I am now ready to rule on the point of order raised on Thursday, February 19, by the honourable member for Roberval and House Leader for the Bloc Quebecois. The event at issue occurred during question period.
In his argument, the honourable member stated that he had been prevented from asking, and I quote, “a question on what is […] a government operation.”
When the point of order was raised, I indicated that I clearly considered the member’s first question out of order, but that I would look again at his second question. I did so very carefully, and I am convinced that the nature of the two questions was the same, in that they both concerned the funding of political parties. Such questions are contrary to our practices as described in House of Commons Procedure and Practice and in Beauchesne’s 6th edition, page 124, citation 410, which reads as follows:
The subject matter of questions must be within the collective responsibility of the Government or the individual responsibilities of Ministers.
(…) Ministers may not be questioned with respect to party responsibilities
I therefore remain convinced that the questions asked by the honourable member were out of order.
I would point out, however, that the arguments made by the honourable member in raising the point of order were extremely eloquent. Their context was much clearer than during question period, because he established the link between the funding of political parties and the administrative responsibilities of the government. If his initial questions had been worded in this manner, they would certainly have been ruled in order.
Members must remember that during such periods of heated debate the tone and wording of questions is of capital importance.
I thank the honourable member for Roberval for raising this matter.