Mr. Speaker, I am rising on the same point generally and not to respond to the hon. member who just spoke.
I note in passing that the items he listed in his point of order where unparliamentary words were used, he listed cases where the Speaker found that they were unparliamentary. The Speaker has not changed the rule book at all. He is currently enforcing and articulating the rules as they are. Just because a member may have transgressed previously in using unparliamentary language does not provide licence for us to abandon the rules now.
The reason I need to rise on a point of order is to explicitly object to two statements that were made during statements by members. Members will recall exactly what they were and the script writers for the Conservative members will know exactly what I am referring to because they were very carefully scripted. These were the statements by the hon. member for Peterborough and the hon. member for Vegreville—Wainwright.
I should point out that this should not be taken as a personal attack. I am doing this for the sole purpose of ensuring that the Chair and the Speaker's ruling are respected. The reason we need to do that was set out in the Speaker's ruling yesterday. I will read the words, which state:
--that such provocative commentary only invites equally inflammatory responses and contributes greatly to the lowering of the tone of our proceedings.
Today I listened to the two members I mentioned make statements that began with generic references to policies or political parties, which the Speaker found to be acceptable, but in the middle or near the end the statements focused precisely on a partisan personal attack on the Leader of the Opposition.
If any members are in doubt about whether this happened, they should reread the statement of the member for Vegreville—Wainwright where he kept it generic or referred to a generic someone throughout the entire statement and at the very end turned it into a personal attack. That was sly, that was sharp and that was cute, but I think the Speaker will find that it offends the ruling he made yesterday.
I do not understand why the members on the government side have this virtually psychopathic addiction to partisan attacks but they appear to be scripted and co-ordinated, and they are there.
The Speaker has said that members' statements are out of bounds for that type of free speech. In normal debate, there is the to and fro and an opportunity to respond but members' statements, there is not.
To ensure respect for the Speaker's ruling yesterday, I am asking the Chair to review the blues and Hansard for those two statements and advise the House whether they were in order or out of order.