SoVote

Dec/4/23 1:02:10 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this is the context my colleagues were talking about. I was the 25th Speaker of the Saskatchewan legislature and I resigned. Why did I resign? It was to take part in a partisan event, a partisan meeting I could not attend because I was Speaker. That is the point. We should all be asking ourselves why the Speaker, knowing the rules, being the referee and being the subject expert on the rules, did not see the conflict in attending a partisan event. I was relatively new, as I had only served one term before becoming Speaker. The tradition of this place is that we elect someone who has served many terms or has shown a great grasp of the procedures and traditions of this place so that we do not find ourselves in the situation we find ourselves in today. December 4, 2023, is a date that will be repeated in this place. I feel that it is so important to have the respect of an impartial Speaker. All else does not matter in this place unless the Speaker is impartial.

183 words

Hon. Andrew Scheer

Dec/4/23 1:03:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I will be very brief. I just want to again reference the statement the Speaker made today. He said, “I would like to reassure members that the principles of respect, impartiality and decorum are values I continue to prioritize for my tenure as Speaker.” Those are not things one just says; those are things one actually has to do. I ask the Speaker to consider this: Should you not agree that this rises to the level of requiring a privilege motion, you will be saying that it is okay for Speakers to engage in these types of partisan activities. I do not want to see the special way the Speaker conducts himself or herself start to be eroded because of the actions that happened this weekend if the House does not take a decision on this.

140 words

The Deputy Speaker

Dec/4/23 1:04:29 p.m.
Watch

I believe I have enough to bring this back. I know the hon. House leader of the NDP is reserving some time to come back, so I want to make sure I have the opportunity to hear from the hon. member. I am going to urge the next two speakers to make sure they are trying to add to the point that this is a prima facie case and stick to the information, not to all the other points that members have been making. The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.

93 words

Mr. Garnett Genuis (Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, CPC)

Dec/4/23 1:05:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I do want to address this question of privilege and speak to the international role of the Speaker, which I do not think has been raised by other members. The primary role of the Speaker, of course, is to preside over this chamber, and impartiality is crucial in his work in that regard. However, the Speaker also represents this chamber in various fora with respect to international work, with respect to Canadian diplomacy around the world. The parliamentary website specifically identifies the role of the Speaker in terms of international work and diplomatic functions. Just this year, a previous Speaker made numerous international trips: at the end of June, a trip to Italy and the Holy See; in April, a trip to Denmark and Sweden; and in March, a trip to Argentina and Chile, for example. The Speaker's impartiality is crucial for their role in international diplomacy and in their work around education and modelling democracy, in some cases, in countries where there are struggles with democracy, where institutions are more vulnerable to capture and to other kinds of pressures and problems. The reality and the presentation of impartiality are critical for a Speaker's work, representing this chamber diplomatically, seeking to promote democracy. I hope that is taken into consideration as well, as the question of privilege is evaluated; that is the Speaker's role internally as well as the Speaker's role externally, speaking on behalf of members and on behalf of the House. Frankly, it is a grave scandal that we would have a Speaker giving the appearance of active partisanship while in his or her position, because that member, subsequently, will be expected to travel to other countries, to speak about our institutions and, in fact, to make the case, in more troubled context, for the importance of impartial institutions, the importance of having independent election authorities, officers of Parliament, etcetera. If the Speaker is compromised with respect to perception of his or her authentic impartiality, if compromised in that perception domestically, it becomes very challenging for that Speaker to fulfill his or her function internationally. It is a critical issue for Canadian democracy, for our own ability to represent our constituents in Canada, but it is also a pressing and important issue in the projection and promotion of our values around the world. Again, I would just encourage you, Mr. Speaker, to take this element of the question into consideration as you prepare for your ruling.

414 words

Mr. Corey Tochor

Dec/4/23 1:08:21 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, for clarification, I was rushed by the NDP-Liberal coalition cover-up guys on my last statement about—

21 words

Mr. Charlie Angus

Dec/4/23 1:08:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. What we are hearing is a serious question. The member is just throwing out partisan junk. He was not talking about the question at hand. As Speaker, you have an obligation to ensure that this is not descending into partisanship, but that we are actually dealing with something very serious, which is the contempt of the House potentially by the Speaker. I would ask that this be kept on focus, rather than allowing the Conservatives to play games.

87 words

The Deputy Speaker

Dec/4/23 1:09:04 p.m.
Watch

I am trying my best to stick to the facts so this can come forward. Will the member for Saskatoon—University just give the clarification that he wants to give, please.

32 words

Mr. Corey Tochor

Dec/4/23 1:09:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, when I resigned as Speaker, that was before taking part in a partisan meeting, not after. It was not that I got caught being on the video screen at a national event for a partisan party; it was to take part in a federal nomination to be here. I could not take part in that partisan activity with that hat on—

64 words

The Deputy Speaker

Dec/4/23 1:09:41 p.m.
Watch

I thank the member for the clarification. The hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot.

15 words

Mr. Damien Kurek (Battle River—Crowfoot, CPC)

Dec/4/23 1:09:48 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is troubling that we are forced to have this discussion in this place. I will reference another privilege discussion that I observed a number of years ago under a previous Speaker, under a previous government. The reason I reference it will become very apparent shortly. It happened to be an NDP member at the time, who was on the opposition bench in the official opposition under former prime minister Stephen Harper and the then Conservative government. There was a discussion about the privileges of a member being violated because the security guards did not allow ease of access to the chamber in the old Centre Block, which, of course, is a little different circumstance than now. An extended discussion took place about the particular NDP member's ability to access the House of Commons and that in the likelihood that ability was hindered in any way, it would have been a violation of the member's privilege, a privilege that is guarded so dearly. Most people watching would hear of the idea of a question of privilege and probably have many questions about what the big deal is. When it comes to the privileges we have in this place, they are so carefully guarded, because that is the mechanism for which we are able to represent the people who send us here to perform our sacred duties. When it comes to the discussion that took place on that question of privilege on the few moments that an NDP member was unable to enter this place in a timely manner, which could have led to her not being able to perform her duties, there is a direct correlation to the discussion we are having here today because—

290 words

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen

Dec/4/23 1:11:45 p.m.
Watch

I rise on a point of order. I think you know what I am going to say, Mr. Speaker. You have already ruled on this. You have asked for this debate to end and for us to continue with the business of the House. Therefore, I would ask that happen now.

51 words

Rise
Point

The Deputy Speaker

Dec/4/23 1:11:59 p.m.
Watch

I will caution the hon. member to get to the point because there are a number of things I want to get moving on. We are already a little over an hour into this question of privilege. I want to give it its due time, but I also want to take it back and then render a decision in the House as soon as possible as Deputy Speaker. The hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot.

76 words

Mr. Damien Kurek

Dec/4/23 1:12:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, not very often will I defend the NDP whatsoever, but I find it interesting that the NDP would be opposed to an example that gets to the very heart of what we are discussing. In that case, it was the physical—

44 words

The Deputy Speaker

Dec/4/23 1:12:38 p.m.
Watch

The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay is rising on a point of order. I know what he is going to say, and it is about making the point. I did ask the hon. member to make that point. The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

48 words

Mr. Charlie Angus

Dec/4/23 1:12:47 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we want to hear a ruling. This is a serious issue. What I am seeing, though, is like allowing a free pass to take partisan shots that are needless. If we are going to have a chamber that does the job of dealing with something as serious as this, I want to hear a ruling. I do not need to see this descend into this kind of partisan gamesmanship. I am asking you to bring the proper focus to this.

82 words

Hon. Mike Lake

Dec/4/23 1:13:20 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, on that point of order, NDP members have stood multiple times now, giving cover to the government. At this point, we do not know what the NDP position is. We know what the positions of two of the parties are on this serious issue. Perhaps the next time the member stands, he can shed some light on whether the NDP is going to continue to cover for the Liberal government.

72 words

The Deputy Speaker

Dec/4/23 1:13:46 p.m.
Watch

I am going to go to the next individual. We are down to the last speakers on this question of privilege. I do want to cut this off because I am fully aware that time is going by. The hon. member for Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman.

47 words

Mr. James Bezan (Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, CPC)

Dec/4/23 1:14:05 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, on this question of privilege, I wanted to provide some extra information, because, like everyone else, I was shocked when I saw the Speaker in his robes addressing a leadership convention. I wanted to look at the use of the House of Commons resources as described under the bylaws of the Board of Internal Economy. Under “Parliamentary functions”, section 4(1), it says: The funds, goods, services and premises provided by the House of Commons to a Member under the Parliament of Canada Act, this By-law or any other by-law made under that Act may be used only for carrying out the Member’s parliamentary functions. It goes on to say, under “Partisan activities”, section 4(2): The funds, goods, services and premises provided by the House of Commons to a Member may be used by the Member for partisan activities only if those activities fall within the parliamentary functions of the Member. It goes on to say, “Not parliamentary functions”, under section 4(3), “For greater certainty, the following activities, when performed by a Member, are not parliamentary functions.” Clause (b) goes on to say: activities related to the administration, organization and internal communications of a political party, including participation in a party leadership campaign or convention, solicitations of contributions and solicitations of membership to a political party; It further says under “Precision”: For greater certainty, a Member’s parliamentary or constituency office shall not be used as a meeting or organizational location in relation to any of the activities referred to in subsection (3). This is very clear, that all of us are prohibited from using our House of Commons resources, including our staff, our premises, being our offices, for any partisan activity. Here we have the Speaker himself using his office, dressed in his House of Commons Speaker robes, addressing a Liberal provincial leadership election. I lose complete faith and trust in the Speaker for violating the rules that he is supposed to enforce himself.

344 words

Mr. Damien Kurek

Dec/4/23 1:16:19 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the intervention by my colleague from Manitoba. I would simply say this. When it comes to the role that partisanship does play in the House, I, among many others, are known for their partisanship. I do find it troubling that there would be members of this place who would use a debate that is about defending the rights and privileges of members to represent their constituents, including when that partisanship takes place, which is why I very carefully selected the example I did about an NDP opposition member's ability to access the chamber. I make that quick connection to the debate that we are having here today. If members look at the back of their IDs, they will see the very clear rules of privileges and what parliamentary privilege means with respect to accessing the parliamentary precinct. A member's ability to access this place goes beyond simply the physical ability for us to walk into this chamber. It needs to ensure that members are able to, in an uninhibited fashion, trust the institutions and infrastructure of this place, including the role of the Speaker as the arbiter and a non-partisan voice that does not take preference over another. To sum this up very quickly, the actions of the Speaker have called into question whether myself or any other member of this place can truly trust the actions of the Chair to ensure that the role of the Speaker and the sacred obligation that this has within our parliamentary system is maintained. Without that, it devolves into something that truly does abuse our privileges.

270 words

Mr. James Bezan

Dec/4/23 1:18:17 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, just to add to my comments on the bylaws, I should also draw your attention to section 7, which says: Except as may be approved by the Board and subject to subsection (2), a Member may not use funds, goods, services and premises provided by the House of Commons for the benefit of any person, association or organization, or for the promotion of a product, service or event of any person, association or organization. This is very clear, that when the Speaker addressed the Liberal convention this past weekend, it was to the benefit of a third party. There needs to be actions taken to prevent that from ever happening again.

113 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 261