SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 312

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 9, 2024 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 312 - May/9/24
Mrs. Rachael Thomas (Lethbridge, CPC)
  • May/9/24 3:20:05 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise to add to the question of privilege I raised on May 1, concerning the removal of my words from the Hansard. The question I submit to you today is the following: Is it appropriate for the Speaker of this place, the House of Commons, or those authorized to speak on his behalf, to comment publicly on a question of privilege that is before him for adjudication? I would like to explain why I put forward this question. It has come to my attention that the office of the Speaker did, in fact, comment to the media regarding my question of privilege. In fact, multiple articles, including one I have here on the front page of the National Post—
123 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 312 - May/9/24
Hon. Andrew Scheer (Regina—Qu'Appelle, CPC)
  • May/9/24 3:25:24 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise to add a couple of points to the comments made by my colleague for Lethbridge. In trying to get to the bottom of who altered the transcript of the Hansard on the day that the member for Lethbridge was kicked out by the Speaker, certain questions were posed to the aspect of the House administration that is responsible for the transcripts for Hansard. Those questions included who gave the order to alter the official record, what guidelines were in place at the time that decision was made and other related points. I will not go into all the questions that were posed, but the answer came back from the Hansard department saying that, since this was raised as a question of privilege in the House, they would refrain from answering those questions from my colleague and instead leave it to the Speaker. Therefore, I just want to ensure that, when the Speaker does come back on that ruling, those questions that were put to the House administration are addressed by the Speaker. The material change of the official record is a serious matter. The deletion of the two words “I withdraw” are substantial because the Speaker, on that day, kicked out the member for Lethbridge and deprived her of the ability to exercise her parliamentary duties and rights for the rest of that day. To keep a member of Parliament from participating in debate and being able to vote in potential votes and other types of related parliamentary functions is no small matter. Even though these are just two small words, the matter itself is very serious. Therefore, I would like to signal to the Chair that we are expecting that the questions that were put directly to the House of Commons administration are addressed in that Speaker's ruling.
306 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border