SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 103

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
September 27, 2022 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 103 - Sep/27/22
The Speaker
  • Sep/27/22 10:07:13 a.m.
  • Watch
I am now ready to rule on the question of privilege raised on September 22, 2022, by the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan regarding comments made on social media by a member of the parliamentary press gallery. In raising his question of privilege, the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan explained that after he asked a question during oral questions, a journalist tweeted comments that he considered personally threatening. The member asserted that in the current social climate, these comments could incite some people to violence. The member further stated that the journalist’s status as an accredited member of the press gallery gives him special access to the parliamentary precinct. In the member’s view, the idea of crossing paths with someone who has threatened him worries him so such that he thinks it would impede his ability to perform his duties. The House leader of the official opposition and the members for Kildonan—St. Paul and Louis-Saint-Laurent expressed their support for the member’s statement, noting that members are increasingly dealing with similar unacceptable situations. The Chair takes this situation very seriously. Elected officials are regularly subject to comments on social media that go beyond criticism and political debate. Some comments are sometimes extreme and occasionally even violent. Parliamentarians, their staff and those who report on parliamentary activities should seek to raise the level of public debate and resist the temptation to trivialize or oversimplify important issues, as it can occur on social media. In this instance, the Chair will not address issues of security or the threats experienced by elected officials since the Chair’s role, in deliberating on questions of privilege, is limited to determining whether, in light of the facts brought before the House, there is a prima facie breach of privilege and whether this matter should take precedence over all other House business. Therefore, in this case, the Chair will instead seek to determine whether the journalist’s comments about the member were designed to intimidate him and infringe on his ability to perform his parliamentary functions. Regarding cases where members are obstructed, interfered with or intimidated by non-physical means House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states the following on page 111: “In ruling on such matters, the Speaker examines the effect the incident or event had on the Member’s ability to fulfill his or her parliamentary responsibilities.” The Chair has reviewed the statement by the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan with these key principles in mind. The facts outlined in the House do not appear to show that the member was impeded in performing his parliamentary functions. Therefore, I cannot find a prima facie question of privilege. As for the member’s second point, the Chair will not interfere with the rules governing the press gallery. The Chair is convinced that press gallery officials will continue to uphold among its members its usual high standards of professionalism. Finally, I would like to remind everyone who influences public debate that they have a responsibility to consider the consequences of their remarks and to choose their words judiciously and respectfully. I thank the members for their attention.
543 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border