SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 271

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
January 30, 2024 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 271 - Jan/30/24
The Speaker
  • Jan/30/24 10:12:00 a.m.
  • Watch
While I am on my feet, I am also ready to rule on the point of order raised on December 12, 2023, by the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader concerning the application of Standing Order 18 in reference to votes of this House. Earlier in the debate that day, several members argued that it was a violation of this standing order to comment on how certain members or parties had voted on a particular issue. The parliamentary secretary sought clarification from the Chair, contending that members on all sides of the House routinely made such comments and this had always been viewed as acceptable. While the Chair pointed to the wording of Standing Order 18 and to House of Commons Procedure and Practice, which both emphasize that “No member may reflect upon any vote of the House,” there was some dispute as to the actual interpretation and application of the practice. The Chair took it under advisement and committed to return to the House. On the issue of reflecting on a vote, Standing Order 18 states, “No member may reflect upon any vote of the House, except for the purpose of moving that such vote be rescinded.” The second part of that Standing Order is of particular interest. I appreciate that the wording of the standing order can leave members with the impression that the rule prevents other members from commenting on or critiquing how particular members voted on a bill or motion. In the past, there have been occasions where the Chair, relying on this very strict interpretation of the standing order, may have provided guidance that, in my view, is inconsistent with the original purpose of the standing order. The intent of the provision was to prevent members from putting into question a decision already made by the House except by way of a formal motion to rescind that decision. Parliamentary Procedure and Practice in the Dominion of Canada, fourth edition, refers to the prohibition against reflecting on a vote in the section on “Renewal of a Question during a Session”. The section describes a prohibition, stating the following at pages 328 and 329: “That a question being once made and carried in the affirmative or negative cannot be questioned again, but must stand as a judgment of the House”. This suggests to me that the section of Standing Order 18 should be interpreted as being linked to the fundamental principle of not questioning a decision once made. This is consistent with Beauchesne’s Parliamentary Rules and Forms, sixth edition, at page 141, which states that: A Member may not speak against or reflect upon any determination of the House, unless intending to conclude with a motion for rescinding it. Finally, I would also refer members to the Annotated Standing Orders of the House of Commons, second edition. Footnote 20 under Standing Order 18, at page 484, lends credence to the contention that members can in fact comment on the voting record of other members. It states: This Standing Order refers specifically to the votes of the House, and not the votes of individual Members. I do not believe the purpose of the Standing Order is to forestall comment on the positions taken by particular members, or even parties, on a given vote. Indeed, even a cursory review of the Debates will show members of all parties regularly making such comments. In my view, this falls into the realm of acceptable debate. Members are accountable for the votes they cast in the House and should be able to justify their positions. Nevertheless, I appreciate that some members may still have concerns about this practice. I would therefore suggest that the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs is well placed to undertake a review of the application of Standing Order 18 and, if it sees fit, return to the House with any appropriate recommendations. I thank all members for their attention.
668 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border