The Commons committee system also provides for the scrutiny of government activity by Members of Parliament. Under Standing Order , the standing committees are endowed with wide surveillance powers, including the power to send for "persons, papers and records" and with certain exceptions wide powers to study and report on legislative, policy, and long-term expenditure plans and management issues related to departments within their mandates. They are also specifically empowered to review Order in Council appointments.
Legislative committees, if struck, would also be empowered to summon departmental officials and other expert witnesses, along with documents and records, in the course of their scrutiny of the legislation referred to them. In both legislative and standing committees, Members are in a position to undertake the well-informed examination of legislation and other governmental activity.
The most celebrated forum in which Members exercise their surveillance function is the daily Question Period. In the few minutes immediately before Question Period, however, Members may attempt to chastise the government for action or inaction by making, under Standing Order 31, a statement of import to themselves and their riding.
During the Question Period itself, Members may interrogate Ministers about alleged cases of mismanagement of public funds or any area of perceived government bungling. It is hard to assess projected government spending, for example, if one lacks technical expertise, or is faced with complex departmental spending programs. House committees studying government estimates are empowered only to approve or suggest decreases in specific appropriations, not to shift government priorities.
Such committees "work under the axe" -- they must report by 31 May of the fiscal year or their reports are simply deemed to have been made. The last function of the Member of Parliament is that of "legitimation.
Citizens of a democratic country like Canada respect its laws as the product of a political system they support and perceive as just.
Because dissenters accept the generally perceived legitimate nature of the law-making process, they normally willingly acquiesce in of majority decisions out of respect for, and support of, the overall political system. In legal matters, conventional wisdom posits that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done.
Similarly, the exercise of government should take place in public. MPs play a valuable part in enhancing the perceived legitimacy of the policy process. To the extent that Canadians perceive that their varied interests are truly represented in the House of Commons -- and duly considered by the government before it formulates legislation -- they are likely both to perceive the House of Commons as a legitimate forum for the making of public policy and to acknowledge the legitimacy of subsequent government legislation.
Another means by which the MP legitimizes the policy process is through voting. There are, however, occasions when parties "play politics" with sensitive public issues, thereby arousing public cynicism towards the policy process and its participants. The long tradition of strong partisan discipline in Canada may preclude serious discussion of important issues among political parties. Government members may feel compelled to praise government action that Opposition parties feel compelled to denounce.
When the positions taken by individual MPs on issues of concern are effectively staked out in advance by the dictates of party discipline, the credibility of MPs as seriously committed supporters or opponents of specific policies may be compromised. Members of Parliament have many roles. In theory at least, they are to be constituency representatives and ombudsmen, orators and law-givers, policymakers and watchmen over the government and bureaucracy, loyal party members and sensitive family members.
In reality, they are human beings who cannot hope to cover adequately all these bases. As an ambitious, policy-oriented backbencher, Mark MacGuigan found that parliamentary demands were "considerable" and constituency cases "staggering.
To be successful over the long run, Members of Parliament must find a balance between their personal, party, and parliamentary lives. This involves deciding which of their parliamentary roles to emphasize. A great many decide to focus on their representational role because acting as "ombudsman" in particular can offer not only political, but also the greatest personal satisfaction. Other Members are attracted to politics to achieve certain policy and legislative goals.
The reform of the procedures of the House over the past 30 years, and particularly over the past 10, has opened many more avenues by which they can exert an influence. Canadian Study of Parliament Group. Ottawa Conference. Bruce Doern and Cassandra Blais. Parliamentary Democracy in Canada. Issues for Reform. Methuen, Toronto, Franks, C. The Parliament of Canada. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, Jackson, Robert and Michael Atkinson. The Canadian Legislative System. Macmillan, Toronto, Jackson, Robert and Doreen Jackson.
Politics in Canada. Prentice-Hall Canada , MacGuigan, Mark. Pross, Paul. Stanfield, Robert. Tremblay, Manon and Marcel R. In these circumstances, MPs will not have the same daily experiences as those of most of their constituents. In these circumstances, engagement with constituents is that much more necessary to understand their concerns. Information and insights gained from constituency casework can be of enormous help to the MP in deciding whether to support or oppose particular pieces of legislation.
When considering public policy, MPs should of course critically examine the evidence for and against a particular course of section.
They will then inevitably decide what needs to be done in accordance with their values. But listening to what constituents have to say is again an important part of acquiring the understanding that a legislator need.
And, of course, those whose lives are changed — for better or worse — by a particular public policy are frequently best placed to judge the impact. In my experience, legislating is the easy bit. The more difficult is the enforcement of that legislation. And constituents who can demonstrate to their MP that they are being denied their legal rights are not only doing the right thing for themselves, they are also alerting their MP to the failure of legislation to achieve its stated objectives.
Laws that are not enforced are worthless. Appropriate engagement with constituents can provide an MP with an understanding of whether legislation is making a difference or not. For constituents to be able to make informed judgments about their representatives they need to know what MPs can do and are doing. Often this is not the case. Many people know little about what parliaments do and for what MPs are responsible. In the UK, many believe that we run local councils and can tell them what to do.
I even have some constituents who think I can interfere with legal proceedings and prevent them from being prosecuted! I believe that those responsible for this poor state of political literacy are primarily parliamentarians themselves. As a start, we need to improve the quality of citizenship education, not least in schools. This is now being done in the UK and, in my experience, has been beneficial for students and teachers alike. But parliaments themselves must take more responsibility to inform and educate.
When I was first elected, there was no organised induction course for MPs at Westminster, let alone a programme to explain to the rest of the country what parliament is all about. We now have an Education Service that particularly works with schools and Members to support young people in developing their understanding of parliament and democracy. So, one reason why MPs should think carefully about how they engage with constituents is that this is an important way to raise the level of political literacy.
Another reason is that MPs have an enormous amount to learn from constituents, the more so when the lifetime experiences of MPs differ markedly from those of the people they serve. Full coordinates for individual Members of Parliament, including constituencies, are available at Addresses for Current Members of Parliament.
Parliamentary Business Parliamentary Business - Home. The House. Procedural Reference Material Library of Parliament. Parliamentary Diplomacy. Members - Home. Members and Roles.
Related Information. Participate - Home. About the House - Home. Transparency and accountability. Arts and Heritage.
0コメント