Debates of May 28th, 2024

Request for Office of Speaker to be Vacated

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. If members have something to contribute, they should wait until the appropriate time. I do not know how many times we have to repeat that in the House. Members have been here for a long time.

I will ask the hon. member to start over and, hopefully, he will not be interrupted.

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the opposition House leader was the Speaker of the House. He not only had fundraisers for himself as Speaker, but also had fundraisers for other members, at least one that we are aware of. The Conservatives do all sorts of hokey-pokey stuff on it, but the bottom line is that we have to take into consideration the twists and turns that the Conservatives consistently use to present some sort of a picture that is not accurate.

Why do the Conservatives continue to try to demonstrate that the parliamentary precinct is dysfunctional, when the only thing that is dysfunctional is the Conservative Party of Canada, better known as the Reformers?

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, that is the typical Liberal response. It is everybody else's fault but theirs.

There are six strikes that I outlined in my speech: the video he made; the comment in The Globe and Mail about the Liberal Party being “our party”; his trip to Washington, D.C. and talking about his history in the Young Liberals of Canada; attending a Quebec Liberal Party fundraiser across the river when he was Speaker; the invitation that went out that was completely inappropriate and over the top; and then, the shameful comments he made today, completely distorting the reality of what he said and, again, attacking the integrity of an NDP MP. The NDP has no problem propping him up.

Which six of those are wrong? None of them. They all happened, and Liberals continue to give him more chances, wrongfully. He has zero reason to give up the chair, if that is going to be the attitude of the Liberal Party. The more strikes he has, the more they seem to love him.

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

Madam Speaker, to say that we are going to blame the Speaker for something that was the fault of the Liberal Party of Canada, I absolutely cannot agree with that. It was a post that was done in complete disrespect—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. I know whoever is going to answer the question is very capable of doing so. That individual will not need any help.

I would again remind members, if they have questions and comments, to please wait until the appropriate time. Otherwise, it is using up some of the time that members may want to ask a question and cannot be recognized.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

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

Madam Speaker, the Liberal Party of Canada showed disrespect to the Speaker. The Liberal Party of Canada showed disrespect to the institution of Parliament. For the Conservatives to point the finger at the Speaker, when the Speaker did not authorize, and had no knowledge of, what the Liberal Party was posting on its website is passing strange. It is a denial of due process.

We know that this debate is holding up an important debate that the NDP has initiated on pharmacare. There are about 18,000 people in the member's riding that would benefit from the pharmacare provisions to help people with diabetes and about 25,000 people in his riding would be helped by the provisions around contraception. The Conservatives seem to want to prolong this debate rather than simply allow the debate on pharmacare to take place.

Will the member recognize that due process means, now that we know the facts, that the Conservatives—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I have been trying to give the hon. member a signal. I want to allow the hon. member to respond.

The hon. member for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would argue that I feel I have a pretty good pulse on the thoughts of people in Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry. There are about 100,000 people who want to have an election so that Canadians can decide on all the issues the NDP keeps talking about, and more importantly, the NDP constantly propping the Liberals up.

The member who just spoke, the House leader for the NDP, was at the PROC meetings when it made the report on the first set of ethical violations and poor judgments of the Speaker. New Democrats said that they will make sure this never happens again, and if he does anything further, he is going to have to resign. He does it, and it does not count. It does count.

The Speaker knew. Was he going to randomly just show up at this fundraiser by accident the night it happened? No. The Speaker knew he was going to be at a fundraiser for his riding. He was going to be speaking at it. It was his choice to host all this, and knowing the history only months ago, he should have had better control and processes to make sure this did not happen. It was poor judgment, and he should not have done it. The NDP has to stop propping him up and giving him free rein to keep committing these multiple ethics violations.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to take my place here and to follow the great speaker we heard earlier. I was shocked when he outlined the six strikes. Not one or two strikes, but six strikes. There is a seventh one, with the doctoring of Hansard, which has not been ruled on for weeks by the Liberal Speaker. We need a new Speaker.

Madam Speaker, my remarks will be through you, but they are really directed to the power that is being held in this place by the NDP. We have an agent of the Crown, our Speaker, and I am most concerned about the orange portion of that Crown. The orange portion used to stand for the common man, for the common person in this place, and it has fallen so far from that position. The green carpet in this place is to represent the common people the NDP used to represent. Those people have been ignored by the NDP. Some would say they have been forgotten.

It is an interesting exercise to consider the NDP's position with all these violations. The most recent violation, not the one that we are talking about today, but the last one, is the most telling. It is due to that allegation the NDP referenced, that if the Speaker messes up one more time, then there is going to be hell to pay. Guess what? The Speaker messed up. We are here. We have yet to hear the ruling on the Hansard cover-up that is going on right now.

We are looking at seven violations, and maybe more, within eight months, and you have confidence in the Speaker?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I want to remind the hon. member he is to address all questions and comments through the Chair, so I hope he will abide by that.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby is rising on a point of order.

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

You are quite right to point this out, Madam Speaker. This is exactly how the Saskatchewan party has treated—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

That is not a point of order. That is a point of debate.

I want to remind members to please wait until it is time for questions and comments to add any additional comments. I would ask members to please not contribute, but if they want to have conversations, to please take it outside.

The hon. member for Saskatoon—University.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Madam Speaker, through you, to the members in the chamber, the disrespect that the NDP caucus shows for this place is most stunning. It is most stunning that you will not look at the facts that have been laid out. There are over six violations, and the proposal is just to let it go and to say it is the party.

There are a lot of things we put our names to in here. Like many members have pointed out, there is nothing that goes out from your office that you are not accountable for. Whatever is in that brochure, a ten percenter or anything that has your name on it, you know the message because you are accountable for it. You are accountable because it has your name on it. It comes from—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Once again, I will remind the hon. member to speak through the Chair. Maybe he would prefer to look at the Speaker so that he does not address it directly to the member. Again, I want to remind the hon. member that he is to address all questions and comments through the Chair.

The hon. member for Saskatoon—University.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Madam Speaker, I have been speaking through the Speaker. I have respect for this place. I view the debate that goes on here as the most important debate in all of Canada.

Canadians from all corners of this great country send 338 people here, and when we get here, the first order of business is to elect a Speaker. It is the most crucial thing we do to start a term in this place.

I note that I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Battlefords—Lloydminster.

An important part of our role is to elect an impartial Speaker. Obviously, we have erred. The Speaker has blind spots that are too large to paper over. The last time we had a violation of this magnitude, we talked about procedure, saying that it was going to go through a certain lens, that we were going to have certain people informed. However, there is another group. Interestingly, when I was preparing for my speech and talking to some of my colleagues, pages came up, and I started talking about the role of a page. Do members know that not a single page has been fired this term?

Pages, for the people watching at home, are the people who help us. They bring over important documents. They let us know if a guest is here. They facilitate the debate. An important role for them is to be impartial. The first thing they learn in page school is that they have to be impartial. They cannot post on social media. They cannot share an opinion publicly. If they do, they are fired. Not a single page has been fired from this place because they take their role seriously.

How this relates to the Speaker, which is an interesting twist, is that he was a page at one time. I think he knows what is right and wrong, but unfortunately he keeps picking the wrong decision, not once, not twice, but six times. We are soon to find out about a seventh time.

To the NDP members who will be voting in this, I would say, historic vote, our debates here cannot happen without an impartial Speaker. It is one of the most important roles we have, so we need a Speaker we can trust, not one who is an agent of the Crown. That Crown, unfortunately, with the Prime Minister and his unholy alliance with the NDP, is lacking in common sense. This lack of common sense is, I think, born into these members. It is the common sense to know that if one is the referee, one cannot take part in partisan activities.

As pointed out earlier, I was once honoured to hold this position in Saskatchewan. I was the 25th Speaker of the Saskatchewan legislature. It was an honour, and it is a peak of my career that I do not know if I will ever surpass. I loved that job; I loved it with all my heart. However, there was another calling that was greater: this country. I was worried about the country that my two boys were going to inherit after the ruinous Liberal Party was done with it.

What did I do? Knowing that I could not be in a partisan role as Speaker, I put down my robes. I resigned my speakership so that I could take part in a partisan event, which was the nomination for my seat. I did that because I hold ethics, being impartial, being a referee, to a much higher role than just someone who wears a pointy hat and funny robes. However, even that is important. Madam Speaker, you wear those robes because they identify you as someone different who holds that seat in this chamber. It is something special to be identified with the uniform of a Speaker. It is therefore with a heavy heart that I ask the current Speaker to lay down his robes. He has discredited, embarrassed and tarnished the office he holds.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, unlike the member opposite, I was not a Speaker, but I do have a bit of experience at the provincial level. I have found Speakers of different political parties all to have their own unique characters and styles in terms of their performances inside the House. I do not see anything with regard to the substance of the motion today that justifies the type of action that the Conservatives are, in essence, saying should be taken. One of those things, for example, is that if two political parties want a Speaker to be gone, then the Speaker should step down. If Saskatchewan only has two political parties in the chamber, would it be okay to draw the assumption that, if a Speaker does not have the support of an opposition party, the Speaker should step down?

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Madam Speaker, that question could only come from a member of a caucus that has a leader with three ethics violations. The corruption and rot over there go deep, and such a question highlights how much these ethical lapses have become a part of this place under these guys.

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

Madam Speaker, the current Speaker of the Saskatchewan legislature actually referenced this member in his final statement to the legislature on May 16. This is in the legislature's Hansard, and the Speaker talked about the member who has just spoken. He said the following:

The signs of inappropriate behaviour by the Government House Leader took place with a former Speaker. The Government House Leader, MLA for Meadow Lake, bragged that he could get the Speaker to rule in any way that he wanted. There is plenty of evidence that did take place. The Government House Leader would text the Speaker how he should rule on a regular basis. The Speaker resigned and ran federally.

Could the member confirm that he is the man that they are referring to, who would rule any way the government House leader wanted? How does the member explain this quote from the Speaker of the Saskatchewan legislature?

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Madam Speaker, that member has been spending way too much time within the Liberal caucus; now it is just gaslighting, all the time. That is the most—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. The member has had an opportunity to ask a question, and if he has anything else to add, he can wait until the appropriate time. That goes for every member in the House. There are other members who are weighing into the debate, and I would ask them not to do so.

The hon. member for Saskatoon—University can continue.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Madam Speaker, that just highlights the importance of the role that you hold right now as a referee, and that is what we need too: a good Speaker. I am asking the Speaker to lay down his robes today.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Madam Speaker, we all remember the events of April 30 when the Speaker kicked out our leader. I want to quote exactly what we heard from the previous leader of the NDP when he said, on that same date, that the Speaker should step down and that, in his career, he has “never seen such blatant partisanship” from a Speaker.

Does my colleague have comments on the former NDP leader agreeing with everyone else in the House? I would love to hear them.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Madam Speaker, that was back when the NDP was a true party. It was a socialist party. I do not agree with the New Democrats' thinking, but I knew where they came from. Now they have devolved into a power-hungry, fart-catching party of the Prime Minister. It is embarrassing to see, in questions from the New Democratic Party, that it has stooped so low.