Inside Politics

FilibusterFAQ: "Wait, what exactly are they debating right now?' and other questions

by Kady O'Malley Posted: June 24, 2011 6:30 PM Last Updated: June 24, 2011 6:51 PM
For the latest news on the filibuster, click here. 

So, what are they -- 'they,' in this context, referring to the House of Commons -- debating right this minute? 

At press time, the Commons is currently in its eighth hour of debate on a hoist motion that would postpone further action on the government's proposed Canada Post back-to-work legislation for six months. 


What's a hoist motion?

Pretty much exactly what it sounds like: a motion to 'hoist' -- or defer -- a bill for a specified period of time, typically three or six months. It's a fairly standard delaying tactic, as it stops the clock on debate of the main item -- in this case, the back-to-work legislation -- for as long as the filibustering party -- or parties -- is able to muster MPs to speak on the motion.

After every member who wishes to do so has used up his allotted time -- twenty minutes to speak, and ten minutes for questions and comments from other members for the first seven hours, at which point it drops to fifteen minutes to speak and five minutes to entertain questions and comments. When the debate collapses -- which, in this instance, is expected to happen only when every NDP MP has had the opportunity to speak -- the House votes on the hoist motion -- and, in this case, almost certainly defeats it. 

How long could that take?

No one really knows -- not down to the minute, at least. The collective best guess at the moment calls for a vote on the hoist motion -- just the hoist motion, not the bill --  sometime between now and the wee small hours of the morning on Saturday. As always, that could change if the NDP decides to let the debate collapse before it runs out of members, although at the moment, that seems unlikely.

What happens after the hoist motion is defeated?

The House returns to -- well, begins, really -- second reading debate on the bill, which means that the same MPs who rose to speak on the hoist motion will have a second opportunity to speak on the main item under the same time limits as were applied during the previous debates.

Once the speakers' list has been exhausted, the House votes on whether to refer the bill to committee -- or, in this case, Committee of the Whole.

Committee of the Whole? What's that?

Funny thing about the Grand Inquest of the Nation: Turns out that if you take the Mace off the Table, it turns into a big room full of members of parliament -- very much like a committee room, in fact. If you put the gavel in the hand of the presiding Commons clerk, the transformation is complete: a 308-member committee at your service. 

Traditionally, committee of the whole is used relatively rarely and in non-contentious situations  -- fast-tracking bills or motions that have unanimous support, or whipping through the estimate votes in time to meet the supply cycle deadline. I've racked my memory, but I can't remember the last time a contested bill went to committee of the whole and it will be fascinating to see exactly how the process unfolds. 

All I can tell you is that the normal standing rules of the House apply, and the motion setting out the terms on how the House will proceed on the bill does not appear to place any time limits on this stage, provided, of course, that all questions necessary to dispose of the bill are put before the House adjourns.  

Just to make it that much more maddening, we have no idea how many amendments, if any, will be proposed -- which could happen during Committee of the Whole, or, in theory, during whatever takes the place of report stage debate when proceeding by CotW instead of the standard practice, but if there are, that, too, will prolong the debate as MPs will also have the chance to speak to those proposals. 

Oh, and there is, of course, third reading to get through as well, but at the moment, that seems so far into the hypothetical future that it is virtually impossible to project what would happen at that point. All we know is that it all has to happen before the House can adjourn. 

Wait, back up: What do you mean "before the House adjourns". Does that mean no breaks?

Yup. Think of the filibuster as the bomb-rigged bus stickhandled by Keanu Reaves in Speed: under the terms of the motion passed by the government to limit debate on the bill, once second reading begins, it can't stop until the bill is passed, as the Chamber itself is already running on borrowed time, since the session was/is set to end when the House rises for the day. 

If you find yourself watching the debate, watch for a wide shot of the Speaker's chair, and check out the calendar on the Table, which is still displaying  June 23, 2011 as the date. That's not an oversight; as far as the parliamentary time zone is concerned, we're still working our way through Thursday, and will until the House finally adjourns, no matter how many hours/days/weeks have passed in the outside world. 

Can't they just extend the sitting?

Not without unanimous consent to change the calendar. There simply isn't time to do it through a contested vote, nor can notice be given, since the next scheduled sitting day is Monday, September 19th. 

What about closure or time allocation?

Already deployed  -- on the motion to limit debate, that is -- but beyond that, the government's hands are tied; closure can only be invoked after debate has been adjourned at least once. Which, as explained via bad 90s action movie analogy above, can't happen in this case, since adjourning now would shut down the House until the fall.   

Now that I think about it, a more apt pop cultural metaphor may be the Weeping Angels from Blink. (Whatever you do, don't take your eyes off the Chamber.) 

Wow.

I know, right?

So, when will it all end?

Beats me. At this point, most people are guessing sometime next week, although it could go longer if the NDP really decides to stick in its heels. Then again, if the house leaders were to strike a deal, it could be over in minutes. That's the magic of parliamentary democracy: it always keeps you guessing.


Wait! I'm still confused!

Don't worry -- that's my job. Alleviating confusion, that is, just to be clear -- not making it worse. If you have any additional questions, feel free to shoot 'em at me in the comments, or drop me a line on twitter. I'll update this post as necessary as the hours -- and days -- progress. It'll give me something to do while I'm keeping an eye on the skeleton crew on the floor from my perch in the Commons gallery. 

Tags: blackberry jungle, filibuster 2011, that's a good question - the extended filibuster remix