44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 5, 2023 10:00AM
- Dec/5/23 4:30:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I think the partisan jabs by the Conservatives and the Liberals are extremely inappropriate in such an important debate. This is an important debate that affects the very foundation of our Parliament. In my opinion, those jabs are inappropriate.
I rose in the House not that long ago, in October, to talk about the controversy surrounding the former speaker. At that time, I said, “Every day members of Parliament entrust the Speaker to guide this Parliament through challenging circumstances.” At that time, I said that the Speaker had done an admirable job through COVID-19, the occupation of downtown Ottawa in the winter of 2022 and the putting in place of a hybrid Parliament.
I also said this: “House of Commons Procedure and Practice indicates that the Speaker's role is not just administrative and procedural, but also ceremonial and diplomatic....[T]he Speaker often acts as a representative of the House of Commons.” That is when I said that the NDP caucus thinks it is important to look at the precedents and the values of the House, and that I regretfully had to ask the former speaker to resign.
That day, our party was the only one to stand up in the House and demand the Speaker's resignation. We did this because of our values and House procedures, and with deep regret. This is not something that should be done out of partisanship. It is not something that should be done in a hurry. We need to consider all the values of the House, which all Canadians truly hold dear. We need to determine what the next steps are for Parliament.
Given the precedent set in October, the NDP approaches this issue with the same thoroughness of thought. We are looking at the procedures and principles of Parliament and for the best way to advance to ensure that this Parliament is something of which all Canadians can be proud. When I rose yesterday, I said very clearly that we were dismayed to see the Speaker in that video tribute to the outgoing interim provincial Liberal leader, even more so because the video was shot from the Speaker's chamber, in the traditional Speaker's robes.
I also said that the House of Commons Procedure and Practice states the following: “In order to protect the impartiality of the office, the Speaker abstains from all partisan political activity”.
I went on to say: “This morning's apology by the Speaker partly explains why this unfortunate situation occurred. Although we understand that the video was intended for an intimate gathering for a personal friend, it was the duty of the Speaker and his office to ensure that the message was not used in a partisan context.”
Of course, we agreed that the Speaker should recuse himself from discussions on the matter. We felt that was important.
Yesterday I rose on behalf of the NDP caucus to say that we believe the proper way to deal with this would be to refer the matter to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. It would then be able to study the matter and recommend any appropriate remedies to ensure this never happens again. That is something that all members of Parliament should agree upon, that we need to ensure this never happens again. Particularly because of the parliamentary crisis, which I think is fair to call it, in the month of October, we need to have the assurance at all times that there is strict impartiality coming from the Speaker's chair.
We understand the Speaker's explanation and his apology, but New Democrats believe it needs to be referred to the procedure and House affairs committee. We believe that this question needs to be fully studied and brought back to the House in a timely way so members of Parliament can deliberate on the decisions made by the procedure and House affairs committee. That is the committee charged with this type of situation.
The Speaker's ruling earlier today set the very clear direction that this needs to go the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs for timely study and for remedies to be brought back to the House. This is the approach that we believe is important and something we have been unwavering on.
I do need to raise a point of consideration. I note that yesterday the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, who I have a lot of respect for, provided a very extensive reasoning for his question of privilege, which included referring this matter to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. I thought the research that was done was thorough and effective, and I agreed with his question of privilege. That is why I noted it when I spoke after question period, not being able to speak before question period because I was at the public safety committee.
As everyone knows, New Democrats in the House all have double and triple functions. None of us has a single job. We all have two, three or four jobs, so I could not be at two places at once, which is why I spoke after question period.
I should mention as well that, because the NDP has 25 members, it receives smaller resources through the House leader's office than any other party. I want to say very clearly that with the very small team we have, Blake Evans and Alexandrine Latendresse do a fabulous job in the House leader's office. My office has two team members, yet we provided to the House after question period a very lengthy and well-thought-out argument that was based on what was said by the official opposition, which has far more resources and an office that is much larger. We came to the same conclusion, which I think shows that, even with fewer resources, there can be an equally effective team.
I was surprised that, after I cited the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, he seemed to put aside the very learned and deep analysis that he had given to refer this to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and took quite a different stand. I am a little perplexed that he would do that after providing, in the morning, something that all members of Parliament would agree should go to the committee. I thank my team, the mighty twosome in the House leader's office, for their terrific work.
The reality is that New Democrats are unwavering. We are not changing our position through the course of the day. We are not saying something different today than we did yesterday. We believe this needs to go the procedure and House affairs committee. We believe that remedies need to be provided by the committee and brought back to the House. We have not changed on this. We believe this is a serious issue. We need to ensure this never happens again. That is why the NDP is unwavering in its support of the motion. In fact, had it not been proposed by the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, we would have moved that motion taking another route.
It appears that the government did not initially see that this is a serious issue, but it has now agreed that it is serious. I understand that we have some consensus that this is to be referred to the procedure and House affairs committee. I welcome that because, on an issue like this, I think it is important that we have all-party agreement to refer it to the procedure and House affairs committee, which is the venue that this should be directed to, to allow it to do that timely work and then have the House consider the results of that work.
I am hoping that the debate will continue at the procedure and House affairs committee if we do have that agreement. That is where this should go. On behalf of the NDP caucus, we would say that this is a serious matter that needs to be dealt with in a thoughtful manner. That is why we are supporting the motion.
1367 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/23 4:43:22 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the hon. member is the former official opposition House leader, so he understands the rules and the importance and gravity of this situation. I believe the hon. member was asking a rhetorical question. He understands, as I do, that this would have to take precedence for the procedure and House affairs committee, if it were to become a House order, which it would at the adoption of this motion. It would then become the top priority for the procedure and House affairs committee.
I have confidence that the procedure and House affairs committee will treat it with the timeliness that is required and ensure that this is the top priority of that committee moving forward. The rules of the House, as we well know, indicate that as well. The committee simply cannot continue doing other work. This would be an order of the House, so the procedure and House affairs committee would have to put it top of mind.
161 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/23 4:45:36 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I know I can be partisan often. I know the member can be partisan often. I think we both, with his long experience and myself having been in this rodeo a few times as well, know that there are times when it is appropriate to be partisan and times when it is clearly not. This is one of those times when it is clearly not appropriate to be partisan in any way.
We are dealing with an institution that has led our Parliament for more than a century and a half. It is vitally important that we preserve the institution, that we ensure that best practices are part of the institution, and that the procedure and House affairs committee, if we adopt this motion, which seems almost certain, will be charged with finding those remedies to ensure that this type of situation does not occur again moving forward. I think all members of Parliament will approach this in a thoughtful way, in a non-partisan way, in a way that gives credit and merit to our Parliament. We are the reflection of Canadians and Canadian democracy and we need to act in that way.
There are times when it is appropriate to be partisan. This is not one of those times. We must ensure that we are doing something that is to the benefit of Canadian democracy and Canada's Parliament.
233 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/23 4:48:18 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member is a relatively new member of Parliament, but he certainly understands the importance of us removing our partisan hats at key moments in our nation's history. This is one of those times.
When we went through the convulsions of what was an unprecedented situation in October, where I felt very strongly it was appropriate, as did the NDP caucus, to ask for that Speaker's resignation, I have not done that this time because I feel the circumstances are different. I also think we have to take a measured, thoughtful approach on this issue. That is why the procedure and House affairs committee, I believe and certainly hope, and I know the member does as well, will step up and understand the importance of the situation and, in a non-partisan way, offer those remedies that can be brought back to the House in a timely way.
These are things of vital importance. I know there have been times in this nation's history when all members of Parliament have stood together. One just has to think of the COVID–19 pandemic where members will recall that decisions had to be made by unanimous consent. We took those decisions together to provide supports for Canadians right across the country. To the credit of every member of Parliament, we all stood together to ensure that Canadians had the wherewithal to weather the pandemic.
This is another example of that kind of situation where MPs have to stand together. I think the members of PROC will understand that and work together to provide those remedies.
269 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/5/23 4:51:42 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I always appreciate the questions from my colleague from Winnipeg North.
The reality is that the procedure and House affairs committee will make those decisions. However, I do feel it is important that there be a timely resolution on this for obvious reasons. This is a priority, and it has to be a priority given that it is a House supporter for procedure and House affairs. At the same time, it is important that those remedies be provided in a timely way.
I think all of us would allow the procedure and House affairs committee members to decide how to balance out the timeliness with getting witnesses as well as to help provide the supports for developing the remedies. That is a balance they will have to achieve, and I wish them the best of luck in doing that.
141 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
