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
  • May/9/24 3:21:05 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, multiple articles, including one on the front page of the National Post, as I just showed the House, were published using an official statement provided by the Speaker's official spokesperson, which means it required his sign-off. This is particularly concerning to me and to Canadians when the matter is before the Speaker for a decision to be made. When the Speaker was asked to provide comment to CTV News on May 1 concerning why he kicked out the leader of the official opposition, he rightly governed himself in that moment and he said, “It would be unfair for the Speaker to comment on things that happened in the House”. However, that same day, the Speaker's official spokesperson released a statement concerning my question of privilege. It is curious to me, then, that the Speaker would deem it appropriate to comment on one matter before the House but not another. In many ways, mine is more severe, because mine is an official question of privilege requiring adjudication, while the matter the Speaker refrained from speaking to actually did not require a ruling at all. On the front page of the National Post of May 2, the day after I moved my question of privilege, the following statement was issued by the Speaker's office, again signed off by the Speaker. It says, “The blues are unofficial and it is not unusual for changes to be made during the editing and revision process. Sometimes comments are left out when there is a lot of noise, and it is not clear what was said”. This is from the Speaker's office spokesperson, Mathieu Gravel. In the Speaker's own words, and I will repeat them, he said it is “unfair for the Speaker to comment on things that happened in the House,” yet his office released an official statement. The question I leave with the Speaker for consideration today is this: Why was an official statement concerning my question of privilege issued to the media? I look forward to receiving an answer when the Speaker makes his official ruling concerning my question of privilege.
362 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 312 - May/9/24
Mr. Warren Steinley
  • May/9/24 9:12:22 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, there seems to be so little interest in the fall economic statement, that I do not think there is quorum.
27 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 312 - May/9/24
Ms. Marilyn Gladu (Sarnia—Lambton, CPC)
  • May/9/24 9:22:42 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, the fall economic statement is supposed to build an economy that works for all Canadians, but I can tell from the member's comments that clearly it is not working for the economy in Quebec. I wonder what the member thinks the government should have put forward in order to promote the economy in Quebec.
57 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 312 - May/9/24
Mr. Mark Gerretsen
  • May/9/24 11:32:51 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would be lying if I said that I do not have a bit of FOMO for not being invited to the party in the back room. In any event, I found it very interesting when the member said that the Liberals took all the Conservatives' great ideas and put them into the fall economic statement, yet she still will not vote for it. What is going on here? Does she not like the initiatives that she claims the Liberals took from the Conservatives?
86 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border