and…we need the tools to ensure that MPs participate fully in the work of Parliament,” Holland said.
Not all parties agree on this point.
The current rules allow MPs to participate virtually, from their homes or constituency offices, in House debates and committee meetings. The House has also introduced an app that allows Members to vote remotely from anywhere in Canada.
While some MPs, including the NDP, have expressed a desire to see the hybrid provisions continue in the long term because of the flexibility they provide for doing their job as MPs, the Conservatives are strongly opposed to the virtual elements of parliament continue longer, saying elected officials should show up in Ottawa to do their jobs.
“UNJUSTIFIED AND UNNECESSARY”
The official opposition’s arguments for calling on him to step down in hybrid sittings include citing the improving public health situation – a move the Liberals cited in the recent lifting of federal vaccine mandates – as well as the impact that the virtual structure has had on translators, and what they see as a decrease in government accountability.
“Rather than using the weather to tackle the cost of living crisis facing Canadians, the Liberals will set up a Parliament in a way that works for them. And when the Liberals talk about a hybrid Parliament, what they’re really talking about is setting up a Parliament where they can be less accountable,” Conservative parliamentary leader John Brassard said Monday at a news conference, dismissing the Liberals’ proposal as being “unjustified and unnecessary”.
Brassard said there was no reason he could see why this motion was coming up now, rather than in the fall depending on the state of the pandemic, suggesting the Conservatives would be open to considering a back to hybrid sessions if the COVID-19 situation was much worse this fall.
“The government should signal to Canadians that we are going to regain some sense of normality… Over the past few months we have seen provincial and territorial legislatures return to normal… So there is no reason why we’re not ‘going back to normal’ here,” he said. “It’s time for these hybrid tools to be put back in the box.”
The Conservatives plan to propose amendments to the next hybrid motion, suggesting that there are current provisions in the Standing Orders – the rules of the House – that would allow MPs who cannot be present to continue to represent their constituents if they are absent for health reasons. or family reasons.
While the House of Commons Administration has been working quickly to find new, innovative and historic ways for Members of Parliament to adapt to the reality of COVID-19 while continuing their work of debating and passing legislation, the provisions were not meant to be permanent.
In the nearly two years of use, there have been several snafus and more serious transgressions associated with the hybrid seating pattern.
From poor audio and video quality and connectivity issues to MPs who have to apologize for taking the debate down the toilet with them. Ministers have also been accused of dodging questions in person by zooming in from Ottawa rather than appearing in the House, in person.
Additionally, as noted by Brassard, the use of virtual tools with sometimes suboptimal audio quality for debates and meetings has led to an increase in reported work-related injuries such as hearing loss and tinnitus, among the interpreters who translate all the deliberations in real time.
HYBRID STUDY COMMITTEE
Holland said the government is asking the Procedure and House Affairs Committee to study the use of the hybrid model and the voting app to see what works and what doesn’t. There is no timeline attached to this suggestion, however, with Holland saying the committee needs to spend time seriously considering the future use or end of virtual parliament.
If MPs on that committee show up in less time, or if the pandemic appears to be over within the next year, Holland said they are not obligated to maintain the hybrid arrangements for the entire year.
The government House leader has also pledged, with a caveat, that ministers will answer all questions in person during the fall sitting.
“Barring a health circumstance that would otherwise prevent it or a general deterioration in health conditions for example, a new variant of COVID-19 emerges,” Holland said of the possible exception.
Defending the decision to continue with the House’s hybrid arrangements, Holland said the Liberals intended to have as much in-person attendance as possible, but “this pandemic is continuing, and so there needs to be flexibility. “.
“What concerns me is to ensure that we have a stable and predictable process, where parliamentarians and Canadians can know, despite everything that is going to happen in the world, that they are going to have a parliament that works,” Holland said.
NDP SUPPORTING MOTION
Citing concerns about a potential new variant of COVID-19 circulating in the fall, NDP House Leader Peter Julian told reporters on Monday that his caucus would support the Liberal motion.
“The idea that we would just go back to being a Parliament where you have to be in the House – and obviously can’t be if you get COVID or are for some other reason urgently needed in your constituency – the idea that you would lose for all those voters, their voice and their vote don’t make sense,” Julian said. “And so it’s a common sense measure that gets us through the fall.”
The NDP’s support will give the minority government the votes it needs to pass this motion later this week.
OBSTRUCTION CHARGES
Looking back on the 44th Parliament so far, Holland accused the Conservatives of going too far to obstruct the government’s legislative agenda, calling the Official Opposition “the biggest challenge inside Parliament”.
“They absolutely have the right to vote against things, they absolutely have the right to criticize the government and on occasion, if need be, to obstruct, but… They don’t have the right to shut down democracy. And that has been deeply my biggest frustration,” he said, citing examples of proposed dilatory motions and bills that he says the Conservatives have tried to delay, prompting the use of tools of planning such as time allocation to break the legislative deadlock.
“I would also say that, you know, in a minority government, we haven’t had the ability to do any of this unilaterally. We always need another partner. So we made sure, I think, at every stage of every bill, that there was enough time to debate and that we had to do it with the support of another party in any case,” said Holland about government motions to expedite consideration or debate on certain items. “It’s not my preference, and I’m looking to drop hoping for something different.”
Responding to Holland’s claims, Brassard called out the Liberals for what he called the “ultimate” delay tactic of calling the “unnecessary” 2021 federal election.
“Trudeau received a minority government, he did not receive a majority government. Canadians sent him here to be held accountable… In fact, the Conservative Party, as Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, has used every tool we can to hold the government to account.”
Brassard also called the NDP’s confidence and supply agreement giving Prime Minister Justin Trudeau a “coalition” government, seeing New Democrats vote with the Liberals 95% of the time.
“I’m not going to apologize for doing our job as the opposition. I know the Prime Minister would have liked to have a hearing in the opposition, but what we are doing is making sure he has an opposition, even if the NDP were not going to fulfill their obligations, ”said Conservative House Leader.
“Travel aficionado. Twitter scholar. Writer. Extreme coffee guru. Evil pop culture fanatic.”