Evidence of meeting #100 for Official Languages in the 44th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was beaulieu.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Liberal
Mona Fortier Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
All right. I'll let you continue, Mr. Chair, but you should know that I've thought of some things I'd like to pass on to the committee in relation to this motion.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Yes, but I had said earlier that after Ms. Ashton's speech, I was going to rule on the admissibility of the motion. We'll see afterwards.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Mr. Beaulieu, your proposed motion would therefore be as follows, including the preamble:
That given the obscene and offensive comments made by the Liberal MP for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell to a witness defending the cause of the French language in Quebec, the committee report to the House: (a) that the Chief Government Whip and member of the Liberal leadership team immediately remove MP Francis Drouin from the Standing Committee on Official Languages and; (b) that MP Francis Drouin resign as the Chair of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie.
Is that correct, Mr. Beaulieu?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Yes. I'm saying it so that it goes into the blues and transcripts.
I've thought about it, I've done some reading, and I've consulted people who know more about the procedure than we do, if I may say so.
With regard to the admissibility or inadmissibility of this motion, I repeat what I said not so long ago, that neither the chair nor even the committee can sanction or censure the remarks of a committee member. This is clearly stated in Standing Order 117 of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons.
My comments concern this committee. I'll come back later to the question of the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie, or APF.
With respect to the committee, Chapter 20 of our Interpretation Manual on House of Commons Procedure and Practice states that “neither committees nor their chairs have the authority to censure an act of disorder or misconduct”.
Let me remind you of the facts. During Mr. Lacroix's testimony, Mr. Drouin asked him a question, and he uttered the words we know. I had already raised my mallet. Even before I used it to ask Mr. Drouin to withdraw his words, he did so of his own accord.
The chair or the committee cannot measure the degree of sincerity of Mr. Drouin's words. I'm referring to your words, Mr. Beaulieu. You said earlier that he had paid lip service to his apology. It's not our job to measure the sincerity of an apology when a person withdraws his words. So I remind you that, before I had time to do my job as chair and bang the gavel to ask him to withdraw his words, Mr. Drouin was already apologizing.
Except for the chair banging the gavel to restore order in a committee, neither the chair nor a committee has the power to do more, such as request punitive measures or measures similar to those called for in the motion. I'm talking, for example, about asking the whip to remove the member from the committee or requesting that he resign from the APF. These are affirmative steps that neither the chair nor even the committee can take.
This eventuality is provided for in our Standing Orders. I'm not interpreting the Standing Orders. It's there in black and white. We can always report to the House, but that's what the Standing Orders say.
Let's look at paragraph (a) of the motion. In this paragraph, it's as if the committee were giving itself the right to choose who became a member and who was to be excluded from the Standing Committee on Official Languages. We know it's not our job to do so. I just want to point out how inadmissible this is and how it doesn't align with the Standing Orders.
Let's also look at paragraph (b) of the motion. I'll draw a parallel. Let's imagine that MP Francis Drouin is required to resign as president of the Richelieu International organization. This organization is dedicated to youth and the French-speaking world. I don't know if this exists in Quebec, but back home, that's exactly what he's doing.
Following such a scenario, Richelieu International members would wonder why a parliamentary committee is telling them what to do, when its rules are clearly established. The organization itself decides who can become a member and whom it will exclude. The parallel is exactly the same with the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie. Even Parliament can't ask the APF to decide who should or shouldn't be a member, or who should or shouldn't be excluded. That's not a matter for a committee.
I quote again from chapter 20: “However, neither committees nor their chairs have the authority to censure an act of disorder or misconduct.” Now, acts of disorder and misconduct must still have occurred. They have, and were resolved when the MP apologized before he had even finished his sentence. If the disorder had continued, I, as chair, could have suspended the meeting until order had been restored. If order is not restored, I can adjourn the meeting. That's provided for in the Standing Orders.
On this point, neither the committee nor the chair needed to go that far, because, what had been said by Mr. Drouin in unparliamentary terms, was withdrawn on the spot.
We respect the regulatory framework imposed on us by the House of Commons. Again, I explain that I'm not interpreting a grey area. I'm not saying that's what I think it means. I'm reading to you verbatim what our rules say. We can report to the House of Commons, but we can't ask whips or anyone else to accept or exclude a member of this committee, because that's not up to the committee.
Neither can we tell an autonomous organization, with its own internal rules and regulations and absolutely not subject to the rules of this committee, who will or will not be a member of its association.
I am telling you this very seriously because I would find it embarrassing for members of the committee if the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie were to turn to us and ask, “What are you meddling with, gentlemen and ladies of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, what are you doing, who do you think you are?” That's why I'm telling you that I find the fact that I don't understand the situation a little embarrassing.
We have rules. I'm ruling on the admissibility, as expressed by Mr. Beaulieu, of this motion relating to the letter of May 17, 2024.
In my opinion, the motion is out of order. I reiterate that it is because that is how our rules are established. I'm going to suspend the meeting for just a minute while I consult with the clerk.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I'll come back to the example I gave earlier, which may be closer to home. I was drawing a parallel with Richelieu International. It's as if the chair of the Standing Committee on National Defence were asking the president of the United Nations or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to resign. I just want to let you know how embarrassing it would be for us as members of this committee if we did that.
Having said that, my ruling has been made, and I've given you the reasons for my ruling.
Next on my list I have Ms. Fortier and Mr. Godin.
Conservative
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I'm sorry. The next speakers are Mr. Beaulieu, Ms. Fortier and Mr. Godin.
I see that Mr. Godin has a point of order.
Go ahead, Mr. Godin.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Actually, Mr. Chair, I think we need to debate your ruling.
Ms. Fortier had asked for the floor before you started.
Conservative
Joël Godin Conservative Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
Okay, we'll let Mr. Beaulieu make his intervention.
However, Mr. Chair, you understand that Ms. Fortier asked to speak, so you hadn't even begun to state your decision. That's what I was trying to tell you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
I agree with you, but Ms. Fortier raised her hand again afterwards. There are two of us here, just to keep track of the raised hands.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
You're third.
The next speakers are Mr. Beaulieu, Ms. Fortier and Mr. Godin.
Mr. Beaulieu, you were the first to raise your hand. The floor is yours.
Bloc
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
I'm actually challenging your ruling. I don't see this as an attempt to expel the member. We're simply asking that the committee report the situation to the House. Our position is that Mr. Drouin should not be on the committee.
Furthermore, as far as the Assemblée parlementaire de la Francophonie is concerned, members will be voting. They're going to vote, but the Liberals are recruiting a lot of members to try to prevent Mr. Drouin from being relieved of his duties as president of the APF. It's not independent of Parliament, unless I—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
That's what I was going to say, that there is no discussion, unless you want to add further comments on that.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
If you challenge the chair, there's no debate.
Is that what you're doing?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
Great. We'll go to the vote right away.
(Ruling of the chair overturned: nays 6; yeas 5)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal René Arseneault
The ruling of the chair is therefore overturned.
The next speakers are Ms. Fortier, Mr. Godin and Mr. Serré.
Ms. Fortier, you have the floor.