Roundup: Procedural secret ballots?

Posted on by

Suggestions for improving the way things work in the Commons are relatively common, and mostly a load of nonsense, but then Kady O’Malley comes along and pitches a new idea that I’d never heard of before, so I figured I’d deconstruct it a little. Essentially, she takes a never-before-used-but-on-the-books procedural tactic and looks to expand it – in this case, secret votes in the Commons on procedural matters. The one on the books is an appeal mechanism for MPs to use when their piece of private members’ business is deemed non-votable by both the subcommittee and the full committee that determines these things. Why this hasn’t been used before is because MPs generally know to keep their PMBs within the rules – federal jurisdiction (which they try to get around with the creation of national strategies) or by creatively trying to ensure that they don’t spend money (though some of those suggestions are too-cute-by-half, and yet they try anyway *cough*That NDP climate change bill that they won’t let die*cough*). O’Malley argues that this secret ballot process, extended to other procedural votes on things like time allocation and splitting complex bills into smaller parts, will somehow embolden MPs and ensure that House Leaders have to convince their caucuses rather than crack the whip. And while this sounds great in theory, I’m not buying it. For starters, even if we think that secret ballots for MPs under limited circumstances will somehow miraculously embolden them (and I’m highly doubtful about that one), it also takes them off the hook when it comes to voting for unpopular things like time allocation or keeping omnibus bills intact. Their voters should see them do it so that they can hold them to account for it. The larger problem, however, is that this is a suggestion that largely re-litigates the last parliament. The issue of omnibus bills this government has promised to amend the Standing Orders to prevent (and that’s a promise that we can hold them to account for), while the issue of time allocation is almost certainly to be handled differently, because frankly, we’re not seeing a return to the days of an incompetent House Leader, like Peter Van Loan most certainly was. And frankly, even it that wasn’t the case, I doubt we would see too many outliers on contentious bills being put before a procedural vote because they tend to buy their party’s decision on matters and will find a justification if it ever comes to that. So while it’s a nice idea in theory, I just can’t see this as anything other than yet another well-meaning bit of tinkering that will only serve to eventually make things worse through its unintended consequences. No thanks.

Good reads:

  • The Conservatives have the gall to say the Liberals should release the human rights report on Saudi Arabia that they commissioned and then didn’t make public.
  • The Conservatives are also saying that the government is withholding releasing the report on doctor-assisted dying “arbitrarily.”
  • The joint committee on doctor-assisted dying has their first meeting on Monday.
  • Despite his disavowals, there are calls for Jason Kenney to “unite the right” in Alberta politics (not that he’s a Progressive Conservative by any stretch).
  • Here’s a look at how the Bank of Canada governor appears to be quietly backing the government’s deficit plans (and fiscal and monetary policy aligning for once).
  • As the Loonie plunges below 70 cents, John Geddes writes about Bill Morneau and the problem of trying to create long-term growth.
  • Susan Delacourt writes about Trudeau, Bowie, and the political power that glamour can bring.

Odds and ends:

The City of Ottawa and Library and Archives Canada may be teaming up to build the new central library branch together.

The National War Memorial also needs a lot of renovation work, and not a lot of time to do it in.

2 thoughts on “Roundup: Procedural secret ballots?”

  1. From experience I remember that Parliaments in Italy and France and elsewhere in Europe have secret ballots, the famous coloured balls put in an urn on the President of the Chambers table. It works for them and this procedure is ancient given the tumultuous history of those countries. On the other hand you have China’s People Assembly where votes are raised hands or electronic, everyone knows how you voted. I would favour some secret ballots on certain questions, it might work. Again I ask myself the question does the public really want to know how their MP voted? I am not sure they do or care.

Comments are closed.