SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 304

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 29, 2024 11:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 304 - Apr/29/24
Mr. Scott Reid
  • Apr/29/24 11:41:29 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I actually have no comments on government legislation. As I observed in my remarks, my goal is to deal with programming motions of closure and time allocations, as they relate to motions to amend the Standing Orders, and absolutely nothing else. There is an argument that, because of the volume of business before the House, we need to have a limited time for each debate. That is the basis on which each of the successive restrictions on the length of debates were justified in 1913, 1969 and 1991. That may or may not have legitimacy vis-à-vis legislation and other matters before the House; however, vis-à-vis discussions of the Standing Orders, I think there should be no programming motions whatsoever. The only solution is consensus. That involves taking the time to find consensus and showing the willingness to compromise that may be necessary.
148 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 304 - Apr/29/24
Mr. Alain Therrien (La Prairie, BQ)
  • Apr/29/24 11:42:32 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have to hand it to the opposition member. His motion makes sense. At the same time, it does not. Why would I say that? Because amending the Standing Orders of the House of Commons should be done by consensus. As we saw last year, unfortunately, some people do not seek consensus in the House. I think it is kind of sad that anyone would have to move a motion to ensure more discussion when it is time to amend the Standing Orders, but I understand the process. The Bloc Québécois will support this motion. Still, does my colleague agree that it is sad and strange that someone has to move this kind of motion instead of just assuming that consensus would be the norm in such situations? It is in the interest of all parliamentarians to agree on the rules that govern how the House operates.
153 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 304 - Apr/29/24
Mr. Scott Reid
  • Apr/29/24 11:43:36 a.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I think that my hon. colleague is right. He used the word “strange”. In a way, it is strange to have a system that allows party line votes on a motion that would change that system to a consensus system. I do not have the magical power to change that. I am simply making an observation, and I hope that the spirit of consensus will prevail here.
71 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border