MLA Report: NDP filibustering just grandstanding against what Albertans voted for

By Medicine Hat News Opinon on July 19, 2019.

Filibuster – a word that has been on the lips of many Albertans recently. While it may sound like the name of a rodent for Groundhog Day, or a favourite sweet treat, what is the true purpose of this parliamentary tool?

History is always a good place to look when analyzing concepts. The first use of this parliamentary tool was by the Roman Senator Cato the Younger. Cato used this tool twice to oppose a mandate of Julius Caesar. The senator, in 60 B.C. and again in 59 B.C., used the approach of speaking continuously until nightfall (the time that the all business had to end for the day) to obstruct legislation to which he was opposed. On both occasions, Caesar found a workaround in regards to Cato’s goals and filibuster attempts. Cato’s filibuster actions proved even then to be exactly what we see it has today – a misdirected strategy for the use of valuable time, effort and taxes.

Healthy debate is the cornerstone of the parliamentary democracy that we are so fortunate to live under. Voters expect our elected representatives to stand up for them in the legislature and speak on their behalf to represent the views of the community. There must be debate on the merits of any given piece of legislation – it is a fundamental action of the electoral body. Free speech and the right to express views – especially in opposition to a differing view – is critical. That is why there is debate after each of the three readings of a bill, so potential flaws can be discovered and corrected. It is the method employed to make sure that the proposed legislation will in fact honour the rights all Albertans and Canadians enjoy. We expect debate. We value debate. We enjoy debate.

There are rules and conventions surrounding just how that debate is to be played out. These rules are to ensure that order and decorum are maintained. That civility remains in place, in other words. Debate can turn argumentative and heated rather fast. Focus can be lost, and debate can move from the original topic to something totally unrelated very quickly. It happens with and without intent.

Filibustering is a purposeful action to extend debate on an item outside of the allotted time frame, with the sole purpose of either setting up a procedural mistake by the governing side, or delaying the passing of a bill, or preventing the passing of a bill altogether. In a legislature where there is a majority rule prevention of a bill passing is almost an impossible to achieve goal. Filibustering under this scenario simply becomes a tool to delay, and grandstand. That is exactly what happened in the last sitting of the legislature. The NDP, chose on two separate occasions to filibuster (delay) bills before the house. The first time it was Bill 2, in early June for more than 24 hours, and then on July 3 for more than 46 hours over three different bills, primarily Bill 8. That is now officially the longest day of sitting on record. Only a filibuster can turn a 24-hour day into 46-hour day. The legislative clock keeps ticking from the time the day’s sitting began until the end. In a filibuster situation the clock just keeps extending the length of that sitting, thus turning it into the longest day on record in this last filibuster scenario. A filibuster unfortunately often simply serves to be an ineffective strategy that in this case is opposite to what more than a million Albertans voted for in the recent election. More than one million Albertans voted for the UCP, whose clearly laid out policy platforms are what the NDP are filibustering against. The people of Alberta voted in numbers that set records, they have spoken clearly. We passed more than a dozen pieces of legislation in our first sitting, a clear reflection to Albertans on our commitment to overcoming ineffective strategies and obstacles.

But Filibuster might be a nice name for a rodent on Groundhog Day.

Drew Barnes is MLA (UCP) for Cypress-Medicine Hat constituency.

8
-7