Mr. Speaker, this is an important point. Had the hon. member said there was misinformation being spread, I would not be standing here right now. However, as a prominent member in this place and as someone who practised environmental law, has read Bill C-39, takes issue with specific points and ties those points to the text of the legislation, it is deeply offensive to be called a liar through the smear of a “wild disinformation campaign”.
It is the job and duty of members of Parliament to study legislation and suggest ways in which legislation can be improved to allow the public to know what our concerns are. In other words, vigorous debate giving rise to disagreement is not a violation of privilege, but to essentially smear the reputation of any member who stands in this place, including the member for Edmonton Strathcona, who was specifically referenced in the member for Halifax's speech as lying about the impact on labour rights, is.
I repeated those same critiques about part 3 of the bill. This is an omnibus bill with many sections. I will try to be concise about this, but the hon. member repeated that this bill is subject to a “wild disinformation campaign”, and she felt it her duty to separate fact from fiction. To be accused of lying and of having motives of disinformation is deeply offensive.
In reference to our parliamentary privileges, and I specifically look at Standing Order 18 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, fourth edition, there is no question that imputing deliberate deceit and dishonourable motives to parliamentarians, who are fulfilling their constitutional duty to scrutinize legislation, crosses the line. As well, Standing Order 18, and this is established in chapter 3 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, fourth edition, explicitly prohibits any reflection upon a member's personal or professional integrity, as that obstructs our ability to discharge parliamentary duties without improper interference. There is a very large difference between opposition and deceit.
I did make attempts to ask the hon. member to apologize so I would not find myself standing here and publicly calling out her scurrilous and completely dishonourable speech. In this case, I would conclude by asking that there be a ruling that, in the opinion of this House, the remarks made by the member for Halifax accusing members of a campaign of disinformation constitute an unparliamentary reflection on members' integrity and that she be directed to unequivocally withdraw the remarks.