SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 319 - May/28/24

Mr. Rick Perkins (South Shore—St. Margarets, CPC)

May/28/24 10:29:24 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am sure the longest-serving NDP House leader in history, Stanley Knowles, is rolling over in his grave at what the House leader for the NDP just said: He thinks that one of the most fundamental principles of a parliamentary democracy, the neutrality of the Speaker, is not worthy of a privilege debate, when the Deputy Speaker has actually ruled that the Speaker pursued partisan activities, breaching his neutrality. The government House leader, who has a responsibility to enforce and uphold the rules of the House, has called that ruling of the Deputy Speaker “fake”. It is reprehensible that the government House leader would question the ruling of the Deputy Speaker on this issue. As my colleague from Manitoba said, the government House leader has a responsibility, first and foremost, to understand that the rules say a privilege motion debate is more important than any other piece of legislation in the House. I know the NDP does not understand it. I expected more from the government House leader, yet, twice this week, he has imposed closure on issues. On every single bill, every single issue, the government imposes closure. They are cutting off democracy and debate at every turn, and he has no respect for the rules of the House.

215 words

Hon. Steven MacKinnon

May/28/24 10:30:52 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, this is what it has come to, of all things. I cannot believe my ears: We have a Conservative, under the current Leader of the Opposition, quoting Stanley Knowles, who had a reverence for this place, who achieved the status of having a permanent place in the House. To compare the actions of the Conservative Party with the actions of a person who inspires us all with his reverence for our democratic institutions is something that, quite frankly, is shocking. It is right out of the MAGA playbook, where up is down, north is south and black is white. The Conservatives have become masters in turning words around, in making base populist appeals. What they really do is stand up every day and stop earnest, honest attempts to make life better for people from becoming reality. We see it in the United States, and we see it here. They obstruct, delay, insult and, yes, disrespect our democratic institutions.

160 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

May/28/24 10:32:25 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the idea that a Speaker who is represented by individuals in their community cannot be partisan is absolutely ludicrous. I come from the riding of the longest-serving Speaker of the House of Commons, Peter Milliken. I personally attended fundraisers that Peter Milliken put on as a Liberal in our riding while he was Speaker. There is an established practice for it. If one does not want to listen to what the longest-serving Speaker of the House of Commons did, let us just talk about his successor, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, who is the House leader for the Conservatives right now. While he was Speaker, he not only attended a fundraiser in his riding but also went to the neighbouring riding of Regina—Wascana and attended a fundraiser. There is documented evidence of it. I have tried to table it in the House of Commons before. There are pictures of him at that fundraiser but, of course, Conservatives would never let me do that. It raises this question: Why are the Conservatives and the Bloc hell-bent on taking down this particular Speaker? I cannot wrap my head around it. Why are they after the current Speaker of the House of Commons?

209 words

Partisan

Hon. Steven MacKinnon

May/28/24 10:33:39 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we can only wonder why the Conservative Party will not relent in its attempts to derail the work of the House and to attack the Chair and the democratic institution that we are all so privileged to serve in. I can only explain it with the word “hypocrisy”. It is the same hypocrisy that has a member vote against a housing program and then go and announce the results in her riding. Conservative members do this all the time. They put this stuff on repeat. They come here to obstruct, delay, insult and offend, but they do not offer one single idea. I urge those who are watching us today to watch and listen closely. Is there a single alternative offered by the Conservatives that helps them in their day-to-day life? That is what we are trying to propose. That is what we are trying to move to, so we can get to work on things such as pharmacare, dental care, expanding the rural rebate on the price of pollution; these are things that put money in the pockets of Canadians. Those are the things that we are going to be talking about later today if these Conservatives would just get out of the way.

211 words

Mrs. Marilène Gill (Manicouagan, BQ)

May/28/24 10:35:06 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to make two points. First, I would like to remind the member that we are talking about a question of privilege. I do not think that raising a question of privilege can be considered obstructing Parliament. On the contrary, that is our right as members. We need to settle this issue. That is the first point I wanted to make. Second, the party in power keeps saying that we are unable to pass bills, yet it is the party in power that is responsible for setting the legislative agenda. It is the party in power that decided to call an election after two years. If bills are being delayed, it is not because we do not want to work. It is because we have a Speaker who is not doing his job properly and who obviously lacks judgment. In addition, he is partisan. It is also because the Liberals decided to slow down the process by calling an election and mismanaging government business.

168 words

Hon. Steven MacKinnon

May/28/24 10:36:02 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is true that questions of privilege take priority in Parliament. That is why we have been debating this matter all day. However, for the umpteenth time, the Bloc Québécois is joining the opposition leader and his troops in attacking the Speaker of the House and the work that needs to be done here. The summer adjournment is only a few weeks away. The member knows full well that we are going to address issues that are likely to please her constituents, issues like the dental care plan, initiatives like the pharmacare plan and the amounts to be transferred to the Quebec government to expand child care centres in her riding. The member knows full well that she is obstructing Parliament, and we want to stop that obstruction so that we can finally offer her constituents and all Canadians measures that will help them in their everyday lives.

154 words

Mr. Peter Julian

May/28/24 10:37:35 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, Canadians should be very concerned about the vicious attacks on the independent Speaker of the Saskatchewan legislature by Conservatives and about the vicious attacks that we are seeing here by Conservatives. A former Speaker of the House, the current member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, said this: “Reflections on the character or actions of the Speaker—an allegation of bias...could be taken by the House as breaches of privilege and punished accordingly.” He urged, as the Conservative Speaker at that time, who was the Speaker representing all of us in the House of Commons, that members be judicious in the expressions they choose to use. We have seen an unparalleled attack on the Speaker by Conservative MPs in their comments in social media. It is unbelievable. It is something that would surely make Stanley Knowles roll over in his grave, knowing that Conservatives are treating, with such disrespect, our parliamentary institutions, as they treat with disrespect our independent institutions like the Bank of Canada, the Auditor General, the PBO and so on. My question to my colleague is simple: Why do Conservatives have so much disrespect for the institutions that govern us and our democracy?

201 words

Hon. Steven MacKinnon

May/28/24 10:38:50 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is a very good question, and we are seeing it all over the world. Democracies are under assault by right-wing parties. Right-wing parties seek to create chaos and to create disorder. They hope that those who are watching at home just say that it is not for them, that their votes do not matter and that they have no say in all of that. The fact that is people do have a say. They do not have to listen to the Conservative nonsense, where what is okay for them back in the day is no longer okay. Respect for institutions must be rigidly enforced when the Conservatives are in the chair and they are in power, but respect for institutions must not be enforced at any other time. This is the playbook we are seeing across the world. It is the playbook we are seeing in the United States, and it is a shame that Conservatives are engaging in it here.

166 words

Mr. James Bezan

May/28/24 10:39:54 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the comments just made by the government House leader, the member for Gatineau, are contemptuous at best. What we are debating here right now is closure on a decision made by the Deputy Speaker that the Speaker has a prima facie case of violating the privilege of the House. Just to remind the government House leader, “The rights accorded to the House and its Members to allow them to perform their parliamentary functions unimpeded are referred to as privileges or immunities.” On page 323 of the procedure and House affairs book, it says, “When in the Chair, the Speaker embodies the power and authority of the office, strengthened by rule and precedent. He...must at all times show, and be seen to show, the impartiality required to sustain the trust and goodwill of the House.” The Speaker has lost the goodwill and trust of the House, and that is why the Deputy Speaker found him in contempt of Parliament and found it to be a prima facie case at that.

176 words

Hon. Steven MacKinnon

May/28/24 10:40:48 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, there have been a lot of questions of privilege raised by a lot of the opposition. That has happened over the course of history. There is a way to resolve that, which is what we are proposing to move to right now. That is what we will be doing. We will do so serenely, democratically and within the rules and procedures of the House. The member should reflect on how this is going, with respect to our democratic institutions, in that right wing—

86 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/28/24 10:41:14 a.m.
Watch

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith the question necessary to dispose of the motion now before the House. The question is on the motion. If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

74 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

May/28/24 10:41:42 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we request a recorded vote, please.

8 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

May/28/24 10:41:44 a.m.
Watch

Call in the members.

4 words

Call

The Deputy Speaker

May/28/24 11:25:59 a.m.
Watch

I declare the motion carried.

5 words

Mrs. Marilène Gill

May/28/24 11:26:21 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It is my understanding that everyone is to wear the headset approved by the House of Commons when rising during the vote. The member for Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook was not wearing his headset when he wanted to check that his vote had been recorded. I just wanted to remind all our colleagues of that.

65 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/28/24 11:26:42 a.m.
Watch

It is true that members have been sloppy about following that rule during votes. Please follow the rule next time. The hon. member for Manicouagan on another point of order.

30 words

Mrs. Marilène Gill

May/28/24 11:26:57 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, can you please tell me if a member's vote counts when they do not have their headset on. It is also for the interpreters' sake that I wanted to bring this up.

35 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/28/24 11:27:10 a.m.
Watch

The vote counts even if the member does not have a headset on. We allow that during a vote.

19 words

Mrs. Rachael Thomas (Lethbridge, CPC)

May/28/24 11:27:42 a.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, today, I rise in this place to address a question of privilege that has been raised with regard to the Speaker's public display of partisanship. Of course, we know that the Speaker of this place occupies a position of trust. We know that within that position of trust, he is supposed to function in an impartial manner. He is supposed to apply the rules in this place equally to all members of all parties. When he functions in a partisan capacity, however, he then betrays the trust those who occupy a seat within the House of Commons. He goes beyond the scope of his role and actually uses it then for the benefit of his political party, in this case the Liberal Party of Canada. The events that I am talking about are several in nature, but the latest one was “A Summer Evening with the Honourable [Speaker]”, said the announcement. This was a fundraiser that was hosted just across the river in Quebec, or deemed to be hosted just across the river in Quebec, and this invitation was sent out, drawing attention to the Speaker as the keynote. However, this is not the first time. This is the latest event that brings us to the House, calling for the Speaker's resignation or calling for a vote to remove him. Before this, there was a cocktail fundraiser dinner that was hosted just a couple of months ago where, again, he was used as the keynote of this address or this function, and, of course, as Speaker, he was promoted, again in a partisan fashion, and used as an individual who could help elicit funds for the Liberal Party of Canada, and that is not all. There is a third one that I would like to draw the House's attention to, which is that the Speaker actually, in his full outfit, jet setted to Washington and addressed the audience that he was given there. He talked about his time as a young Liberal, and in a very partisan fashion, in his address to the audience that was in front of him. That is his third strike. However, there are two more that I would like to draw the House's attention to, for a total of five within just the last few months of him being Speaker. In this place, there was an interaction that took place between the Prime Minister and the leader of the official opposition. The Prime Minister exchanged words, or used words to accuse the official opposition of being a “spineless” leader. In retort, the Leader of the Opposition responded with words that were similar. The Speaker of the House said nothing to the Prime Minister, but then went on to kick out the member of the official opposition, again pointing to a partisan decision. There is a fifth incident that I would like to draw attention to; that is that I myself was removed from this place. I was removed from this place because I used these words toward the Speaker. I said that he was, “acting in a disgraceful manner.” I was asked by the Speaker of the House to withdraw my words, which I rose from my seat and I said, “I withdraw”. However, the Speaker went on to kick me out of the House, not just for a little while but actually for the remainder of the day, therefore robbing the constituents of Lethbridge from having a vote in this place. It is the practice of the House, and it is in fact according to the Standing Orders, that should a member stand in her place and withdraw those words, she should be allowed to stay. However, the Speaker, functioning in a partisan capacity, removed me. If those blues are looked at, it is very clear that I said, “I withdraw”. It is in the official record of the House. If the audio is listened to, Madam Speaker, you can hear me say those words “I withdraw”. It is clear within the audio record of the House. However, when it came to the Hansard, which is signed off by the Speaker's office, those words, “I withdraw”, were conveniently removed. Therefore, there is already another question of privilege before this place, which is to say, why were those words removed? Why did the Speaker's office sign off on official Hansard records that removed my withdrawal? In this place, the Speaker must function in a trusted capacity. He must respect the members of this place. He must never be partisan in nature, nor should records ever be officially changed based on what is convenient for him. Based on his conduct over these five incidents, we are asking for his resignation and if not, then we would like to remove him through a vote.

819 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

May/28/24 11:32:11 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, let there be no doubt that the Conservative Party is just playing a game here. This is the Conservative-right MAGA-attacks on the institution itself. Let us be very clear that the Conservatives do have a double standard. When the Conservative House leader was the Speaker and had a fundraiser, there was no problem. Not one Conservative stood up. However, the issue that we have had before us in the last 24 hours has nothing to do with the Speaker. It was the Liberal Party of Canada that formally apologized for doing and publishing what it did. Therefore, the Conservatives are attempting to punish the wrong entity. The question for the member and the Conservative caucus today is this. How can they continue to make a mockery of what the reality is, which is that the Speaker, in this situation, did absolutely nothing wrong?

147 words