Mr. Speaker, I rise on the same point of order to point out that in the Annotated Standing Orders of the House of Commons , Standing Order 21 reads:
When a Member has a direct pecuniary interest in a question being decided in the House, the Member may not vote. For a Member to be disqualified from voting, the monetary interest must be direct and personal.
Let me anticipate an objection which the Chair may raise to this point. It goes on to say:
As such, measures with a wide application, such as matters of public policy, are not generally considered in this light. Even voting a pay increase to Members themselves does not amount to a case of direct monetary interest, because it applies to all Members, rather than to just one, or to certain Members but not to others.
I will anticipate an objection the Speaker may raise to my colleague's point of order by pointing out that in the bill before us the pay increase does not apply to all members and it does not apply to all rather than to just one.
For instance, I point to the section of the bill that would require members to “opt in to the pay increase proposed therein” which would, by its nature, not apply to all members equally. It would have an unequal application.
I further point to the section that proposes an increase in indemnity for the right hon. Prime Minister of 42%, which is substantially greater than the increase proposed for members of parliament. There is therefore at least one or perhaps several members who would, if the bill were passed, exercise the opt in clause and obtain a direct pecuniary benefit exclusive to themselves, not as a matter of public policy generally applicable to all members of the House but to themselves solely.
I therefore submit to the Chair that the bill before us is in violation of the standing orders.