House of Commons Hansard #331 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was workers.
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order.
This point of order goes to the integrity of this place, and I need to raise it immediately. Just moments before the vote, my colleague, the deputy House leader, the member for Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, called over to the Prime Minister. He is leaving now—
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
Order. Members know that we are not to mention the presence or absence of a member. Let us hear the hon. opposition House leader.
Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB
Mr. Speaker, just moments ago, my colleague called over and said to the Prime Minister, “Are you in charge of the Speaker?” I did not call that over; I happened to overhear it. The Prime Minister looked over at us, and there were a number of us, and he said, “ Yes, I am.”
We are hoping the Prime Minister would address that. We know you, Mr. Speaker, are in charge of your role, and the Prime Minister should not be in charge of you, and he should not believe that he is in charge of you. He certainly should not be telling us that.
I was hoping we could hear from the Prime Minister on that.
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
Order, order. I am sure members are familiar with the famous words of William Lenthall on this topic, so I refer them to that. If they are not, I recommend they look it up.
The House resumed from October 2 consideration of the motion.
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
Pursuant to order made on Tuesday, October 2, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion of the hon. member for Portage—Lisgar relating to the business of supply.
The question is on the motion. Shall I dispense?
Opposition Motion—JusticeBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders
Some hon. members
Agreed.
No.
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
I declare the motion defeated.
Before I go to the question of privilege, I wish to inform the House that because of the deferred recorded divisions, government orders will be extended by 19 minutes.
The hon. member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford is rising on a question of privilege.
Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC
Mr. Speaker, today I rise to add my voice on the question of privilege by my hon. colleague, the member of Parliament for Montcalm.
The House of Commons, on September 26, 2017, adopted, by unanimous consent, the following motion:
That the House reiterate its desire to fully preserve supply management during the NAFTA renegotiations.
I would like to bring your attention to the way this motion is fundamentally different in English and French House of Commons records.
In its original form, the motion is as follows:
That the House reiterate its desire to fully preserve supply management during the NAFTA renegotiations.
In French, the word “volonté” can be translated in some contexts to the word “desire”, as it was done here. However, I would argue that, in this case, the motion was clearly expressing the will of the House and not only its desire.
As a fully bilingual institution, it is our duty to make sure MPs can function in their language of choice, and to ensure that unilingual MPs, and those hoping to become bilingual, have access to a translation that is as accurate as possible. Therefore, I would argue that, in this case, it is very important to understand the meaning of the motion adopted by the House by unanimous consent last September.
The English version of the motion has to be adapted to the French and should actually read as follows, “That the House reiterate its will to fully preserve supply management during the NAFTA renegotiations.”
The difference in meaning here is significant and really should be taken into account when examining this question, especially since the word “volonté” actually comes back in this question of privilege.
In the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, at page 598, it reads as follows:
However, orders or resolutions presented or adopted by unanimous consent express the will of the House and are as binding as any other House order or resolution.
You will notice that in this case, “the will of the House” is translated in French by “la volonté de la Chambre”. Therefore, I urge you to consider this motion as clearly expressing the will of the House, since the meaning is perfectly clear in French, the language in which this motion was moved.
I understand the jobs of the interpreters and translators are very difficult, and this is in no way to blame their incredible work.
I would add that the House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, reads as follows on page 589:
When unanimous consent is sought, the Chair takes care to ascertain that no voice is raised in opposition; if there is a single dissenting voice, there can be no unanimity. Whenever the House proceeds by unanimous consent, the fact is noted in the official record.
This procedure was followed to the letter, and the official record shows that this motion was agreed to by the House.
However, as my colleague pointed out, and as many in the NDP have been denouncing for a long time, the conclusion of the negotiations on the new NAFTA resulted in Canada opening up 3.59% of the Canadian milk and dairy products market to American products. Given that the House had agreed on a motion that was specifically expressing the will of the House to fully preserve our supply management system, it is difficult to understand how the government could give up yet another significant portion of our supply management system.
Let me conclude by saying that farmers are watching the current government and expect it to live up to not only its words but to its votes as well.
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
I thank the hon. member for adding his arguments to those of the hon. member for Montcalm. Of course, I will come back to the House in due course.
The hon. member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound is rising on a point of order.
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order, a very serious one, and I hope you will allow me the time. I will be as brief as possible.
I want to start by saying that I think I can speak for every member of the House when I say that we respect the Speaker and we all want to continue to do that. What has happened here today and how you deal with it is going to reflect on that.
A member of the House, who is no longer here, indicated that he—
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
Order. The member did not indicate a particular member, but I would ask him not to get into who is here or not here. I would ask him to carry on.
Larry Miller Conservative Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON
My mistake, Mr. Speaker.
The other aspect was referring in the House, whether jokingly or not, and I do not think it was, to any individual in this place runs you, I think, is a wrong thing to say, no matter whether he or she was serious.
The thing that really bothers me and has not been dealt with is that the member for Milton, one of the most respected people in this place, stood on an issue that is absolutely unparliamentary and was brushed off by that same individual, who then walked out.
Mr. Speaker, how you deal with that is going to reflect one way or the other.
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
I thank the hon. member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound. I can assure him that I will review the words that were used today during question period.
Of course, I appreciate the interest of all members in good order in this place and I appreciate the assistance of all members in creating order in this place, whether it comes to unparliamentary language or other activities that create disorder.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to one petition.
While I am on my feet, I move:
That the House do now proceed to orders of the day.
The Speaker Liberal Geoff Regan
The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?