May 17th
- MP
conMay 17, 2012 12:10 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'AppelleOrder please.
This is not a matter of debate. The member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley has pointed out that the member for Vancouver South made a particular heckle during a question. If the member for Vancouver South wishes to address that she may, or she may leave it up to me to deal with.
Does the hon. member for Vancouver South wish to reply to the point of order?
- MP
libMay 17, 2012 12:10 pm | Newfoundland, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—WindsorMr. Speaker, this is on a different point of order. This morning between 10:30 a.m. and 11:00 a.m., during questions and comments on the pooled pension plan debate, I started off my speech with, not a direct insult but an inferred one, to my colleague, the member forBurlington. Whether I agree with him or not is irrelevant. He did not deserve the inferred insult that I put out there.
I would like to apologize to him and to the House for that.
- MP
ndpMay 17, 2012 12:10 pm | British Columbia, Skeena—Bulkley ValleyMr. Speaker, it is not my practice to raise these particular points. Today seems to be a particularly difficult day in the House, as you observed.
On two occasions members of Parliament, from the Conservatives and the Liberals, accused other members of being stupid and ignorant. Clearly, in our orders around this place, in order to have some sort of civility in approach to debate, using such terms to refer to another hon. member of the House, whichever direction it is guided toward, is beneath contempt for a member of Parliament.
Mr. Speaker, you heard the comments clearly. It is in your guidance to suggest that members do not use this language when referring to another member of the House. It is very difficult, near impossible, to imagine the situation improving when members accuse others of being stupid and ignorant. I hope that you will rule on this.
- MP
libMay 17, 2012 12:10 pm | Quebec, BourassaMr. Speaker, there are limits.
First of all, it is not a children's museum, it is the Museum of Science and Technology in Ottawa. Second, people here have the right to ask questions. Challenging that right because someone does not have children is unacceptable. The member should apologize immediately.
- MPndpMay 17, 2012 12:05 pm | British Columbia, Skeena—Bulkley Valley
Mr. Speaker, I am sure you will recall in question period when our member for Alfred-Pellan asked a question of the government. The member for Vancouver South heckled our member and our side a number of times in a most improper and unparliamentary way. Mr. Speaker, you may have thought that this had come from a protester in the galleries. That is understandable because the type of incendiary language used in the attack on the member of Parliament for Alfred—Pellan was inexcusable.
The Conservatives, on many occasions when there have been protests in galleries, have described themselves as feeling afraid, persecuted and unable to sit in their seats and do their work as members of Parliament. I would hope that the Conservatives would apply this same standard when a member of Parliament from their side attacks one of ours in asking a decent and reasonable question.
I can understand that the member is a certain distance from your chair, but if we tolerate this type of behaviour by members of Parliament towards other members of Parliament, there is no possibility of decorum and there is no possibility of civility in this place.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that you demand from this member an apology to the House.
May 16th
- MP
ndpMay 16, 2012 12:10 pm | Manitoba, ChurchillMr. Speaker, I would like to clarify the record from statements by members today. The member for Yukon stood on a statement about the UN special rapporteur. His visit did take him to northern Canada. He went to Gods River in northern Manitoba and I--
- MPconMay 16, 2012 12:10 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
Order, please. I have not heard anything that is a point of order yet. Is the member asking him to table something?
- MP
May 16, 2012 12:10 pm | Newfoundland, St. John's EastMr. Speaker, this is either a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts, or an outrageously negligent comment about Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, similar to what the Prime Minister said a few years ago when he talked about—
May 14th
- MP
conMay 14, 2012 12:10 pm | Ontario, Ottawa West—NepeanMr. Speaker, I make no apologies for discussing important issues with my fellow colleagues on both sides of the House of Commons at any time.
I would encourage you, Mr. Speaker, to rightfully say that was not a point of order but rather a silly excuse for an intervention.
May 11th
- MP
conMay 11, 2012 9:05 am | Nova Scotia, Central NovaMr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order to ask for unanimous consent that I am able to table the MERX documents that demonstrate on the DND website as well as on the public works website that there was ample information available on projects that were incorrectly being reported today when members opposite alleged information was not available. I would like to table proof positive that the information was available to all Canadians three years ago.
- MPlibMay 11, 2012 9:05 am | Quebec, Bourassa
Mr. Speaker, is the document that we have just tabled bilingual?
May 10th
- MPconMay 10, 2012 12:10 pm | Nova Scotia, Central Nova
Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order to clarify an answer given last night in the committee of the whole.
In my enthusiasm to talk about the medical system, in particular the mental health system that we have in place in the Canadian Forces, I referenced the Canadian Forces health care budget as having “ongoing capital” of $439.6 million as opposed to saying “including capital”. Therefore, I am simply correcting the record.
To be clear, I should have said, “This brings the ongoing budget to $439.6 million for the Canadian Forces health care system.”
- MPconMay 10, 2012 12:10 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
Order. The House appreciates the clarification.
- MP
ndpMay 10, 2012 12:10 pm | British Columbia, Vancouver KingswayMr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to bring to your attention that prior to question period the member for Kootenay—Columbia used his Standing Order 31 statement to launch a personal attack on me, no less on a completely baseless and false matter.
This is the second time this has happened, and I raised a point of order two months ago on this very point.
You have repeatedly ruled that is an inappropriate use of Standing Order 31 for members to attack other members of this House.
Ironically, just today the government House leader stood up in question period and decried the use of personal attacks on those who want to serve the public, which I presume includes members of Parliament, yet the current government continues to do that very thing with Standing Order 31 statements every day.
I ask that you uphold your own ruling of this House and require the member for Kootenay—Columbia to withdraw his comments forthwith.
May 8th
- MP
conMay 08, 2012 12:05 pm | Quebec, Lévis—BellechasseMr. Speaker, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, a document entitled Privacy Action Plan, version 2.0.
It is the same document I made reference to in question period.
May 4th
- MP
libMay 04, 2012 9:05 am | Nova Scotia, Cape Breton—CansoMadam Speaker, understanding and respecting the Standing Orders and traditions of the chamber, I know it is not proper and not accepted to make any reference to the whereabouts or absence of a particular member in the House. I would ask the Speaker to check Hansard on this. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment had referenced that I was commenting on the absence of a member from the House. When I spoke about the member for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry and the regional minister from P.E.I., it was about their absence on the file and the fact that people in their ridings were losing jobs, not any reference to their absence or physical whereabouts in the House.
May 1st
- MPconMay 01, 2012 12:05 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
Does the hon. member for Toronto Centre have unanimous consent?
- MP
libMay 01, 2012 12:05 pm | Ontario, Toronto CentreMr. Speaker, in light of the answer given by the Prime Minister today to my questions with respect to the testimony in the public accounts committee, I wonder if I could have unanimous consent to read the relevant section of the testimony in that committee into the record.
Apr 26th
- MP
ndpApr 26, 2012 12:10 pm | Ontario, Timmins—James BayMr. Speaker, you know I have great respect for your judgment and I will certainly listen to whatever decision you make on this. I also recognize your desire to not turn these issues into debates. However, the question at hand had to do with serious questions asked day after day about a minister's refusal to take accountability. Therefore, the simple question with respect to the refusal of a minister to stand up to speak and take responsibility is this. Is there a plan to keep that minister in line?
If I said “woman”, I certainly would retract that and say “minister”. Is there a plan to keep that minister in line? That is a legitimate question. I can remove the word “woman”, but I would say this. Where is the plan to keep that minister in line, because she has broken the trust of taxpayers repeatedly? I would like to see that minister stand in the House and explain if there is a plan.
- MPconApr 26, 2012 12:10 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
It seems that the member has addressed the particular concern.
- MPconApr 26, 2012 12:10 pm | Quebec, Lévis—Bellechasse
Mr. Speaker, because the member for Timmins—James Bay seems to be playing word games and not simply apologizing, I would like to draw this fact to your attention: whether we are speaking in English or French, sexist comments are unacceptable in this House, period. We may use colourful expressions and have strong opinions, but there is no place in the House for sexism.
The expression “keep this woman in line” is very sexist and a patriarchal attitude implying that it is the role of men—
Apr 23rd
- MP
libApr 23, 2012 12:05 pm | Saskatchewan, WascanaMr. Speaker, I refer to the sitting of the House on the afternoon of Wednesday, April 4, just before the Easter break. As Hansard shows, the House was engaged in a pretty heated debate about the F-35 issue at the time. In that record, there is a brief remark attributed to me at about 3:15 p.m., which makes reference to the Speaker.
Given my high regard for the important office of the Speaker and in the interests of maintaining the House's functionality, I want to withdraw that reference that in any way reflects upon the Speaker.
Apr 4th
- MPlibApr 04, 2012 12:15 pm | Ontario, Toronto Centre
You are sheltering the government on—
- MPlibApr 04, 2012 12:15 pm | Saskatchewan, Wascana
Mr. Speaker, my point relates to the intervention just moments ago by the government House leader where the government House leader said categorically that the government accepts both the conclusions and the recommendations of the Auditor General.
Do I take it then the government is saying it is withdrawing the point that appears on page—
- MP
ndpApr 04, 2012 12:10 pm | Nova Scotia, Sackville—Eastern ShoreMr. Speaker, during question period, the hon. member for Crowfoot, a gentleman for whom I have great respect, said, “The gun registry did not save one life”.
Unlike the Minister of National Defence and the—
Apr 2nd
- MPconApr 02, 2012 12:25 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
Order, please. I will look at both statements and come back to the House if necessary on that.
- MP
ndpApr 02, 2012 12:25 pm | Ontario, Windsor—TecumsehMr. Speaker, I would ask you, in particular when you are looking at today's statement, to take into account the statement that was made last Thursday. How can a member possibly call someone a hug-a-thug and say that is about his philosophical underpinnings or about a policy issue? It is not. It is a personal attack. It is name-calling at its basest level. Therefore, I would ask you to look at both the statements, not just the one today.
- MPndpApr 02, 2012 12:20 pm | Ontario, Windsor—Tecumseh
Mr. Speaker, earlier today, you interrupted the statement that was being presented by the member for Mississauga—Brampton South. As there is some confusion, I am asking for some indication from the Chair as to how you intend to handle this.
Mr. Speaker, you will recall that last week the member for Toronto—Danforth had raised a point of order with regard to the statement, again presented by the same member on the government side, in terms of the nature of the statement being a personal attack on him, which is a violation of the long-standing tradition of this House and any number of Houses in the Westminster system, and more specifically, it is in violation of the rulings of your predecessor, Mr. Milliken in the last Parliament where he ruled that personal attacks against other members during the course of an S. O. 31 statement is improper.
We are not clear, Mr. Speaker, whether in fact, by cutting her off today, you were expressing your intent as to your ruling or when we might expect a determination from you on the point of order that was raised by the member for Toronto—Danforth last week.
Mar 30th
- MPconMar 30, 2012 9:05 am | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
As the member knows, members are given a great deal of latitude during statements to discuss issues that they feel are important to them or things in their constituencies. I did not hear anything today that would cause the Chair concern, but I am happy to get back to the member after reviewing the blues.
- MPlibMar 30, 2012 9:05 am | Newfoundland, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor
Mr. Speaker, my point of order is with regard to the members' statements that began this session.
I have been here for eight years. I take quite a bit of delight in bringing attention to events and people in my riding who do wonderful things. I am sure every member in the House does much the same for all the right reasons.
Members' statements that preceded question period were shameful. It was all an extension of debate in the House that we should be doing during debate. It is 15 minutes in a day. Could we not talk about the people and events of this great country for just that period of the day?
Could you please make a ruling on that, Mr. Speaker, and come back with an opinion?
Mar 29th
- MP
ndpMar 29, 2012 12:15 pm | Ontario, Trinity—SpadinaMr. Speaker, what do you plan to do with the point of order raised by the new hon. member for Toronto—Danforth?
- MPconMar 29, 2012 12:15 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
I will look at what was said. I did not hear anything at the time but I will certainly come back to the House if necessary.
- MP
libMar 29, 2012 12:10 pm | Newfoundland, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie VerteMr. Speaker, I am sure all members will agree that when it comes to matters of decorum in the House, where there is an opportunity to receive information to clarify exactly what the intentions were of any hon. member, that members would uphold the values and conventions of the House—
- MPconMar 29, 2012 12:10 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
Order, please. I think the member is making a point about the content of the statement of the member. I think I have the gist of what he is bringing to the chair's attention.
The hon. member for Mississauga—Brampton South is rising to address this point.
- MP
libMar 29, 2012 12:10 pm | Newfoundland, Random—Burin—St. George'sMr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member for Yorkton—Melville, I have here in my hands a copy of a letter, which I am quite prepared to table, written by the parent of a young student who was actually in the school when the member spoke and advocated what I said in my question.
I would be prepared to table the letter for all to see. In fact, the letter was written to the Minister of Public Safety.
- MP
ndpMar 29, 2012 12:10 pm | Ontario, SudburyMr. Speaker, I would like to give the Minister of Health the opportunity to correct the record. In a laundry list of untrue things we voted against, the minister quoted—
Mar 28th
- MP
conMar 28, 2012 12:10 pm | Ontario, Elgin—Middlesex—LondonMr. Speaker, during statements by members today, I made a comment that was very inappropriate for the House and I apologize unreservedly for doing so.
Mar 27th
- MPlibMar 27, 2012 12:05 pm | Ontario, Toronto Centre
Mr. Speaker, it is a very simple point of order. I came into the House a little after two o'clock and noticed that the member for Charleswood—St. James—Assiniboia is with us again.
I just want to say how delighted all of us on this side of the House are to have him back and looking so well.
- MP
conMar 27, 2012 12:05 pm | Quebec, Roberval—Lac-Saint-JeanMr. Speaker, absolutely not. I never intended to show any disrespect to anyone. I receive some rather harsh comments on the work we are doing, but I never intended to offend anyone.
- MPconMar 27, 2012 12:05 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
Pursuant to order made earlier today, I will now recognize the hon. Leader of the Opposition to make a brief statement.
Mar 15th
- MPconMar 15, 2012 12:05 pm | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
I did not hear anything that was an actual point of order there.
- MP
ndpMar 15, 2012 12:05 pm | New Brunswick, Acadie—BathurstMr. Speaker, two days ago, on March 13, the Minister of Labour said, and I quote:
Mr. Chair, I can say that if there were to be a work stoppage during the period of time that has been indicated, the March break, there would be no alternate domestic air service to the following places in British Columbia: Castlegar, Nanaimo, Penticton, Sandspit. In Ontario it would be Kingston and Sarnia. In Alberta, Lethbridge and Medicine Hat....In Nova Scotia it would be Sydney. In New Brunswick [my riding] it would be Saint John, Bathurst and Fredericton. In Quebec...
She misled the House because these cities would not have been affected by the Air Canada strike, since Jazz is the airline—
- MP
conMar 15, 2012 12:05 pm | Ontario, PeterboroughMr. Speaker, I will respond to that point of order by indicating that the member clearly had an opportunity to ensure air service into his own riding but instead decided not to do that.
Mar 13th
- MPconMar 13, 2012 12:10 pm | Ontario, Ottawa West—Nepean
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. As a member of the government, as a member of the Conservative caucus, I have to say it is my privilege to tell the House that the member for Peterborough is a man of great integrity and he is doing a great job for the people of Peterborough.
- MP
libMar 13, 2012 12:10 pm | Prince Edward Island, MalpequeMr. Speaker, on the point of the order that the parliamentary secretary raised, the fact of the matter is that the—
- MPconMar 13, 2012 12:10 pm | Ontario, Peterborough
Mr. Speaker, I would like to call upon the member to withdraw the two statements that he made, given the fact that they are both false.
- MP
libMar 13, 2012 12:05 pm | Newfoundland, AvalonMr. Speaker, thank you for your clarification. I would like to inform the House that given your ruling, the Liberals will be scrumming after all in camera meetings to lift the veil of secrecy the Conservatives continue to drape over committees of this Parliament.
- MPconMar 13, 2012 12:05 pm | Ontario, Peterborough
Mr. Speaker, on a separate point of order, during question period the Liberal leader made a couple of assertions that were fundamentally false. In fact, they are completely untrue. The leader of the Liberal party indicated that the Conservative Party of Canada was under “investigation”. It is not.
He also said—
Mar 9th
- MPconMar 09, 2012 8:55 am | Saskatchewan, Regina—Qu'Appelle
I thank the member for her contribution to that point.
