Procedure and House Affairs Committee on May 28th, 2024

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

It is a long-standing tradition in this House, of course, that when members withdraw or apologize for a comment, the member is taken at his or her word.

[Jamil Jivani, Conservative, Durham, ON]

I would like to cede the remainder of my time to my colleague.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Mr. Berthold, you have the floor.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much for being here, Mr. Fergus.

I've been listening to you since the beginning of the meeting. You have made many comments about debate, about members' intentions behind their comments, about decorum and about how you view that decorum.

You are at the very heart of another question of privilege concerning your partisanship and your partisan actions in the House of Commons and outside of it. Your actions have made it clear that you have a fairly elastic idea of what partisanship is.

Unfortunately, as you know, you have lost the confidence of the official opposition and the second opposition party to arbitrate the debates. In that sense, you do not have the credibility, in my opinion, to comment on the quality and intentions of members of the House. You yourself have become an issue in the House, which should never be the case for the Speaker.

Why, after all these blunders, do you not accept the verdict of half the members of the House who are asking you to resign?

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Once again, Mr. Berthold, as I said to your colleague from Durham, I cannot comment on a matter that is currently before the House.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Why do you not think it is time to resign?

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Once again, this is a file and an issue that is before the House.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

How you personally perceive the situation isn't before the House.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Mr. Berthold, I know you want a few extra minutes, but unfortunately your time is up.

We now go to Ms. Fortier for five minutes.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Speaker, thank you for being here. I want to come back to the subject of our study today. I think your experience and knowledge can help us delve deeper into the issue before us.

Have you observed conduct in the House that goes beyond the parameters of debate, that verges on harassment or that may constitute harassment? Can you give us any examples? I'd like to give you some time to address those things in your answer.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

That's an excellent question, Ms. Fortier.

As a member of Parliament since 2015 and as the Speaker of the House of Commons, I can tell you that I've had occasion to wonder whether certain conduct exceeded the standards of acceptability. I can tell you something: I am always concerned about upholding the traditions of the House and the rules that exist. They are important.

I'm not pointing fingers at anyone in any party, but I do wonder whether the way we behave towards one another as members of Parliament would be considered acceptable in any other workplace. I think the answer is no. Parliament isn't like any other workplace, however. We work in Parliament, a place where we have to engage in a clash of ideas, a place where we have to have pointed and passionate debates. That is exactly what people expect. Is there a way, though, to do those things in a manner that would be acceptable elsewhere?

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Since you became the Speaker of the House of Commons, or since you became a member, have you seen other members of the House conduct themselves in a way that could be described as harassment or bordering on harassment?

I'm trying to get a better sense of what's happening in the House.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I can't comment on that specifically, because it's something I have to assess each and every day. As I see it, the issue is whether the debate or conduct truly adheres to the rules in place and is worthy of the House. If not, I have the freedom to say something, as does anyone in the chair. We can choose whether to ask the member to change their behaviour or not.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

I will end with this. Do you have other suggestions for the committee, ones you may not have had a chance to examine fully?

I really appreciated the points my Bloc colleague raised about prevention. We can do something about that. The matter of social media is something else to consider. Are there solutions we can put forward?

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Unfortunately, the issue of social media falls outside the scope of the Speaker's responsibilities, unless members and the House decide to give the Speaker that power. Otherwise, the Speaker cannot make a judgment on anything that goes on outside the House or its committees.

Coming back to your first question about any suggestions I may have, I'd say that a code of conduct would be much more useful than a document as thick as a phone book listing all the behaviours that aren't acceptable. Coming up with something like that would be too complicated. Setting goals we want to meet may be a better idea than determining what isn't acceptable.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Very good. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Thank you.

We now go to Ms. Gaudreau for two and a half minutes.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Speaker, with all the debates and discussions we've had, I would actually like to know, if possible, what we can take away from today's meeting. Is there potential for the committee to examine harassment among members? From the Speaker's standpoint, how have those proceedings informed hopes and ideas for change in the House of Commons?

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

At this point, I think we have all the pieces we need to solve the puzzle. It comes down to self-discipline, something each and every one of us has to exercise. You raised that, as did Ms. Mathyssen.

I think our code needs modernizing, and we certainly have a responsibility as part of that process. We don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. We need to make sure that we don't completely flout the traditions of this place, which have stood the test of time for good reason. I think we can do both. Our first draft may not be the best, but we can make adjustments.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

That's it for my turn.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker and Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

You have 40 seconds remaining. Would you like the time or not?

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I'm fine, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ben Carr]

Okay. Very good.

Ms. Mathyssen, you are the beneficiary of an extra 30 seconds, so it's three minutes to you.

[Lindsay Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

That's music to my ears.

Just to build off of that, where we were going before, often and thankfully the government uses a GBA+ lens to look at budgets. Within this institution, has that ever been done for Parliament, for that code of conduct, for Standing Orders, for the things that govern us and each other?

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

That's a very good question.

I'm the new kid on the block, so I'm going to ask the Clerk or perhaps Ms. Evangelidis if we could respond to this question.