Mr. Speaker, as members know, I had also sent notice to the Speaker that I wished to address a point of order, the same one of course.
The point I want to raise is twofold. First is the whole matter of the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Edmonton North. Second and attached to that is the issue of what I believe to be language that the Speaker might want to look at in relation to something that was said by the hon. member for Edmonton North.
Getting back to the first point that I raise, the relevant citations of Beauchesne's, it has just been said by the House leader of the official opposition that a question can be answered by any minister.
That, of course, has been ruled on consistently in the past. In other words, the questions are asked of the government and the government, if it so chooses, can then delegate any minister to answer. That is quite properly cited in citation 410.
The proper citation is in fact citation 412. The proposition is the following one. Can a member ask any question of a minister whether or not it is in his or her area of ministerial responsibility? Quite clearly the answer to that is no.
Citation 412 of Beauchesne's says:
A question may not be asked of a Minister in another capacity, such as being responsible for a province, or part of a province, or as spokesman for a racial or religious group. Journals ,October 16, 1968.
I had someone research Journals for me and I want to read to members very briefly the applicable paragraph. I read selectively here in the text for the purpose of brevity. It says a ruling was then made to the effect that a question must be addressed to a minister in relation to his administrative responsibilities.
I read further, and the House might want to pay particular attention to this portion. It says the very limited ambit of the previous ruling was to the effect that a minister may be asked questions related to a department for which he has ministerial responsibility or acting ministerial responsibility, but a minister cannot be asked nor can he answer a question in another capacity such as being responsible for a province or part of a province or as spokesman for a racial or religious group.
The point I am making here is that an opposition member or any member's asking a question to a minister knowing the minister is unable to answer, according to our rules, and then making editorial remarks to let the record show that the minister refused to answer is not only against the standing orders of this House but there is a question of political ethics the Speaker might want to look at.
On the whole issue of the language used in this House by the hon. member for Edmonton North, I invite the Chair to look at this as well.
The hon. member for Edmonton North in the past has complained and the House has admonished members for referring to members inappropriately or for using language which was not deemed appropriate. The hon. member for Edmonton North will remember what I am referring to and I do not intend to repeat it on the floor of the House.
To attribute to someone certain characteristics of an animal on the floor of this House is wrong. It has been said to be wrong in the House by the hon. member for Edmonton North and by the Chair.
Mr. Speaker, I invite you to examine that very closely because I believe that is similarly unparliamentary.