I am pleased to deal with both points of order. The first relates to the use of props. The hon. member is quite correct that the Minister of Justice did make improper use of the prop and she received proper chastisement from the Chair from the point of view of my finger.
In fairness, I was suspicious when I saw the minister pick up the book but I thought she was going to quote from it, which of course would have been proper use of the book had that been the case. She did not. She only held it up and that is why she got a finger lashing from the Chair.
I know that hon. members quail at the prospect. The member for Edmonton North has quailed before when that has happened to her, which is very seldom of course, and I know the Minister of Justice felt the same nervousness. She knows that it is wrong to have done that. A flag is a different thing from a book. One cannot read a flag to the House and that is why I was quick to jump in and it was too late to do anything else.
With respect to the second issue, the hon. member points out that perhaps the Chair should have been a little more vigilant and ruled the question about the flat tax out of order. However, it is fair to say that the Minister of Finance from public accounts in the newspaper has been urged to adopt a flat tax in Ottawa as part of the national tax policy. I suspected that the question having to do with the imposition of a flat tax in another province was perhaps tied into the possible adoption of such a policy at the national level and accordingly allowed the question.
Given the nature of the answer perhaps that was unwise, but the minister had his day and that was that. I cannot answer for any other question periods since I am usually not in attendance.
I thank all hon. members for an entertaining number of points of order this afternoon and we will now go to orders of the day.