SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 267

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 13, 2023 02:00PM
Context: House Hansard - 267 - Dec/13/23
The Speaker
  • Dec/13/23 4:01:36 p.m.
  • Watch
I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on December 1, 2023, by the member for Saint-Hyacinthe─Bagot regarding allegedly misleading information shared by the Minister of Public Services and Procurement and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence. In his intervention, the member alleged that the House had been misled about the process to replace the Aurora aircraft. The member noted that, when the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of Public Services and Procurement were asked about this matter in the House on November 24 and 28, 2023, they both answered that the decision to award a sole-source contract to Boeing had not yet been made. Yet, according to the member, a newspaper article published on November 29 revealed that the government knew by then that the contract had been awarded. In the member's view, the government's answers were knowingly inaccurate and effectively misled the House. However, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader explained that the responses from the minister and the parliamentary secretary were accurate at the time they were provided, as the government’s final decision was not made until the evening of November 28. Given the circumstances, he concluded that the House could not have been misled and that there are no grounds to find a prima facie question of privilege. The House is therefore faced with two versions of events. One is based on an article published in a newspaper. The other was provided by the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader; this version indicates that, based on the sequence of events, no misleading information was provided. In cases such as this, the Chair’s role is strictly limited to determining whether a member deliberately misled the House during the proceedings. In order to find a prima facie question of privilege, three criteria must be met. These criteria are set out in numerous decisions issued by previous Speakers, including one delivered by my predecessor on May 11, 2021, on page 7022 of the Debates, and I quote: First, the statement must effectively be misleading or manifestly contradictory; second, the author of the statement must know, in making the statement, that it is false; third, the member intended to mislead the House. As members can tell, the threshold for showing that the House was deliberately misled is very high. This is because the consequences of such allegations can be quite serious. Accordingly, the Chair carefully reviewed the statements the minister and the parliamentary secretary made during Oral Questions. The Chair understands how important it is for members to receive the most reliable and accurate information possible in order to carry out their duties. However, the Chair could not find evidence that the minister and the parliamentary secretary contradicted themselves or intended to hide information or mislead the House. As a consequence and in keeping with the many precedents on such matters, I cannot in this case find a prima facie question of privilege. I thank all members for their attention.
520 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border