SoVote

Feb/8/24 10:21:57 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the government House leader is responding to a question of privilege raised by the official opposition. I think he should be provided the amount of time and discretion needed in order to—

35 words

Context: House Hansard - 278 - Feb/8/24

Mr. Warren Steinley (Regina—Lewvan, CPC)

Feb/8/24 3:18:10 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a question of privilege arising out of question period today. Standing Order 48 waives the required hour's notice when a breach of privilege occurs during the proceedings of the House. Misleading comments were made on the floor of the House. It is imperative not only to correct the record but to draw a firm line against misleading comments being tossed around in a way the Liberals have done so egregiously. Normally we chalk these things up to debate, but the misrepresentation offered by the government is so egregious that I think it rises to the level of being a prima facie case and a contempt of Parliament. Here are the facts. Here is what I had originally said, in the Hansard transcript: Madam Speaker, as always, one has to be very careful with the Liberals when they talk about truths and untruths. What Dr. Charlebois said was that there has not been enough data collected to see exactly what the effect of the carbon tax is on food prices. He also said— Which the member conveniently omitted. that he called for a pause on the carbon tax to lower food prices. Charlebois has said that.... When one hears a story coming from the Liberals, it is always interesting to listen to the facts. Talking to Mr. McCann, I also asked if the point of a carbon tax is to increase the price so that consumers change their behaviour. He said that this is exactly what the Liberals say the point of a carbon tax is. The truth is that, when it comes to food inflation, food prices and the relationship with the carbon tax, it will come out in the wash that there is a correlation. When one talks to farmers and dairy farmers today, their highest input cost now is the carbon tax and the heating of their barns. If someone does not think that affects the price of what a farmer does, then they should maybe get out of downtown Winnipeg and go to a farm once in their life. As the Speaker will recall from today's question period, what was portrayed as being said is nowhere close to the facts. To find a prima facie case of privilege, three things must be established: the statement must be misleading; the member making the statement must know it is misleading; and the statement must have been offered with the intention to mislead the House. This has happened three times, twice yesterday with the Prime Minister and then, today, with the Minister of Environment. All three of these conditions have been met here because of the wanton and reckless misquoting and misrepresenting by an hon. member. If you agree with me on these points, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to move an appropriate motion to refer the matter to the procedure and House affairs committee.

484 words

Context: House Hansard - 278 - Feb/8/24

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 3:20:50 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I see that you were very generous in listening to what the member across the way was saying. I had the opportunity to witness the exchange. From my perspective, it is very much a dispute over the facts at best. I would suggest that what was being suggested as a point of order or a matter of privilege is just a matter of debate that should have, in all likelihood, stayed inside the committee. I realize that the member might have been embarrassed, but it does not justify bringing it into the chamber.

95 words

Privilege