Thank you, Mr. Chair
I think that if I had been Speaker and the only person to stand up had been the one being punished, I would have continued and called for a vote, since all the other political parties could stand up. This means you did not have the support of the other political parties. Parliament was challenging the Speaker.
The current situation has become untenable: Canadians, and as well as teachers who come from everywhere to visit Parliament, say they no longer want to take children there. We have reached that point.
Mr. Marleau, I must say that I disagree with you. I will tell you on what point. You say that the Speaker has a list of names of the people who will make interventions and does not have the power—because of the list of political parties—to refuse anyone the right to speak.
In the meanwhile, in terms of statements, if a member stands in the House of Commons—he has not committed a crime, because he has not been sexist or done anything of the sort—and says he wants to recognize the presence of John Smith in the gallery, he is punished for 30 days. Yet, the political party gives the Speaker a list setting out who will make a statement in the House of Commons.
So how can the Speaker say that he has the power to prevent a member from making a statement for 30 days, but that during Question Period, because of a list provided by the political parties, he can’t do so, and he has the same list?