Parliamentary reform
Summary of proposals
- Message from the minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions
- Introduction
- Greater Citizen Participation
- Enhancement of the Role Played by the Members of the National Assembly
- Modernization of the National Assembly
- Redefinition of the Relationship between the Government and the National Assembly
- Process Leading to the Adoption of Parliamentary Reform
- For information
Dear Fellow Citizens,
Dear Colleagues of the National Assembly,
In his opening speech of the present parliamentary session, the Premier of Québec, Jean Charest, entrusted me with the mandate to draw up a comprehensive plan to reform our democratic institutions.
The government is taking action by submitting a project for parliamentary reform comprising 140 proposed changes. This first component of the project will be followed by a reform of the electoral system and a review of the Electoral Act that should encourage voting.
This document lays out the main points of the proposed parliamentary reform. This reform is intended to profoundly transform the organization and proceedings of the National Assembly, the way the elected Members do their work, and the relationship between the government and the National Assembly. These proposals are also intended to foster a more direct contact between citizens and their elected representatives. In short, the main goal of this reform project is to make the National Assembly a resolutely modern and open parliament.
All the Members of the National Assembly are invited to work together, regardless of political allegiances, to redefine the foundations of Québec parliamentary life. I am therefore inviting all those who are in any way interested in the vitality of our democratic and parliamentary institutions to express their reactions, ask questions and propose changes that they believe will be useful and will answer their concerns. For, above all, the National Assembly is your parliament.
Jacques P. Dupuis
Governement House Leader
Minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions
Introduction
The parliamentary reform project, submitted to the Members of the National Assembly (MNAs) by the Government House Leader and Minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions, Jacques P. Dupuis, represents the first component of a comprehensive plan to reform our democratic institutions for spring 2004, as announced by Jean Charest in his opening speech.
The proposed reform is a major undertaking. It comprises 140 proposals that will bring about sizeable changes in the relationship between citizens and their elected representatives and in the way the National Assembly conducts its business. Indeed, this is the most ambitious parliamentary renewal project in the last twenty years.
The National Assembly is still perceived by many as an institution that is too far removed from its citizens. This perception does not do justice to the work that is really accomplished by the elected Members. Nonetheless, numerous well-known situations justify the proposed initiatives to correct procedures and practices in order to help restore confidence in the institution that is at the centre of Quebecers' democratic life.
The proposals submitted by the Government House Leader and Minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions pursue the following four objectives:
- Greater citizen participation in parliamentary life.
- Enhancement of the role played by the Members of the National Assembly.
- Modernization of the National Assembly's organization and proceedings.
- Redefinition of the relationship between the government and the National Assembly.
Greater Citizen Participation
Citizens do not often have the chance to directly intervene in parliamentary proceedings. Petitions are filed in their name by their elected Members. Groups and citizens that wish to do so can present a brief during public consultations, but they will only be heard if they are invited. It is not surprising that citizens feel excluded from what it is sometimes called "the people's house". The goal of the present parliamentary reform is to ensure greater citizen participation in the exercise of democracy. According to the proposals:
- The citizens could submit their own petitions to the elected Members. A sub committee would receive them and would hear the petitioners so that they may directly present their grievances to the elected representatives. The sub-committee would ensure that the government responds to the submitted petitions within thirty days. Furthermore, citizens' support for petitions could be obtained through the Internet.
- Citizen participation in parliamentary committee proceedings would be made easier. The committees would go to hear the citizens in their communities and make greater use of new technologies such as videoconferences to facilitate the participation of citizens who are from remote regions or unable to travel. Moreover, citizens could participate in parliamentary committees without presenting briefs. There would be designated periods during which they could present their point of view about the subject under study. These presentations could also comprise forums that favour freer exchanges between citizens and their elected representatives.
Enhancement of the Role Played by the Members of the National Assembly
Elected Members are too often seen as people whose individual influence is limited by party discipline. Earlier parliamentary reforms have tried to correct this perception. Unfortunately, it still persists and, what is more, is not entirely false. Certain measures must be considered if elected Members are to play a more active role. According to the proposals:
- Party discipline could be relaxed by creating three categories for the voting of bills. The Government House Leader would thus indicate, when a bill is introduced, whether Members from the governing party can vote freely, whether cabinet ministers and their parliamentary assistants must respect collective cabinet responsibility, or, finally, whether all the Members from the governing party must vote the same way.
- Elected Members would be consulted for the nomination of persons appointed by the National Assembly (e.g., the Chief Electoral Officer and Auditor General). The Members could submit a list of candidates to the Premier that they consider capable of carrying out the position. Based on this list, the Premier would then make a recommendation to the elected Members concerning his or her choice of candidate.
- A declaration period for the Members would be foreseen for each daily session of the Assembly's proceedings. Each declaration would allow a Member to briefly comment on an event, welcome a distinguished guest or speak about a particular subject.
- A daily period would be exclusively devoted to the affairs of the elected Members. During this period, the Members could debate motions or bills and thus have more substantial exchanges about subjects of their choice.
- The elected Members would be called on to adopt a code of ethics and create an independent Ethics Commissioner position. The incumbent would report to the National Assembly and would be appointed by its Members.
Modernization of the National Assembly
Several aspects of the organization and proceedings of the National Assembly have been severely criticized by external observers and the public in general. For example, it is difficult to understand why the Assembly hurries to pass bills in June and December, and is subjected to an intense schedule that does not lend itself to rigorous work. It is sometimes pointed out that the most serious work is conducted in parliamentary committees. However, certain constraints prevent us from making more efficient use of this very productive aspect of parliamentary work. Likewise, the question and answer period is also criticized. Some people have mentioned that the televising of debates has shown an undisciplined side of the elected Members that has tarnished their image. Furthermore, the order of proceedings brings about delays. These delays lead, in turn, to the postponing or cancelling of group or citizen hearings before parliamentary committees. Finally, the rules governing the recognition of parliamentary parties must be reviewed. In other words, changes are needed to correct the most ineffective aspects of the National Assembly's organization and proceedings. According to the proposals:
- The calendar of parliamentary proceedings could be changed so that the Assembly sits from mid-February to mid-June and from mid-September to mid-December. This would bring an end to intensive periods of work.
- The question and answer period would be modified to restrict the possibility of excessively partisan debates and abuse of process. The length of the questions and answers would be set at 55 seconds for the official Leader of the Opposition and the Premier, and 35 seconds for the other Members. The points of order would be delivered at the end of the question and answer period.
- A party must currently have twelve (12) elected Members or obtain 20 % of the vote to be recognized as a parliamentary party. These requirements seem to be too harsh. They do not accurately reflect the popular support that certain parties can receive. They should, consequently, be reviewed. The number of elected representatives would be brought down to six (6) and the percentage of votes would be set at 15%.
Redefinition of the Relationship between the Government and the National Assembly
In principal, the elected Members pass laws that are then applied by the government and administration. In principal, once again, the government reports to the National Assembly and must have the confidence of the majority of the elected representatives. In practice, however, the government has such a firm control of the parliamentary proceedings that some people believe that it contributes to lowering the esteem in which the National Assembly is held, whatever political party is in power. The government decides which bills will be studied and adopted; it can even suspend the application of rules so as to force the adoption of a law. During the presentation and studying of bills, the government provides minimal information for both the elected Members and the public. The elected representatives' control of government spending and priorities is insufficient. In short, there is an unbalanced relationship between the National Assembly and the government that is in the government's favour. A redefinition of this relationship is thus required to enhance the role that all the elected representatives play as the legislators and controllers of government activity. According to the proposals:
- The mechanisms for expressing the confidence of the Assembly in the government would be reviewed. The elected Members would be called upon to vote on the government's general policies as stated in the opening speech. It would also be necessary to clarify the consequences of passing a motion of non-confidence or refusing to pass a bill. Once a motion of non-confidence has been passed or a bill has been rejected, a motion of confidence would be automatically registered for debate. According to the results of the vote, it would then be clear to all that, even though the elected Members have rejected a measure proposed by the government, they still retain their confidence in the government.
- When introduced by the government or elected Members, bills would be accompanied by more complete explanatory documents so as to better inform the Assembly and general public about the orientations, intended effects and possible costs.
- Allowing for exceptions, a bill presented in one sessional period of parliament would be passed in the following sessional period. For example, if a bill were submitted in the spring, it would not be passed until the session was resumed in the fall. Moreover, the government would not be able to invoke the suspension of certain rules (guillotine) to speed up the passing of a bill for more than one bill at a time.
- Ministers should not participate, as members of a parliamentary committee, in the detailed study of bills. Rather, ministers should sit at the witness table to defend their projects; they could then propose changes but could not vote. Ministers would, however, continue to participate as elected Members in the public consultations on bills or subjects for which they are responsible.
- The accountability for and control of the government's spending and budget policies would be reviewed to ensure more coherent parliamentary proceedings.
Process Leading to the Adoption of Parliamentary Reform
It is customary that changes to the organization and proceedings of the National Assembly require the consent of all its Members. This is why the House Leader and Minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions is submitting the present summary of the proposals to the Members of the National Assembly. All the Members are invited to enrich the debate and work together, regardless of political allegiances, in order to redefine the foundations of Québec parliamentary life.
Interested citizens will be able to express their viewpoints, ask questions and submit proposals by contacting their MNA or the Minister. They will also be able to comment on these questions during the public consultation that will examine the proposed changes to the voting procedure this fall.
The proposed changes are considerable. If adopted, they will bring about a profound transformation in the relationship between the elected Members and citizens, in the National Assembly's organization and proceedings, in the work of the elected Members, and in the relationship between the government and the elected representatives. Finally, the minister is proposing a permanent mechanism for reviewing organization and proceeding rules. This will allow parliament to be more aware of the need to continually adapt without waiting for signs in our society of disillusionment and a loss of trust.
For information, please contact your elected Member:
- by postal mail:
Hôtel du Parlement
Québec (Québec) G1A 1A4
- by e-mail by consulting the address list for the elected Members on the National Assembly's Web site at: www.assnat.qc.ca .
You can also contact the Government House Leader and the Minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions:
- by postal mail:
Office of the Government House Leader
Minister for the Reform of Democratic Institutions
Édifice Pamphile-Le May
1045, rue des Parliamentaires, bureau 1.39
Québec (Québec) G1A 1A4
- by e-mail: ministre.srid@mce.gouv.qc.ca
You can also consult the Web site of the Secrétariat à la réforme des institutions démocratiques at: www.mce.gouv.qc.ca/srid
