Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Quebecois supports the Progressive Conservative Party and the Canadian Alliance on the importance of having an emergency debate.
I remind hon. members that, by virtue of Standing Order 52(6) a ), an emergency debate must meet the following conditions, one in particular which I will quote: a ) the matter [—] must relate to a genuine emergency [—]
I believe that today, in light of what we have learned—and the demonstration we have had for the past few months, not to say the past two years—there are indeed grounds for an emergency debate so that the Prime Minister may explain himself.
I remind hon. members that, to summarize the situation, the Prime Minister has misled the House. He has misled the public, and that is serious. He has taken refuge behind an ethics counsellor who, by his own admission, does not even have the ability to exonerate him.
It is clear that there is a perceived conflict of interest, blindingly clear. The Prime Minister must explain himself before the House, and this serious matter, which casts doubt on the very capacity of the Prime Minister to govern this country, must be debated and debated now.
For your information, Mr. Speaker, I would like to quote briefly from the Marleau and Montpetit, page 589, regarding precedent in cases like this:
However, in one exceptional circumstance, an application was approved for an emergency debate on “the sudden and unexpected revelation of events which [had] taken place in the past, in that they might precipitate a course of conduct which, if allowed to continue unchecked, would certainly classify itself as an emergency and a matter of urgent consideration.”
Further on a specific case is cited:
This refers to revelations made by the Solicitor General in the House on October 28, 1977, concerning illegal actions committed by the national security forces of the RCMP in 1973. This matter was referred to the McDonald Royal Commission and to the Attorney General of Quebec.
Therefore, I am calling for support in this request so there will indeed be an emergency debate, given the urgency of the situation.