Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 16th, 2016

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I appreciate that.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Schmale.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

We wouldn't want you to miss....

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

The trouble is that Mr. Reid is not convinced yet.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

My feeling is that it would not be your loss, Mr. Richards, but our loss if we didn't have an opportunity to hear what you have to say.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

I think you feel that way. I am not sure that others do.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I appreciate that.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I would be quite upset if you missed your opportunity, Mr. Richards. I am happy to keep going.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Schmale. I appreciate that.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

See how well we are getting along.

We just explained a bit of history as to why privilege is so important. Based on the fact that it is so important, based on the fact that I think we all agree it is important, and based on the fact that the House does need to see the legislation before it is leaked, that leak prevents us from doing our jobs properly or carrying out our responsibility as members of Parliament.

I ask rhetorically—but if the other side would like to answer, I am happy—why would they shut that down? You never know, the shoe could be on the other foot. We could be switching places at some point. Why would you not like to get through this now, start a precedent, maybe put in mechanisms so that this doesn't happen again, and maybe work towards something where we don't have this again, whether it be this Parliament, the next Parliament, or any future Parliaments? Let's work to fix this and get to the bottom of it.

I will continue and hopefully convince the other members that I am on the right track here:

In the midst of their occasional [duties], the House of Lords and the House of Commons both acknowledged that a balance had to be maintained between the need to protect the essential privileges of Parliament and, at the same time, to avoid any risk that would undermine the interests of the nation. In this connection, it was agreed in 1704 that neither House of Parliament had any power, by any vote or declaration, to create for themselves any new privileges not warranted by the known laws and customs of Parliament. Since then, neither House alone has ever sought to lay claim to any new privilege beyond those petitioned for by Speakers or already established by precedent and law. The nineteenth century witnessed numerous cases of privilege, which helped to determine the bounds between the rights of Parliament and the responsibility of the courts. Perhaps the most famous of the court cases was Stockdale v. Hansard. In 1836, a publisher—

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

I remember it well.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I thought you would. I know you would remember this, and you could probably quote this without a book in front of you.

—John Joseph Stockdale, sued Hansard, the printer for the House of Commons, for libel on account of a report published by order of the House. Despite numerous resolutions of the House protesting the court proceedings and the committal to prison of Stockdale by the House, the courts refused to acknowledge the claims of the House because it had not been proven that the claimed privilege existed....

Based on all that, again, we go back to what the justice minister said and what the Canadian Association of Journalists said in their “Principles for Ethical Journalism”. I think you know this, David. You are a former journalist.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Like you, I was a journalist and a staffer, but I chose the right party.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I would disagree with that but I appreciate your comments.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

We chose the right party. He chose the centre party.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

And there's nothing left.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Relevance...?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

You look at the “Principles of Ethical Journalism”. They strive for accuracy and fairness. They're independent and transparent. They keep their promises. They respect diversity and they are accountable.

That keeps them from just printing items out of thin air, or if it is speculation, from using language and guiding...when clearly fact is the case. In this case, the language tells us what we need to know.

Mr. Chair, I would submit that the reporter knew somebody.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Schmale, just in case you didn't notice, Mr. Richards is back.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I didn't know that.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Banff—Airdrie, AB]

Mr. Chair, I didn't want to pressure the member to rush. I know he has lots to say. I'm anxious to have an opportunity as well, but I wouldn't want to take away from his opportunity either.

Don't feel pressured, Mr. Schmale.

[The Chair, Liberal, Larry Bagnell]

Mr. Reid, I assume you want to get in too.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, ON]

No, I don't want to get in.

I just want to say that I'm finding him more and more convincing.

[A voice]

So it's working.