44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 28, 2024 10:00AM
- May/28/24 10:18:28 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the comments by the government House leader are so disappointing. He is not protecting the sanctity of this place. The House of Commons is our House of Commons, and that is our chair; however, the current chair occupant has proven that he is not fit to be in that chair.
We had a decision by the Deputy Speaker about the partisan activities of the Speaker. I do not know what type of baseball the Liberals play when empowered by their NDP coalition to shut down debate on a privilege motion, but the last time I looked, in baseball, it is three strikes and a player is out. On three different occasions, the Speaker has been involved in partisan activities and given partisan speeches. This is the fourth occasion. It has been found each and every time that he has violated the rules of this place.
We have a question of privilege in front of us. Turning to chapter 3 of the third edition of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, on page 150, it says:
Once the motion is properly moved, seconded, and proposed to the House, it is subject to all the procedures and practices relating to debate on a substantive motion. The speeches are limited...
The House has considered all the conduct of the member, in this case, the Speaker. It goes on to say:
A privilege motion once under debate has priority over all Orders of the Day including Government Orders and Private Members’ Business. However, the debate does not interfere with Routine Proceedings, Statements by Members, Question Period, Royal Assent, deferred recorded divisions or the adjournment of the House [or other] scheduled...Private Members’ Business...
We have done our orders of the day, but now we have the Liberals, empowered by their NDP coalition partners, shutting down debate and moving closure on a question of privilege that relates to the very confidence that all of us in the House of Commons have in the Speaker.
The Speaker should do the honourable thing and resign. The House Leader should do that instead of forcing us to—
354 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 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
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/28/24 11:35:39 a.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is prudent that we hold each other to account in the House. Right now, we are seeing the Conservatives use every tool and tactic to delay getting pharmacare passed so people can get life-saving medication covered.
Let us talk about what is going on in my colleague's riding of Lethbridge. It has an overdose toxic drug death rate that is triple that of British Columbia, one of the highest in the country. Instead of talking about about policies that would help save lives, like recommended by the deputy commissioner of the RCMP who said that we need more safe consumption sites, not less, the law-and-order party refuses to listen to the police.
Will my colleague meet with the RCMP? Will she try to open a safe consumption site when—
137 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/28/24 12:31:14 p.m.
- Watch
First of all, I want to remind members not to point to items they have in their hands.
Does the hon. member have unanimous consent?
Some hon. members: No.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): The hon. member knows that he is not to show any document in the House and that it is a prop. There are a variety of members who—
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes): Order. The problem we have is that several members from different sides continue to not abide by the direction of the Chair. I ask all members to please abide by that, including the hon. member who just spoke. The House could run a lot more smoothly if individuals were to respect the decisions being made and respect each other in the House.
The hon. member for St. Albert—Edmonton has the floor.
150 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/28/24 12:40:14 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would say shame on the parliamentary secretary. That is utter nonsense, even for him.
This motion arises from a prima facie question of privilege, a ruling of the Deputy Speaker, and the parliamentary secretary has demonstrated contempt for the Deputy Speaker by dismissing the seriousness of that matter, which has been ruled upon. Consequently, the motion has been brought forward. However, there is a broader context to the motion, and it is that this is not just one transgression, but part of a pattern of repeated transgressions of partisanship by the Speaker. It is why he needs to resign, and he needs to resign today.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/28/24 1:15:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. That hon. member knows that this is debate and not a point of order. I would ask that those kinds of interventions stop, as the deputy government House leader does.
39 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/28/24 5:41:54 p.m.
- Watch
Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to move the motion?
Some hon. members: No.
The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs Alexandra Mendès): Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.
40 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/28/24 5:59:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would, frankly, be embarrassed if I were the deputy House leader of the government standing up in this place, defending the indefensible. He has members of the House speaking at length about all the Speaker's transgressions as an impartial referee of the House. He cannot do the job. That is what we are talking about today. Instead, the member is deflecting and diverting from the fact that, one, he cannot get his agenda through the House because he has decided to put the Speaker in the chair, and the Speaker has decided for himself, by his actions, that we would have this day today.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/28/24 6:13:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the deputy leader just spoke and said this. It is not a direct quote, but it is pretty darn close, because I had to make notes as she was saying it. It will show tomorrow in Hansard. She said, in regard to this partisan posting, that her conclusions were, with respect to the Speaker, that he “probably, might have, most likely approved” of it. We have a third party that has said it was fully responsible and has actually apologized for it; then we have the deputy leader of the Conservative Party saying the Speaker most likely approved of it. That is what the Conservative Party is basing its evidence on when saying the Speaker has got to go.
I think there is a lot more truth to what the member just finished saying. This is a personal thing. He said that the Speaker should have resigned long ago. Could he provide more clarification on his statement that he does not believe the Speaker should have been given one chance?
174 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/28/24 6:32:43 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I find it very difficult, within the context of what the member has put forward, to take this seriously.
I have just gone on to Hansard and did a quick search of our current Deputy Speaker, the member for West Nova. He has said so many things that are partisan as well. I could list them off. He criticizes the Liberals consistently. He was an opposition member. However, that seems to have no play in this place.
Throughout our careers, there are roles we have here. The member, herself, was on the government side. She is no longer. Our roles change. I believe her argument against the current Speaker, in the context she was using throughout her speech, is poor.
I would like to hear her response to that, considering we all have roles, and they change over time. This could be said about the current Deputy Speaker. It could be said about you, Madam Speaker. This is all applicable.
162 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/28/24 7:00:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we know why we are here today. It is because of the Conservatives' persistence in playing a shameful game of character assassination.
The issue arose because something was posted on social media, a website, and we have a third party saying they are the ones who did it, apologizing to the Speaker's office for doing it and taking full responsibility. However, when I posed a question to the member's deputy leader asking why the Speaker was being blamed, her response was, in essence, that he “probably, might have, most likely approved” of it.
Does the member have anything of substance to say showing that the Speaker was aware of it?
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
