The Decision-Making Process / Divisions

June 11, 1992

Debates, p. 11789

Following Question Period on June 5, 1992, Mr. Alex Kindy (Calgary Northeast) rose on a point of order to seek clarification from the Chair concerning the entry in the Votes and Proceedings of the recorded divisions held on June 3, 1992. Mr. Kindy noted that the list of paired Members accompanying Division No. 150 contained the name of a deceased Member and that names appearing on the list of paired Members also appeared on the list of Members voting which ran counter to the purpose of pairing.^[1] The Speaker replied that on June 4, the Acting Speaker (Mr. Charles DeBlois) had informed members that, because of major computer problems, the printed lists did not reflect accurately the notes given to the Clerk during the taking of votes of June 3, and that a revised version of the Votes and Proceedings and the Debates would be reprinted and distributed.^[2] The Speaker said that he would consider Mr. Kindy’s intervention and report to the House if necessary. On June 11, 1992, the Speaker gave his ruling which is reproduced in extenso below.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: Before proceeding to the daily routine of business, I want to give my ruling on a matter raised by the honourable Member for Calgary Northeast a few days ago.

As all honourable Members know, there were some technical difficulties with the Votes and Proceedings of Wednesday, June 3, 1992 in recording the divisions on motions of amendment at report stage of Bill C-81, An Act to provide for referendums on the Constitution of Canada. A reprint was immediately ordered to accurately reflect the results recorded by the Clerk.

In his point of order, the honourable Member for Calgary Northeast was concerned by the fact that some of the names appearing under the listing for paired Members also appeared under the “yeas” or “nays”.

It would appear therefore that some Members whose names were paired with others, indicating that they would not be voting, had in fact cast votes either for or against certain motions.

Should or could action be taken by either the Speaker or the House in regard to this situation.

Standing Order 44.1 specifically deals with paired Members. It explains that a register of paired Members is kept at the Table, “in which any Member of the Government party and any Member of an opposition party may have their names entered together by their respective Whips, to indicate that they will not take part in any recorded division”; independent Members sign in their own right.

The names of these paired Members are inscribed immediately following the list of “yeas” and “nays” for each recorded division.

However, the Standing Orders are completely silent on the question of a broken pair; there is no penalty provided for, nor any corrective action suggested. As the 21st Edition of Erskine May explains on page 350:

The Speaker has ruled that agreements to pair are private arrangements between Members and in no sense matters in which either he or the House can intervene.

Although Westminster’s rules relating to pairing are different from those employed in Canada, the basic principle enunciated in May holds true for our practice, that is to say: a pairing agreement is a private arrangement in which neither the House nor the Speaker can intervene, according to the Standing Orders as now written.

Any change to our current practice would require amendments to our Standing Orders. The Standing Committee on House Management which has as part of its permanent mandate the power to review and report on the Standing Orders, procedure and practice in the House, may wish to look into this question. I thank the honourable Member for Calgary Northeast for bringing this matter to the attention of the House.

The Standing Committee on House Management took up the matter of pairing as the Speaker had suggested. In its 81st report,^[3] presented in the House on April 1, 1993, the Committee made two recommendations with regard to pairing. These read as follows:

22. Pairing should be used more often. Provision should also be made to allow Members to sign the Register of Paired Members in their own right without requiring the approval of the Whips.

23. If a Member who has personally signed the Register of Paired Members for a particular day, time or vote casts any vote in the House on that day, time or vote, the vote or votes shall be disallowed.

This Report was never concurred in by the House.

F0414-e

34-3

1992-06-11