Debates of Dec. 15th, 2023

Speaker of the House of Commons

[The Acting Speaker, Bloc, Gabriel Ste-Marie]

The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan on a point of order.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, if you will indulge me briefly regarding Bill C-234, I hope that you will find unanimous consent for this: That at the ordinary hour of daily adjournment—

[The Acting Speaker, Bloc, Gabriel Ste-Marie]

I can already hear that the hon. member does not have the unanimous consent of the House.

The hon. deputy leader of the government may continue his speech.

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

Mr. Speaker, dragging out my time is only going to put more of me between the member and the NDP House leader, so he is going to have to decide whom he wants to hear from. However, I am going to jump to the good stuff.

In addition to the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle's fundraising event, he also sent out a very important Facebook message on July 21 of the same year, while he was still Speaker: “Just five hours left. We've received tremendous support today and we are over two-thirds of the way there, but we still need your support. Just a $15 donation from our supporters on Facebook would put us over the top. Will you join us?” There are countless Facebook quotes like this, with the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle trying to raise money. He also had a scotch-tasting and cigar event in his riding.

The member for Regina—Qu'Appelle is going to say that this is different, because he was the Speaker and this all happened in his riding.

He agrees. I would assume that the member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan would also agree that if he were to do that outside his riding, it would be inappropriate. Can I get a “Hear, hear!” for that? I do not hear it, do I?

Here is what the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle said yesterday in a tweet, while trying to defend his actions when it came to light that he had been involved in a fundraising activity in his riding: “The Speaker”, referring to the current one, “attended a Liberal partisan event billed as a 'Cocktail militant'”, which we now understand to be a volunteer appreciation event, and I appreciate his explaining that to me, “for Liberal volunteers outside his own riding. Helping to drum up support for Liberals in other ridings is a major breach of impartiality.” Let us remember the words that say that helping to support others “is a major breach of impartiality.” It is totally unacceptable, he says.

He went on to say, “When I was the Speaker, the only fundraiser I attended was for my own riding. This is something all Speakers are allowed to do because they must run under a party banner, and other parties run candidates against them.” After seeing this tweet last night, I replied to it and encouraged the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle to delete it because he was probably going to regret it when it came to light that is not the case if he participated in those same activities.

Today, I thought that maybe the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle has a bit of a foggy memory and maybe wants to revisit the issue, so after he presented his motion today, I asked him whether he could please tell us again why it was okay for this to happen in his riding when he was Speaker, but not a riding outside it. Let us just consider what he is accusing the current Speaker of: going to the neighbouring riding and participating in a volunteer appreciation event, according to the member's own words, at the provincial level of government. That is all he was doing; he was taking part in a volunteer appreciation event. He was not donating or anything.

I asked the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle why it is okay to do it in one's own riding but not in other ridings. In his reply to my question, he said, “That's a great question. I appreciate the friendly question from the member from Kingston because there's a very important difference, and it really does change the nature of it. Speakers have always had to run under party banners, until the day comes where parties have a convention or agreement that we will not run candidates against each other as Speaker. The Speaker has to go in an election, and has to have signs and pamphlets, and organize volunteer meetings. There's never been an expectation that the Speaker would cease partisan activities of that nature in their own re-election. Previous Speakers have done that for decades. In fact, the previous Speaker, the member for Nipissing—Timiskaming, did a government announcement in his riding for a government-funded announcement. Nobody objected to that because it was clear that he was communicating to his own constituents that he was talking about the work that he does as a member of Parliament and informing the constituents as to the government's decision in his riding. We were aware that the Speaker had made the announcement, but it did not offend members of Parliament because it was in his own riding. The same is true for partisan fundraising activity by the Speaker. Going to another riding's EDA and raising money for a political party is an offence to other parties who will one day run candidates there.”

The member for Regina—Qu'Appelle has very clearly, in a tweet, in response to my question, articulated extremely well why it is so important that the Speaker only, according to him, participate in their own riding's events.

Members do know where this is going, do they not? Let us go back to May 7, 2015. The member for Regina—Wascana, who is now a sitting member of the House of Commons, had an event. The Regina—Wascana Conservative EDA were pleased to invite individuals to a private networking event with the hon. now opposition leader, the then member of Parliament for Nepean—Carleton, on Tuesday, May 19, at 6:30 p.m. This event took place in a member's home and therefore space was very limited. They truly expected the event to sell out and tickets were $100. It was a hundred bucks to attend this event.

Are there any guesses as to who went to that event? I have a Facebook post of a picture. I really wish I could show this. Perhaps members would allow me to table this. It is a picture of three individuals who are sitting members of Parliament. One is the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle. Can members believe that?

Next to him is the member for Regina—Wascana, who is clapping right now, and the member for Carleton, on May 21, 2015, while the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle was still the Speaker. We have not entered the writ period, and he cannot claim that he was not the Speaker.

The member for Regina—Wascana posted the picture. I hope this does not come back to bite him, and I am sorry about that. He said that on that Tuesday evening, he was joined by the hon. member for Regina—Qu'Appelle and the hon. member for Carleton at the wine and cheese event hosted by the Regina—Wascana Conservative Party EDA. He said it was a great night of discussion and fellowship.

With member's indulgence, I would seek unanimous consent of the House to table this Facebook post.

[Some hon. members]

No.

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

Mr. Speaker, there was a no. That makes sense.

I just find it so incredible, the rich hypocrisy. The Conservatives could have picked their spokesperson on this from among 125 people, but for some reason, they chose to pick the most vulnerable person.

This did not take a lot of work to find this out. It has only just begun. I am sure that one can find countless other opportunities to show that the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle is by far one of the worst in not abiding by the rules, especially when he was Speaker, with his sudden requirements to be non-partisan.

I will say that, if the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle wants to continue this discussion in February, I will thank him for giving me a month and a half to dig up more information because it is undoubtedly all out there.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for this trip down memory lane.

I was wondering if he would perhaps like to move, again, for unanimous consent to table the Facebook post that he referred to. I wonder if he would like to elaborate or comment on the fact that this particular photo was taken of the three of us standing on a public street. He is not in the Speaker's wardrobe or speaking at the Liberal Party convention.

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

Mr. Speaker, he should not have said anything. He was better off just being quiet.

His billed event said that the event would be taking place in a member's home and therefore space would be very limited. They fully expected this to sell out. In the background of the picture, one sees a bunch of homes. This is clearly outside of either his home or that of the constituent who is hosting this event for him.

He wants the people listening to this debate to decide whether the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle was at the event or whether he just happened to be walking down the street and decided to take a picture with him and the member for Carleton, who came running out of the house to take that picture. There may even have been some thinking about it at the time, where they said, “I have an idea. If we go take this out on the street, they will not be able to use it against us.”

It is very clear that the member who just got up and asked me that question said that, on that Tuesday evening, he was joined by the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle and the member for Carleton at the wine and cheese hosted by the Regina—Wascana Conservative Party EDA. It is very clear that the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle was at that event.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I usually enjoy the speeches by my colleague from Kingston and the Islands, but this time I must admit to being particularly disappointed, because what I just heard was mud-slinging.

I do not even need to get to the substance of the matter, namely whether the actions of the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle were or were not legitimate. I do not need to go there, because what is happening right now is that people are trying to tell us that the best way to fix a broken leg is to break the other one. I find that especially deplorable in the discussion we are having. What I am seeing is a willingness to debase the office of the Speaker of the House and his obligation to be impartial.

My question for the member for Kingston and Islands is the following. I would like to know whether the numerous attacks he made in his speech against the former Speaker of the House, the current member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, helped restore the House's confidence in the current Speaker. That is precisely what is at issue here.

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

Mr. Speaker, what undermines the confidence in the Speaker is when members of the House continually get up and try to disparage the Speaker.

I come from a riding that has the longest-serving Speaker of the House of Commons. I am fully aware of the member's interventions, in terms of what he would do in our community, how he might go outside our community a little, into another neighbouring riding, to participate in an event. I am fully aware of it.

What I find extremely troubling is how the Bloc and the Conservatives seem to be on a hell-bent objective of getting rid of this particular Speaker of the House of Commons. I do not know why. They sent the matter to PROC, which dealt with the matter and referred it back to the House. We have not even had an opportunity to concur in the report yet.

The opposition House leader, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle teamed up with the Bloc Québécois and just does not seem to even want to respect the fact that we went through a process. Instead, he is saying there is new information, that the Speaker went to a volunteer appreciation event at a provincial political association to say hi to a couple of people. All I am saying, in pointing out what I have, is that the same individual who brought forward the motion did even worse; he went to the neighbouring riding of the federal association and paid 100 bucks to go there—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh.

[The Acting Speaker, Bloc, Gabriel Ste-Marie]

Questions and comments.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[The Acting Speaker, Bloc, Gabriel Ste-Marie]

I would ask the hon. Deputy Leader of the Government in the House of Commons to wait his turn.

The House leader for the New Democratic Party with a question.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there are two concerns that most Canadians would share in seeing the Conservatives pushing this debate today with the Bloc.

There is a process that we agreed upon. All members of the House agreed to refer the matter to PROC. PROC did the examination and has reported back to the House. Obviously, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle does not agree with the report. However, that is not within his purview. The idea that he would just incessantly move motions and disrupt the House until, I do not know when, does not make any sense at all when we are talking about the institution of the Speakership and the importance of doing the work that PROC did, with the recommendations that the Speaker has accepted.

I have two questions for my colleague. First, why are members of the Bloc and the Conservative Party refusing to heed what was a very clear report from PROC, which the Speaker is now following to the letter? He did that with an apology this morning. Second, as I mentioned this earlier with respect to the ruling by the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle when he was Speaker, the traditions in the House have been that commenting on the character or actions of the Speaker on, for example, an allegation of bias, could be taken by the House as breaches of privilege, and punished accordingly. That is how we work in the House. Those are the rules we have set as members of Parliament. I would like to ask my colleague, the member for Kingston and the Islands, whether he believes that members of the Conservative Party will respect the rulings and tradition of the House and, once we finish this debate in 20 minutes, stop openly questioning the Speaker.

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not think they will, but I think they need to be held accountable based on the ruling that the House leader for the NDP quoted, from that very member, earlier on.

I just want to get back to something else that happened just moments ago. People watching may not have seen it. The member for Regina—Wascana stood up on the first question and implied to the House that the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle was never at the event in question. After my intervention—

[The Acting Speaker, Bloc, Gabriel Ste-Marie]

The hon. member for Regina—Wascana on a point of order.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Mr. Speaker, that is just plain false. I did not imply that in the slightest. What I implied and what I said was that the photo was taken on public street. That is very different, and it is certainly different than recording a video and posting it for the whole world to see at the Liberal Party convention.

[The Acting Speaker, Bloc, Gabriel Ste-Marie]

I must interrupt the hon. member as that is a point of debate.

The hon. deputy leader of the government may continue.

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

Mr. Speaker, why would he say it then? Why is it relevant? He was saying it because he was trying to give us the impression that he was not at the event. What people need to know is that moments ago he heckled me and said that no, he did not pay to get in, so he acknowledged he was there.

It is now on the record that the member for Regina—Wascana acknowledged that the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle was at the event. That member is probably going to get pulled into the lobby in a second because, back there, they are trying to figure out how to handle this catastrophe.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question regarding the pattern we are seeing, as the member opposite mentioned. Not accepting the results of the procedures of the House seems to be a pattern the opposition is following. I wanted to refer back to what happened with Bill C-234 with the bullying of senators and the attempt to push something through, which had already followed proper procedure.

Here again we see the procedures of our House, which have always been used and have resulted in the will of this place, and the Conservatives once again are getting up and trying to override that. Can the member please give me his opinion on why this is happening and how it is relevant?

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

Mr. Speaker, they have no respect for the rules of this place. It is obvious. What are they doing today? What are they really doing today? They are just contributing to their non-stop attempts to shut down Parliament.

I said it in a statement earlier today that, one out of every three days this fall session, the Conservatives have used delay tactics like this one to prevent us from doing the work Canadians have sent us here to do. This is what they want. They want this place to be dysfunctional. They want to be able to go back to Canadians later on to say that they made it so dysfunctional that the Liberals could not do anything. I regret to inform them we were able to accomplish a lot this fall session, despite their childish temper tantrums, which we have seen repeatedly for the last three months.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, on the comments the member just made, the Liberals have made all sorts of claims about who wants to work and who does not want to work, so we put those claims to the test today. I repeatedly sought unanimous consent of the House to meet next week to continue the important work that needs to be done on Bill C-234.

On Bill C-234, a majority of the House voted for the bill. A majority of the Senate was for it until the Prime Minister and the environment minister started personally calling so-called independent senators. If the member wants to get work done, is he prepared to work after hours today? Is he prepared to work next week to complete the consideration of Bill C-234?

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

Mr. Speaker, I certainly am prepared. However, what I find really interesting is that this member has continually tried to raise points of order, as did other members, over the last few days trying to sweep the whole Canada-Ukraine free trade final vote under the carpet so they do not have to be held accountable to Canadians. They are going to be held accountable. I hope they have the opportunity over the next month and a half to reflect on their decisions, change their position and start supporting Ukraine.

[The Acting Speaker, Bloc, Gabriel Ste-Marie]

The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan on a point of order.