Mr. Speaker, to begin, allow me to thank the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, the House leader of the official opposition, for his speech.
Let us keep in mind that this member has occupied the Speaker's chair, so when he raised the question of privilege, he knew full well what this is all about. He also knows why it is important for those who occupy the chair of Speaker of the House of Commons to be impartial and take on the role of the referee, not one of the players on the House of Commons ice rink.
I was shocked when I first saw the video of the current Speaker of the House for the very first time. I was shocked by his comments and by the fact that, not only after his election as Speaker, but also before, in the speech he gave to be elected Speaker, the member for Hull—Aylmer made several references to the importance of words, deeds and decorum in the House. As a referee and the person responsible for decorum in the House, if he is to achieve this goal, he must, without fail, demonstrate absolute impartiality.
I will remind the House about what the member for Hull—Aylmer said before he was elected. Again, everything is a matter of judgment, of course, but it is also a matter of perception. At the time, before he was elected, this is what he said to all his colleagues in the House. He used his speaking time, the time that every candidate for the speakership is entitled to, to say, “The words we use matter. Symbols matter. I know this all too well. As your Speaker, I will act swiftly to restore the honour of the House.”
That statement offended me because I did not think the House had been dishonoured in any way prior to his arrival. Nevertheless, as a group, we chose to elect the member for Hull—Aylmer as Speaker despite what he said. Given his statement, we expected the honour and decorum of the House to be impeccable. Then the Speaker made a statement from his seat before oral questions. Let us not forget how astonished we were to see the Speaker make such a statement at such a time. He announced his intention to elevate debate in the House of Commons and do better than his predecessors.
Who would have thought, just a few weeks later, that not only would all his attempts to do so fail, but on top of that, he would prove to be the most partisan Speaker since I do not know when? Who would have thought that the comments he made at the Ontario Liberal Party convention would have harmed the position he holds? We must also consider the way in which he said he wanted to lead the House to have better deliberations.
When the referee takes sides, how are the players then supposed to respect any of his decisions? When the referee practically becomes one of the players on the ice and he decides to score a goal with his striped shirt in the opposing team's net, he loses all credibility in any decision me makes after that. It is unfortunate, but that is how it is.
To remind people why we had to raise this question of privilege, I will quote some of comments from the famous video at the root of the situation we find ourselves in today.
The Speaker was dressed in his Speaker's robes in the video that was seen by Liberal supporters at the Ontario Liberal Party leadership convention. The video was filmed in the Speaker's office, likely using House of Commons resources.
His words were very clear. Despite the apology that he gave in the House this week, he cannot dismiss or erase what he said to the convention on that video. In reference to Mr. Fraser, the interim leader of the Ontario Liberal Party who was retiring after an election, the Speaker said, “He's demonstrated so much calm, conviction and resolve and determination, and he's held it all together at a very challenging time in the history of our party.” He very clearly stated “of our party”.
Even though, in his apology, he indicated that he was not a member of the Ontario Liberal Party, that he did not have a membership card and that he did not participate in activities, he still took the time to say “our party” in front of all those Liberal supporters.
When it comes to partisanship and perceptions, the Speaker, dressed in the robes of the Speaker of the House of Commons and standing in the office of the Speaker of the House of Commons, clearly failed in his basic duty to show reserve. There is a reason why no other Speaker of the House of Commons has spoken at a political convention. It has never happened before in Canada, not in legislative assemblies, not in the Quebec National Assembly and not in other parliaments around the world operating under our British parliamentary system. It has never happened anywhere.
Various excerpts from the many books of standing orders and procedures of Houses of Commons operating under the British system concur in this matter. It is written. It is a rule. It is not mere tradition that requires the Speaker to refrain from partisan displays.
I would like to quote from Parliamentary Procedure in Québec, third edition, at page 132. This excerpt demonstrates that non-partisanship must be demonstrated in all parliamentary systems, not just here:
While the legitimacy of the Chair stems primarily from the rules that govern the selection process, the impartiality of the Chair is essentially determined by the attitude adopted by the President in the exercise of the functions of office. Of course, the rules of parliamentary procedure state that the President does not belong to any parliamentary group, does not participate in any of the Assembly's debates and votes only to break a tie, but it is the manner in which the incumbent oversees the proceedings and follows those rules that determines whether actual impartiality and the appearance of impartiality are maintained.
I am saying this most sincerely: Unfortunately, with this video that was shown at the Ontario Liberal Party convention, the Speaker failed in his duty to be truly neutral and, primarily, in his duty to maintain an appearance of neutrality.
I will also add my voice to that of the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, who is asking that the matter be referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs as soon as possible. The solution for the Speaker is none other than to ask for his resignation, because he has lost the confidence of the House.
While I am at it, I will move an amendment to the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle's motion. The amendment reads as follows:
That the motion be amended by adding the following: “, provided that the committee: (a) meet within 24 hours after receiving this order of reference to consider the matter; (b) ensure this matter take priority over all other business; (c) shall have the first priority for the use of House resources for the committee meetings, subject to the special orders adopted on Monday, May 16, 2023, and Monday, December 4, 2023; and (d) be instructed to report back to the House not later than on Thursday, December 14, 2023”.
