House of Commons Hansard #98 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was crtc.

Topics

Anti-terrorism LegislationOral Question Period

Noon

The Deputy Speaker

The Chair has received notice of a question of privilege from the right hon. member for Calgary Centre.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

Noon

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I raise a question of privilege relating to a matter that arose in question period relating to the purchase of medications that are covered by the Patent Act, a law that has been passed by the House and which sets forth regulations. Some of my colleagues do not agree with the content of the law, but they would agree that the law has been passed by parliament and must be respected by all Canadians, cabinet ministers among others.

During question period it was revealed that the Department of Health did not make an application to the commission under section 19(1) before purchasing from Apotex. That, Sir, is a breach of the law. An application made after the fact does not cover the requirement of the law to make an application before the fact. It is a breach of the law.

Also, the government did not have the commission inform Bayer, the company whose rights are established and protected under the law passed by this parliament. That was not done before the purchase from Apotex as is required by the law of this parliament. That is a breach of the law of this parliament.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

Noon

The Deputy Speaker

Order. With the greatest of respect to the right hon. member, a parliamentarian of vast experience, he would know firsthand that the Chair would not rule on a point of law. I sense that in the debate of question period there might be a dispute of facts. I would ask the right hon. member to get to the privilege.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I shall, having established the facts.

There is a basic duty of ministers of the crown to act within the confines of the law. That is fundamental to this parliament. The failure to obey the law may be a matter for the courts, but it is also a matter of grave concern to members of the House because a failure to obey the law is a blatant and open contempt of the House. Why, Sir, are we here to pass laws if the laws we pass can be ignored by ministers of the crown?

Earlier the minister of--

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Order. I want to once again reiterate that the Chair at no time, under any circumstance, can make any ruling on a matter of law. If there are further words to the question of privilege, I would ask the right hon. member to get to the matter of privilege.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, the Chair can, as we both know and as the House knows, come to judgments on matters of contempt of parliament. A contempt of parliament is contained in an action by a minister of the crown of Canada to deliberately breach the law of Canada. I am not asking the House to adjudicate the law. The law is clear. I am asking the House to consider the question of contempt. It is without--

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

I again remind the right hon. member that first and foremost there has to be, and is, a presumption of innocence. Otherwise there is no contempt of parliament. I do not know what else I can do if there is another matter dealing with the question of privilege.

I would like to make it clear that the matter of contempt must be based on guilt. There is a presumption of innocence here so I am at a loss to go much further. However I will recognize the right hon. member.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, it is precisely because of the presumption of innocence that I related to those matters which belong to the courts, which is whether or not there has been a breach of the law. The government knowingly departed from the law that this parliament wrote. That knowing departure by the government of the country in itself constitutes a--

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

I believe the Chair at this time has heard enough on the matter. I have listened attentively to the matter raised by the right hon. member. The Chair is satisfied at this time that there is no need for any further debate on the matter with regard to privilege. I will now move on.

I remind members in the House that I have another notice of a question of privilege. I will now go to the member for Beauport-Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:05 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC

Mr. Speaker, this is not a question of privilege relating to an event that occurred during oral question period but, rather, a question of privilege that results from a briefing session on Bill C-36 given this morning by the Department of Justice.

I want to put this question of privilege in its proper context and to stress once again the indifference shown by this minister and her department toward the members of this House and their right to information, which is a priority. We saw the Minister of Justice's way of doing things with Bill C-15, which resulted in a question of privilege on the part of the hon. member for Provencher. That question was referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons amended the directives for members of the Privy Council Office.

As regards Bill C-36, the Anti-terrorism Act, a lot of information was released even before the bill was introduced in this House on Monday. One simply has to read the October 13 edition of the National Post , which included whole parts of the bill and which came out before the briefing session organized by the Minister of Justice on Monday morning, the day that Bill C-36 was introduced in the House.

Our right to information as duly elected members of this House, which is a priority, was once again violated. This leak about Bill C-36 in the National Post was the subject of a--

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:10 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Order please. I simply wish to remind the House that this question has already been referred to the committee. Therefore, I would ask the hon. member for Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans to get on with his question of privilege.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:10 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC

Mr. Speaker, I do not understand why the government House leader does not want us to raise our point. Is he hiding something? Does this bother him?

In short, the Minister of Justice and officials from her department did it again in a meeting this morning. Notwithstanding the complexity and the importance of this bill, it is, at the very least, peculiar that nobody at the Department of Justice requested simultaneous interpretation for their briefing session on Bill C-36 this morning. For more than one hour at the beginning of this briefing, the minister's officials provided information solely in English.

Assistants of members of the Bloc Quebecois were present at that meeting and were unable to obtain the information in their native language, despite the complexity of the bill.

The right to service in the language of one's choice is guaranteed under section 133 of Canada's constitution as well as under the Official Languages Act.

In view of the complexity of this bill and taking into account the language barrier, it becomes very difficult for parliamentary assistants and for the members themselves to form an informed opinion about such a bill.

The reference book entitled House of Commons Procedure and Practice says on pages 66 and 67, and I quote:

Any disregard of or attack on the rights, powers and immunities of the House and its Members, either by an outside person or body, or by a Member of the House, is referred to as a “breach of privilege”--

I could also refer to Erskine May, who said the following, and I quote:

The privileges of Parliament are absolutely necessary for the due execution of its powers. They are enjoyed by individual Members, because the House cannot perform its functions without unimpeded use of the services of its Members; and by each House for the protection of its members and the vindication of its own authority and dignity.

Let me now quote from Joseph Maingot's Parliamentary Privilege in Canada , second edition, chapter 2, page 13:

If someone improperly interferes with the parliamentary work of a member of parliament--i.e. any of the member's activities that have a connection with a proceeding in parliament--in such a case that is a matter involving parliamentary privilege.

In conclusion, my right to receive information in my native language, through my assistants, was violated this morning by the Minister of Justice.

Considering these facts, I submit that my privileges as a parliamentarian were also violated.

Should you rule that there is a prima facie case of privilege, I would be prepared to move the appropriate motion.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

Glengarry—Prescott—Russell Ontario

Liberal

Don Boudria LiberalMinister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I agree, it is a very serious matter. It is not, however, a question of privilege, as the member knows.

It is not a matter of a parliamentary committee or of the House. It is a matter of a briefing session provided--

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

An hon. member

Oh, oh.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

If the member listened, she might understand.

That said, I believe that the question raised by the member is serious. However, it is not a matter of negligence by the minister.

I have in hand and am prepared to table it, the document that the minister, through her office, used to request interpretation services in the House of Commons. I have received it and its reception has been confirmed by the House.

It is possible the interpreters reported late for work. Movement in parliament is restricted at the moment. It is possible.

In any case, I will not investigate the House staff or put them on trial.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Bellehumeur Bloc Berthier—Montcalm, QC

Then the briefing should not have begun at that time.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

I am getting to that. If the member could listen--

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Order, please. I hope we will be courteous and respectful enough to listen to each other even, and I understand, though we do not always agree.

The hon. government House leader.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Mr. Speaker, as I said, I am prepared to table the document I have in hand. However, I am prepared to go further, given that the briefing session was clearly inadequate since it was not given in the language of the member opposite, nor, for that matter, of other members.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

The act was not complied with.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

Liberal

Don Boudria Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON

Mr. Speaker, this is a serious matter. It seems to me that the right hon. member for Calgary Centre could for once in his life listen to something serious.

I am prepared to offer the members opposite an additional briefing session for their benefit. This session would be held at a convenient time, in the language of their choice, with interpreters. I am prepared to offer an additional information session.

That having been said, I apologize for what happened and for the fact that interpretation services did not get there on time. If you were to ask me if the briefing session should have been cancelled at that point, I might agree. I do not know whether such a request was made.

To sum up, interpreters were requested. They arrived late. These two facts are true. I am prepared to offer a new briefing session at a convenient time, not just for the benefit of the member opposite, but for the benefit of all members. I am also prepared to meet with the member opposite to work out the details.

That having been said, I wish to table the document to which I referred, showing that the minister had asked for interpretation services to be present. It is entitled: Chambre des communes-House of Commons . Since I have quoted part of it, I may now table it.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:15 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

I listened carefully to the comments of the hon. member for Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans and to those of the government House Leader. During the latter's intervention, he made an offer which I hope will make it possible to resolve the matter amicably, without the intervention of the Chair. If not, we can always come back to the issue, and the Chair will deal with it at that time.

I hope that this disposes of the matter for now.

We will now revert to routine proceedings.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:20 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Chair went very quickly and did not give me the time to complete my thought on this.

I wish to table a motion to the effect that the question of privilege raised by the member—

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:20 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

Order, please. The motion by the hon. member for Beauport--Montmorency--Côte-de-Beaupré--Île-d'Orléans is premature. If the Chair is called upon to make a ruling, other measures will be available at that time, depending on the ruling in question. However right now, such a motion is premature.

PrivilegeOral Question Period

12:20 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

I listened attentively to your remarks when I was speaking earlier. You indicated that you had not found at this time reason to find a question of privilege. I am rising to give notice to you and to the House that I want to reserve the right to pursue this question at the next sitting of the House.