This is from page 13, and I will not read the entire thing. It references the attorney general of the day, which was a certain John A. Macdonald. These debates can be somewhat confusing. There's John A. Macdonald and there's John S. Macdonald, as well, who were both contemporaries and were going back and forth at the time. He wasn't Sir John A. Macdonald; he was Attorney General Macdonald. He said this, and I quote:
...said the Speaker having desired that he should not go on with the Address about the union of the colonies, he proposed not to take it up till Monday next, but as the matter was one of the utmost importance, he thought it would be well now to settle the mode of conducting the discussion. He would propose that after the discussion commenced, it should continue day after day, and that for the purpose of greater regularity the Speaker should remain in the chair. At the...time he would propose that the rule which prevented members speaking more than once when the Speaker was in the chair should be suspended, in order that every member might have the same liberty of free discussion as he would have in the Committee of the Whole.
I think it was a worthwhile commentary at the time. John A. Macdonald proposed that basically the rules be suspended to allow greater discussion. I would, perhaps, liken you to Sir John A. Macdonald, allowing that flexibility in this place as well, Mr. Chair.
He goes on further in the dialogue, and says:
Atty. Gen. MACDONALD said there was nothing irregular in his proposing that discussion should go on with the Speaker in the chair. The suspension of the rules he proposed was for the protection of the minority, by allowing each member to speak and state his objections as often as he pleased.
I think that's a worthwhile commentary as we sit here today under the watchful eyes of our Father of Confederation. This is about the minority. It's about protecting the rights and privileges of individual parliamentarians as we conduct our business. Certainly Sir John A. Macdonald recognized at the time that we should allow ample debate, going so far as suspending the rules at the time to allow members to contribute multiple times to the debate. To have been a fly on the wall during the debates at that time would have been fascinating, considering that at the time, I believe, there was alcohol continually served in the Houses of Parliament of the day.