SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 177

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
March 31, 2023 10:00AM
Context: House Hansard - 177 - Mar/31/23
Mr. Luc Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC)
  • Mar/31/23 12:04:06 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, ethics violations do not seem to be a problem for the Liberals, as long as they stay in the family. If there is any position where independence must not merely be presumed but be a certainty, it is that of Ethics Commissioner. Someone at the Office of the Prime Minister, however, thought that it would be a good idea to temporarily appoint a Liberal minister's sister-in-law to rule on the ethics of ministers in the Liberal government. When will the Prime Minister put a stop to his hypocrisy and revoke the interim appointment of the sister-in-law of his best friend, the minister?
110 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 177 - Mar/31/23
Mr. Luc Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC)
  • Mar/31/23 12:11:42 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, during question period, you decided to take out a question from the official opposition. Without calling your decision into question, I would like to ask the Table for clarification about the application of the decision. As you know, you have a list in your hands to help you announce the members who will be speaking. I do not believe that there is any standing order of the House that permits you to decide to take out a specific question based on a list provided to you. The list is there as a guide to make the House run smoothly. I would like the Table to tell us exactly how to proceed if such a situation were to arise again. I think we need to know. As you noted, it made the opposition members uneasy. We want to follow the rules of the House, as does the Leader of the Opposition. We need some clarification about how such decisions will be applied in future. Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
170 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 177 - Mar/31/23
Mr. Luc Berthold
  • Mar/31/23 12:17:55 p.m.
  • Watch
Madam Speaker, I understand, but I wanted to know one thing specifically. One of our members rose to speak when none of our other members were rising. However, you gave the floor to the next member on the list. That is why I think it is important to get clarification. The member we chose to ask the question was entitled, in my opinion, to ask it, because he was the only member rising to be recognized and able to ask the question. For your information, there should be no list, so you could not have asked the next member to rise in place of another, since this list normally does not exist, according to the rules.
117 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border