Debates of June 4th, 2021

Bill C-10—Time Allocation Motion

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Madam Speaker, typically when we run across a standing order that is not regularly used and we are about to make new precedent with it, the Speaker gives a long ruling on whether this issue is in order or not. We have not heard the logic for this being in order. This is new to all of us. A text message from my staff last night said, “This is going to be interesting in the morning. We have never seen this before”.

It seems to me that we would see a large ruling. I was expecting to hear from you for several minutes on why this was going to be admissible and how it played into the reasons that this should be going on to a vote this morning. We are voting on Friday, and that also is unusual. Many things about this are unusual, and I was expecting to hear the logic on how we were going to be proceeding on this. I have heard none of the logic on this, and now it feels like this is—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

As I told hon. members, I will come back to the House to explain.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is not your job to do the government's bidding but to work so that we have a functional House that we all agree on and that we move forward.

When we end up in areas of the Standing Orders that are not regularly used, we typically would see an explanation before we move forward. I have heard from many of my colleagues who have said that they have concerns with this. They have spent the night preparing their arguments as to why this should be in order or not in order, and to have that just run over is not doing the job of the Speaker.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate that your position can be difficult at times. Today is a certain expression of that, but we have points of concern that have been raised about members' rights. I agree 100% that decorum is important, but decorum comes from having a process.

When we have a motion of the government that clearly has not been used in this type of format for many decades, there are legitimate questions about the lessening of our rights as members to debate and discuss important issues. This bill also deals with the Canadian Charter of Rights. I am very surprised that the Liberal party is trying to push forward a process that not only clearly violates our rights as members to fully debate these things. This material legislation may also affect the Canadians we represent.

I ask you to come back with an extensive ruling on this practice so that it does not set a precedent for future governments that will point to today and this abuse of our ability to discuss this issue at report stage. I hope we also agree that when the government is proposing changes to the Broadcasting Act that infringe upon those rights, you should have a clear process in a minority Parliament that would clearly build the goodwill of all members. This cuts off debate without having proper process, without giving justification that this is not infringing upon our rights and without having the ability to debate. These are section 2(b) freedom of expression rights that are clearly laid out in the Charter.

I am surprised that the Liberal government is attempting to push through such a large-scale change at report stage without having a clean process. I know that decorum is central to your work because you are in charge of making sure of the business of this place, but I have seen today that, unfortunately, it is not there. It is not your fault, but it is your obligation to members who are concerned about our privileges here. We must know the process is clean. I hope you will listen to this intervention. I hope that the government will reconsider the way it is conducting itself. I do not even want to get into the other parties. I am surprised that after so many interventions protesting the use of time allocation, the NDP would tie themselves to a process that hurts this institution and sets precedent for future governments.

There is a lot on your plate, I understand. I hope that we can start focusing on making good laws and wise decisions. I would hope, Madam Speaker, that you would utilize the table officers to their fullest, and that you would suspend this hearing so that you could go through this and bring back the justifications that have been asked for by members with respect to this process today.

We cannot go back to our constituents and say the process was not clean. This is Canada. We believe in democratic governance, and that involves—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

We are getting into the debate of a point of order. I take the hon. member's comments.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I will—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I do not know who is rising on points of order in the hybrid setting and who is rising on points of order in the House.

The hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Peterborough South, ON]

Madam Speaker, I wanted to raise a point on behalf of the Green Party. Oftentimes they do not get the opportunity to speak. They have been polite and quiet while waiting. They have been up there. I could see on my screen that they were among the first. They are always some of the most respectful party members from one of the most passionate parties. Even though I disagree with them on a lot, I want to hear their voices, just like I want to hear all Canadians' voices.

I think it is incredibly important that we hear voices across this country, on the Internet and in—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I thank the hon. member for pointing that out to me. I will get to a member of the Green Party soon enough.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, on the point of order, the sticking point on this has been what constitutes a day, so I want to read a precedent into the record so you can reflect on it when you ultimately come back to the House.

The member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, when he was Speaker, determined that a sitting day was equivalent to an average of 4.7 hours, or approximately five hours. He made this ruling following a point of order that was raised when the government moved a time allocation motion in hours, not days. This is from the Debates of June 12, 2012, pages 9231 to 9236, and on June 18, 2012, pages 9680 to 9681.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am not going to get into the thrust of this, except to ask the Conservative members who are calling you a disgrace to stop doing so and apologize. As we go down this rough road, we can at least have some self-respect and decorum.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

I appreciate the hon. member's words.

The hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like some guidance. I appreciate the assistance from colleagues.

I had made a point of order, which you rejected. My hand was up for the purpose of putting a question to the minister. I do not believe that the current motion before us is legitimate, by the way, but I am prepared to put questions to the minister, to ask why he is prepared now to put closure on a committee, a process we have not seen in several decades.

Do I ask a question of the minister now or speak to a point of order?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

We are on a point of order.

The hon. member for Lethbridge.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, I am looking for some clarification, because it has been a bit of a shemozzle.

We raised some points of order; a member got cut off partway through his point of order; the Speaker insisted on then going into the 30 minutes for questions and comments. Now we are back to points of order, which I appreciate. I am curious if the clock was stopped during those 30 minutes, to resume once the points of order have been heard.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

Yes, it was stopped.

[Rachael Thomas, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Madam Speaker, I wanted to ensure that speaking time is protected.

I have another point of order, but I will allow you to go to others first.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I hate to throw more onto the docket, but I have been informed that New Democrats are not supporting this and I named them earlier as having been partnered with the government. I want to apologize to those NDP members and thank them for telling me I was misinformed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

That is appreciated.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the leader of the government in the House.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, I want to raise what I believe is a point of order. In listening to what has been taking place over the last half hour, it brings me back to a time when there was an issue with decorum in the chamber during a budget debate. It was the behaviour of members of the official opposition, who were banging their desks, ultimately storming out of the chamber. The Speaker at the time made a ruling. Official opposition members did not support it and they ended up walking out of the chamber.

You have made a decision, Madam Speaker, and you were prepared to allow the debate to continue. The difference between your position and the other incident that I referenced is that we are in a hybrid system. I counted at least four or five Conservative members speaking when you called for decorum, and rightfully so. However, we need to put in place something that allows individuals to hear the questions and answers when there is inappropriate behaviour virtually. If it were in the chamber, you would have the Sergeant-at-Arms remove the person, but you do not have that tool virtually.

I raise that as something that can be taken into consideration, but at some point, the House needs to deal—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

Agreed.

The hon. member for Portage—Lisgar.

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Madam Speaker, I have to correct my hon. Liberal colleague from Manitoba. I do recall when we, in opposition, pounded the desks and did not let the then finance minister, Bill Morneau, deliver a budget. It was not because the Speaker had delivered a ruling; it was because we did not believe Bill Morneau was fit to be finance minister after all his ethical lapses. I recall that quite well.

Respectfully, the issue here is that this is such a rare manoeuvre for the government to take and there needs to be confidence that it is indeed in order. I understand that you believe it is order, Madam Speaker, but you have also indicated a number of times over the last half hour that you do not have the answers as to why you believe it to be in order. We trust you are confident you will get those answers. Why not suspend the House and speak with your officials, those who are assisting you? That is absolutely reasonable. Then you can come back when you feel confident you indeed have the answers and you can make your point, and have the confidence of everyone that it is in order.

Because it is a rare issue coming before us, my suggestion and my request would be that you suspend the House, Madam Speaker.

[Scott Aitchison, Conservative, Parry Sound—Muskoka, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am looking for clarification.

The Deputy Speaker ruled on June 12, 2012, which has already been mentioned, that points of order raised during time allocation debate did not count against the 30 minutes provided for the debate. I want to be absolutely clear that this is in fact the case here, that the points of order being raised right now will not count against the 30 minutes of debate on the issue.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

The clock has been stopped, as I indicated previously.

The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.