44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 12, 2023 11:00AM
- Jun/12/23 9:16:31 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise this evening in the House to join the debate on Government Business No. 26, which seeks to make permanent the changes to the Standing Orders to allow members of Parliament to participate virtually in the work we do in this place. This motion is an important step forward in the evolution of our democracy, to make sure we are keeping with the times.
I am part of the class of 2019, as I was elected in October of that year. For me, Parliament was in session for only about six weeks before the pandemic hit, so I was just getting the sense of how the business in this place operates when that hit. Then the COVID pandemic threw everything for a loop. We had to learn how to do the business of this place but be able to respect the public health guidelines we were given, which prevented us from travelling across the country and prevented us from gathering in large groups.
Therefore, at that time, we embarked on a new innovation that allowed us to participate virtually by creating a special version of Zoom. It would allow us to participate in a way that respected those public health guidelines but still do our important work where we would be able to deliver speeches by Zoom, participate as members of committees, and have witnesses in our committees participate by Zoom as well. We also were able to vote on important pieces of legislation. What we originally developed was actually not very efficient. We each had to say on Zoom what our vote was, but eventually we actually developed an application which utilizes facial recognition so that we are now able to vote anywhere in our country in sometimes 10 seconds or less. This is a very important innovation, to my mind.
The experience has shown that virtual Parliament worked. We were able to get very important work done over the course of the pandemic to deliver help to Canadians in some of the most dire straits. We were rapidly learning what the impacts of COVID were, and we were making an iterative response to make sure the programs we were rolling out were fit for purpose.
Since the public health guidelines have changed and we have been able return en masse to this place, we have kept these provisions as an addition to the work we do in this place, and that is very important to add here because there are very clear benefits to our being able to participate virtually when we need to. For instance, if there is an emergency, particularly a family emergency, members are able to be there with some of their loved ones in some of their most difficult states. Multiple members of Parliament have given birth just in the last year, and this has allowed them to continue to do their work as MPs while being at home with their newborn child. In addition, something that was very much highlighted during the pandemic is that those who are in poor health or are sick do not need to travel to be here. It means that they are not potentially exposing other people if they are contagious, or putting themselves in a very risky position. I have heard a number of the previous speakers mention some names of members of Parliament here, and I do want to just mention our late colleague, the Hon. Jim Carr, who, with a terminal condition, was able to participate virtually, right up until the end of his life. That bears mentioning because he brought so much wisdom to this place and I learned a lot from him personally.
Another benefit I would mention about this system is that it allows members to be in their constituencies more and to do more constituency work. A very important part of our job as parliamentarians is to make sure we can be there and listen to the concerns people have and be able to advocate for their priorities. To be able to do that, it is important to actually connect with people in our constituency so that when we come to this place, we are able to advance those priorities. Many of us in this place have ridings with large populations. For me, it is 131,000 people, and there are many other members of Parliament who have even more constituents and represent large areas that are sometimes very difficult to get to.
It is important that we be able to connect with folks so we do not get too caught up in the Ottawa bubble here and become detached from the realities people are facing. That work as a constituency member of Parliament is very important, as is just being there at events, so people can feel close to their government and so members are able to be more responsive.
There are significant costs to the pre-existing system we have, where everybody is here in person. A number of members previously have talked about how the size of our country, the largest democracy in the world and the second-largest country in the world, presents some major challenges. Just the time to get here from our constituencies can be immense. At the best of times, it takes me eight hours, point to point, to get here. In the last two weeks I have missed connections, which meant I had to stay overnight in places along the way. Some other members have talked about it taking 24 hours to get here, so time is a cost. There is also a monetary cost every time we travel here; it can be in the thousands of dollars for a round trip for folks to get here.
There are health issues, particularly for some of our more vulnerable colleagues, when we are doing 26 round trips a year, particularly if we have a time zone change. For me, it is a three-hour time difference, which does take its toll as well. There are also the environmental impacts. I calculated that, for every round trip I do to Ottawa, there are 1.2 tonnes of greenhouse gases emitted, so I think we all need to be mindful of that. Then, of course, there are the opportunity costs when we are not able to be in our community as well.
One thing that I do not think has been mentioned so far in the debate today is the cost it has on families. I have seen some statistics that have shown that members of Parliament have a divorce rate of 85%. It is not hard to see why. With so many of my colleagues I have talked to, I have seen the stress it puts on relationships when they are not able to be with their family for half of the year. I think this is something we also need to take into account, because it discourages many people from getting involved in this kind of work, particularly for young families or young couples expecting to have a family. The challenge of the amount of time we need to be here, which is sometimes 130 days of the year, is a huge challenge in getting more of the people involved in this type of work whom we really need to get involved.
I do not want to say I am advocating for all virtual, because there are very real benefits to people's being here. As the government House leader for the Conservative Party mentioned, being able to talk to a minister and get something solved is much easier when one is able to walk to their desk and have that conversation. We are not, if all virtual, able to develop the informal relationships that are so key to making this work effectively, whether with other members of Parliament from other parties, with senators, bureaucrats or other stakeholders.
It is really important that, when we are giving speeches, we be in this place, because the impact when we are able to see how it is landing with somebody is very different than reading something on the screen, so I think there should be guidelines for the use of the system. I think it is a very important tool we have. All members should seek to be here far more in person than virtually, and the experience to date has shown that the vast majority of MPs are doing just that. The questions and answers in question period should be done in person. I know a few other members have brought this up previously, but the experience has been that ministers are here answering questions, which is very key for accountability.
I very much support this motion, which creates the conditions for us to be more effective MPs and better people, more energetic in the work we do as well. It has very clear benefits when it is done in a judicious way, and the experience to date has shown that it has been used in just that way.
1511 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/12/23 9:26:48 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think being there in person can make the job of a committee chair a lot easier. It is not impossible to do it virtually, but they do need to have help on the ground to see how people are motioning and whether there is agreement in the room. I do not think it is absolutely necessary, but I have seen some chairs who are able to do it very well and some not as well. I think that, ideally, we would have chairs in person. My experience has been that it makes it a much smoother process.
100 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/12/23 9:28:56 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think that is one of the reasons we are having this debate this evening. When we started using this system, we had unanimous consent. To do our job, we need to hear the different perspectives and allow everyone to contribute to the debate.
I agree that it is very important that the ministers be here to answer questions. I am here to listen to the member speak about what he would like to do with this motion. I think that we can find solutions by having discussions.
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/12/23 9:30:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, indeed, that was one of the points I brought up in my speech. Hybrid allows for some of that flexibility, and we do need to get more women and more people from equity-seeking groups here in this place. Right now, for the first time ever, we have 100 women represented here. We need to find ways to encourage more people to be here, and if some of these issues are preventing that, we need to have an honest look at it, because when we do that we improve our democracy and get those important voices heard in this place.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
