I couldn’t quote you a section of the rules from the Barbados legislature, for example, but I can admit that the problem is a universal one in terms of the Speaker’s position and human behaviour.
There is a saying in the Lac-Saint-Jean region to the effect that people will be people. There are no rules that can completely eliminate the human factor.
With regard to your research about the provinces, there are variations, but in some cases the motion must be moved by the House Leader, while in others, the House of Commons’ practice was adopted immediately after 1985, at the same time as the practice of having the Speaker elected by a secret vote.
In Great Britain—which was the basis for my comments to the committee in 1992—, the member is expelled from the Parliamentary precincts. He cannot return to his office. He cannot attend a committee meeting. There is a consequence. If the sergeant-at-arms sends a message to everyone saying that the Speaker has expelled such and such a member, it’s over for the day.
I don’t mean to criticize the members. You have large ridings; some of them are far away. On Thursdays, a lot of people fly out in every direction across the country. The privilege of travelling on Thursdays should at least be suspended, so that a member cannot not simply contravene the Rules to get a longer weekend and leave the next day. In other words, a member who is excluded from the House is already punished, but is only pardoned the next time he appears in the House.
That’s partly what inspired my recommendation in 1992: the British practice under which a member cannot return to the House or go to his office. In modern times, this could have unpleasant consequences.