44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 23, 2021 12:15PM
- Nov/23/21 3:47:06 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, we are in a new Parliament. All proceedings in the previous Parliament ended at dissolution. The facts that the member is raising were the subject of discussion in the previous Parliament, and those studies and motions are no longer in effect. I would therefore assert that a motion or committee report would be necessary in order to proceed with the point of order. It is premature; it is not in order at this time.
76 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 3:57:28 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will say to the opposition House leader that absolutely we have excellent conversations. I appreciate the opportunity to begin working with him. I congratulate him on his reappointment to that position.
To the opposition House leader of the Bloc, who was just speaking, we similarly have had very strong conversations, as we have with the House leader for the NDP. I think we will have ample opportunity to be able to discuss these matters in detail.
The problem that arises, and this was the point I made earlier, is that in the absence of a motion or a committee report that would be necessary to proceed in this, it is simply premature.
I would state that this is not to be before the House at this time. This is not a matter that should be dealt with here, at this moment. However, I would encourage the House leaders, who are going to be meeting in about an hour, to continue the conversation in that forum, as that would be the appropriate place to continue the conversation.
179 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 4:06:00 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, let us not start this Parliament in this way, by attacking servants of the House. There is a forum for this. You have stated that that forum is the Board of Internal Economy. That is where we deal with personnel matters. We do not deal in this chamber in parlaying in rumours and things that people received in their inboxes, with all due respect to the member across the aisle.
Every individual who works for this place, particularly those who are servants of this place and do not have the ability to defend themselves or stand in their places to give their side of the story, should have these matters adjudicated in camera, with the opportunity for all of the facts to be present as opposed to a one-sided smear of an individual who is trying to serve this place and to do so with distinction and honour.
Mr. Speaker, we have heard enough. Please let us end this.
162 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 4:15:50 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, this is a terrible precedent. If we are going to adjudicate claims or rumours of harassment in this forum, where there is parliamentary privilege and where the individuals in question cannot defend themselves, it is an abhorrent precedent. We have the Board of Internal Economy. We have a process for this.
I stand not only because of this situation, but for any person who would ever wish to serve the House and who could imagine themselves in a situation where their accuser was given the opportunity to fully display the arguments of the accusation, but the person who was being accused was afforded no opportunity of defence or to produce their evidence. There is a process for that, called in camera. It is called the ability to examine these facts.
I remind members that we are talking about the Clerk of the House of Commons, a servant of 40 years whose integrity is being questioned at this moment. On the allegations, a third-party independent report was done that stated the attacks on his integrity and honesty were “baseless”.
To litigate these matters in the House without the opportunity for the individual in question to stand and defend himself or to produce evidence to the contrary is an abhorrent violation of what any employee should expect in terms of protection so these matters can be looked at. There is a precedent being established in this chamber right now. There is a line being crossed.
I ask the Speaker to please, for the sake of this place and the people who would serve it, to stop this absolute farce from continuing.
274 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 4:30:03 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Is this what we are doing? Are we hearing evidence on this case? I am hearing the member opposite posit a number of different items that she is stating as fact that, again, there is no opportunity to respond to or hear other evidence of. Is this what we are doing? I just want to understand what the ruling is in this matter.
72 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 4:40:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the proceedings of the Board of Internal Economy are in camera, and therefore, the discussions about votes of the Board of Internal Economy are supposed to similarly be in camera.
32 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 5:20:18 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as I take my place here yesterday and today, I cannot help but reflect on how fortunate I am to be here and thank the good folks of Ajax for sending me to this place for the sixth time. In returning for the sixth time, I welcome this debate because it is an opportunity for us to have a discussion on the nature of privilege.
Of course, privilege is extended to us not because we are special but because we hold an important democratic function representing the people in our ridings. We have a duty, as was just articulated by the NDP House leader, to lead by example and to use that privilege for the purpose for which it was intended, to extend the betterment of Canadian citizens, their health and well-being, and ensure we comport ourselves in a way that inspires leadership in the rest of the country.
We hit a big milestone today: 90% of Canadians have at least one vaccine and over 86% have two. It is a remarkable achievement. It is remarkable because we have been able to frankly be much less divisive in our country than we have seen in other places.
Every time we debate this, and is why I lamented being here today, it makes it harder for that last 10% to get that first shot and harder for that last 14% to get that shot. It is my sincere hope we can dispose of this matter and stop talking about it so we can be united in our desire to see every single Canadian vaccinated so we can put this whole business of COVID behind us.
I look at this and my problem is really a couple-fold. One would hold out that the Board of Internal Economy is only seven members of Parliament. Those members are representatives of their respective parties and represent more than 70% of the elected will of the Canadian people.
Others have spoken about other mandates in place and how we should expect Parliament to be no different. I would actually say that this place has an extra special responsibility to make sure everybody is vaccinated here, specifically because we are criss-crossing from every part of the country, convening in this room, meeting for very long hours and then returning to every part of this country.
This is not the same situation as the local restaurant. There is no other workplace like this one. Therefore, we have to be even more careful in how we—
423 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 5:24:02 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, questions of privilege are not just about individual members; they are about the collective interest and health of all members. What happens if a member has a health problem? That is why we are having these in camera discussions at the Board of Internal Economy. People's personal situations and health status must be discussed in private.
We have members in this place who may be immunocompromised, people who are actually put at very real, elevated risk compared to others because of a communicable disease. What about their privilege? I do not hear the Conservative members talking about the privilege of members who are in that very vulnerable state.
This place is not just about our privilege. As I stand here, I see members of the House administration. I see pages. I know there are people who are doing translation. There are journalists. What about their health? What about their privilege to have their health protected? At what point do we set rules to make sure that the privilege of an individual does not compromise the safety and health of others?
We know that this chamber is full of rules and full of things that would infringe upon our individual privilege. The whip spoke about the fact that I have to wear this tie. He is absolutely right; that is a rule, and I suppose that is an infringement of my privilege if I did not feel like wearing a tie. So are dress codes, limited hours and limited debate. I was just talking to the member for Winnipeg North, who was telling me a story of a member who walked into the Manitoba legislature with a knife and had to be told that their privilege did not include carrying a knife.
There are limits on our privileges in this place. Those limits are present at all times. I would submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that they most certainly are present during a pandemic. We are in a public health crisis. We would expect all workplaces to have these provisions. I am, frankly, disappointed that we are talking about this, because all of these conversations miss the single most important fact, which is that with unanimity we could have avoided all of this. We could simply have agreed that vaccines, in this place, on the parliamentary precinct, are the right thing to do. Instead, we are continuing to debate this for reasons that frankly, I have to say, are confusing to me.
If these moral arguments do not hold sway and if the concern of privilege for others does not hold sway, I will refer specifically to some items within the Parliament of Canada Act and elsewhere that demonstrate the Board of Internal Economy's ability to have authority to decide vaccination requirements within this House.
I would like to draw to the attention of members section 52.3 of the Parliament of Canada Act, which states, in respect of the functions of the Board of Internal Economy:
The Board shall act on all financial and administrative matters respecting
(a) the House of Commons, its premises, its services and its staff; and
(b) the members of the House of Commons.
The Board of Internal Economy has a legislated mandate to act on administrative matters for the House and its members.
I would also like to draw the attention of members to Government Motion No. 1, which the government gave notice of today on the special Order Paper, and which was shared last week with all parties. Motion No. 1 directly addresses the matter of ensuring that members who participate in the deliberation of this House in person must be fully vaccinated or have a legitimate medical reason for not being vaccinated. This is a fundamental issue of the collective privileges of the House.
I can assure members that this matter will be debated as soon as possible to send a clear message that the health and safety of members who participate in person are of the utmost importance to the government members and, by extension, the House.
I would point out that not only does the Board of Internal Economy have the authority to make the sensible decision it has made, but also this matter will be debated and voted on in the next few days, which will further resolve the point raised by the opposition member.
In closing, I would like to cite a salient point made in the 2014 edition of Erskine May's A treatise on the law, privileges, proceedings and usage of Parliament, at page 203. It states that certain rights and immunities, such as freedom from arrest or freedom of speech, belong primarily to the individual members of each House and exist because the House cannot perform its functions without unimpeded use of the services of its members.
It goes on:
Other rights and immunities, such as the power to punish for contempt and the power to regulate its own constitution, belong primarily to each House as a collective body, for the protection of its Members and the vindication of its own authority and dignity. Fundamentally, however, it is only as a means to the effective discharge of the collective functions of the House that the individual privileges are enjoyed by Members.
That last quote is most pertinent to this situation. The question of the relationship between individual privileges and our collective privileges is a fundamental issue for this House to determine. That is precisely what the government is proposing to accomplish through Government Motion No. 1.
As the last point, even if the party opposite continues to protest in this way, there is a very simple solution, which the House leader for the NDP has indicated, and that is an extension of the hybrid measures which would allow the members who are unvaccinated in their caucus to participate remotely and do so in a way that is safe and does not in any way impugn their privilege. They are in the odd position of disenfranchising their own members by saying they are both against having this hybrid provision and also having this position on vaccines, which I find strange.
This matter is clear. Absolutely the board has the authority and collective privilege has to be respected in this place.
1047 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 5:35:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I was up earlier on this, but, as this is a matter from the previous Parliament that would have concluded at dissolution, I do not believe it comes forward here. Therefore, I am not opposed to the member raising it, but I believe it is premature to be doing so here.
I would have to assert that a motion or committee report would be necessary for this matter to be considered. It is premature. We are dealing with a lot of matters that are from the previous Parliament. I do not believe that members can simply bring matters in here and avert that process, and I would seek the Speaker's ruling on such.
123 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 5:44:34 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order.
I will read something that I believe is relevant to this:
All items on the Order Paper including government and private Members’ bills die. The government’s obligation to provide answers to written questions, to respond to petitions or to produce papers requested by the House also ends with dissolution.
Committees cease to exist until the House reconstitutes them following the election. All orders of reference expire, and the Chairs and Vice-Chairs of all committees cease to hold office. The government is no longer required to provide responses to committee reports.
I continue to make this point. We have indulged many points that have crossed the line and have gone on for quite some length. Again, this is not the place, not the time and not how this should be dealt with.
145 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/23/21 6:02:46 p.m.
- Watch
moved:
That the House do now adjourn.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
