Evidence of meeting #98 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was fergus.
A video is available from Parliament.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Stéphane Lauzon Liberal Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC
Are you aware of that $3,000 transfer from Mr. Scheer's office to the riding of Guelph during the election when he was Speaker of the House?
9:10 a.m.
Acting Clerk of the House of Commons
Personally, no.
Are you aware of it, Mr. Bédard?
9:10 a.m.
Interim Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, House of Commons
I have no knowledge of it.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Stéphane Lauzon Liberal Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC
The money was for robocalls.
If you have any documents concerning this matter, would you please send them to the committee so we can take them into consideration when we draft our report? Perhaps we could compare that matter to the present situation to help us make our decisions.
9:10 a.m.
Acting Clerk of the House of Commons
We can check our files to see if we have anything.
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Thank you, Mr. Lauzon.
Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
9:10 a.m.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Salaberry—Suroît, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Janse, you clearly stated that, if the young, inexperienced Speaker had consulted you if he had any doubt about his decision, you would have advised him not to make the video. You clearly said that, in English and in French. Explain to me why you would have advised him not to do so. What impact would it have had on his future?
9:10 a.m.
Acting Clerk of the House of Commons
Thank you for your question, Mrs. DeBellefeuille.
It's important for the Speaker to be impartial and to be seen to be impartial at all times, even more than other occupants of the chair. I think that's what would have helped to explain why it wasn't a good idea to make that kind of video. We want to take maximum precautions given the impact it can have on the trust of the House of Commons.
9:10 a.m.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Salaberry—Suroît, QC
Mr. Janse, what you're saying is that when you're the Speaker, you have to ensure you're beyond reproach and to prove to all members of the House that you can be impartial, that you're above the fray and that you're capable of exercising proper judgment. In this remarkable case, my understanding is that, if you had been consulted, you would've told him not to make the video because that would create a significant risk to his reputation and impartiality. Is that an accurate summary of your thinking?
9:15 a.m.
Bloc
Claude DeBellefeuille Bloc Salaberry—Suroît, QC
Thank you, Mr. Janse.
I'd like to go back to the Washington trip. I'm the Bloc Québécois whip, and I know how the trips of MPs and the Speaker work. My impression is that it was a somewhat unusual trip or mission for the Speaker. I know that Mr. Rota, the former speaker, made a point of not travelling during sitting weeks and limiting his trips to break weeks.
Do you think that the fact the Speaker and his close associates travelled to Washington when we were in the midst of a crisis shows that he doesn't realize the significance of what happened to the House?
9:15 a.m.
Acting Clerk of the House of Commons
Once again, that's a question that you should put to the Speaker when he comes to testify at 9:30. You're right in saying that the Speaker usually doesn't travel when the House is sitting, but there are some precedents.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Mr. Janse, we haven't discussed existing precedents, but perhaps there are others in the House of Commons. I'm thinking of all the discussions and decisions regarding former Deputy Speaker Champagne. Can you tell us about that situation? Can you tell us why there wasn't a breach of privilege in the case of that Deputy Speaker? I believe there were clear directives in that instance.
9:15 a.m.
Acting Clerk of the House of Commons
I'm going to ask my colleague Mr. LeBlanc to answer that question.
9:15 a.m.
Acting Deputy Clerk, Procedure, House of Commons
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Mr. Julian, you're referring to a case that occurred in 1993. When Ms. Champagne was Deputy Speaker of the House, she was also asked to chair a Progressive Conservative convention at which Ms. Campbell was elected party leader.
A question of privilege was then raised in the House regarding Ms. Champagne's participation in that partisan activity. The Speaker of the House at the time, Mr. Fraser, responded that expectations of impartiality and duties might not be as high for Deputy Speakers as for Speakers, as Deputy Speakers could at times attend their party's caucus meetings. In those circumstances, it therefore wasn't considered a question of privilege.
It seems to me he also noted the fact that the conduct of occupants of the chair is not normally criticized through a question of privilege but rather by means of a substantive motion.
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Is it accurate to say that the Speaker may not behave in the same manner as a Deputy Speaker because the former is subject to different expectations?
9:15 a.m.
Acting Clerk of the House of Commons
A very specific example is that the other occupants of the chair, the Deputy Speakers, attend caucus meetings, whereas the Speaker hasn't done so for decades. So there definitely is a difference.
9:15 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP New Westminster—Burnaby, BC
Earlier you said that showing a photograph of the Speaker in official robes at a partisan event would be viewed as going too far. However, with social media these days, you can't share a photo like that, taken at an event, even if it's private, because it can be broadcasted.
Do you think social media has changed the situation regarding impartiality and non-partisanship?
9:15 a.m.
Acting Clerk of the House of Commons
Yes, I said exactly that in my introductory remarks.
The challenge is, perhaps, even greater for Speakers in the age of social media—absolutely.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bardish Chagger
Thank you.
I will now go to Mr. Berthold.
You have the floor for three minutes, Mr. Berthold.
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much for being here today, Mr. Janse.
Was the event that Mr. Fergus wanted to attend in Washington a tribute to Claus Gramckow?