Parliamentary Privilege / Rights of Members

Political affiliation: designation in records of the House

December 13, 1990

Debates, pp. 16705-6

On September 26, 1990, Mr. François Gérin (Mégantic—Compton—Stanstead) rose on a question of privilege to request that corrections be made to various lists of committee members, to the official records of the House and to the electronic listing of Members. Mr. Gérin stated that although he had on May 18, 1990, terminated his affiliation with the Progressive Conservative Party, various listings of members still connected him with that party. The Speaker assured the member that the necessary corrections would be made.

Mr. Gérin then requested that corrections be made to reflect his new affiliation with the Bloc Québécois. The Hon. Jean Lapierre (Shefford) supported the Member’s arguments and added that members of the Bloc Québécois, in addition to being designated as such in the records of the House, also sought to be recognized in terms of the House’s various proceedings and ministerial statements. At that point, Mr. Jim Hawkes (Chief Government Whip) and other Members suggested that the matter be referred to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections. However, the Speaker while agreeing that referring the matter to that Standing Committee might “very well be the most sensible approach,” commented that a number of issues had been raised and that the terms of reference to the committee had to be quite clear. For that reason, the Speaker suggested that the matter be adjourned until Members had an opportunity to discuss it among themselves. Mr. Gérin agreed.^[1]

On October 1, Mr. Gérin rose under the guise of a point of order to give notice of his intention to resume his application on the following day after Question Period^[2]. However, discussion on this particular question of privilege was never resumed in the House.

On October 10, Jack Shields (Athabasca) rose on a point of order to seek clarification as to how Members from the Reform Party and the Bloc Québécois were being recognized in the House.^[3] The Speaker indicated that the matter was under advisement.

On November 21, Pat Nowlan (Annapolis Valley—Hants) was recognized on “a point of personal privilege” and requested that henceforth he be recognized and listed in House records as an “Independent Conservative.” After brief interventions from other members, the Chair indicated that the matter had been raised before, was under discussion and would hopefully be resolved soon.^[4]

Mr. Nowlan rose again on December 10 to discuss the question of the status of the independent Member and to demand recognition as an “Independent Conservative.” Other Members also participated in the discussion.^[5] The Speaker summarized their remarks in his decision rendered on December 13, 1990 and reproduced in extenso below.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: The honourable Member for Annapolis Valley—Hants rose on November 21, 1990, to declare that he was and wanted to be known as and registered in our records as an Independent Conservative.

The honourable Member for Calgary West intervened to make the point that in the appendix to Wednesday’s Debates Members are listed by affiliation to parties recognized under the Canada Elections Act or as Independents, with no other possibilities in terms of that listing.

The Chair then indicated that the matter was the subject of discussion outside the Chamber and expressed the hope that it could be satisfactorily resolved.

Our further discussions on this matter were neither conclusive nor determinant of the issue. Before the Chair could so report back to the House, the honourable Member for Annapolis Valley—Hants again rose on December 10, 1990, to press for recognition as an Independent Conservative.

In his passionate appeal to the House, the honourable Member referred us to numerous precedents where Members having been elected under one label declared themselves under another affiliation and were so recognized.

He maintained that the political system in this country is based on the election of individuals whose party affiliation is incidental. The honourable Member for Calgary West continued to insist that to invent a political affiliation which did not exist under the Canada Elections Act and to request the Parliament of Canada to approve the designation of that political affiliation in its written records when it does not exist as a label one can use in running for election in this country would be a serious mistake.

The honourable Member for Kingston and the Islands (Mr. Peter Milliken) submitted that the honourable Member for Calgary West was seeking to alter the rules under which we have operated here by reference to changes in the Elections Act made in the 1970s. He concluded that based on precedents it would be entirely proper for the honourable Member for Annapolis Valley—Hants to choose his designation and insist that it be inserted in the Wednesday listing as an appendix to Debates.

The Chair concluded the exchange by asking if any Member could advise the Chair if there was any legal impediment against the honourable Member calling himself an Independent Conservative in the House. None was identified.

The Chair promised to return to the House with a reasoned response and is prepared to do so now.

It is perhaps paradoxical that the political affiliation of an honourable Member, which is so fundamental to his or her self-definition is, in our official records, given only marginal expression. As far as this House is concerned, a Member is designated by political affiliation only in the weekly appendix to Debates, and only in appendices to Journals and the bound volumes of Debates. There are, of course, other applications of these designations as, for example, in the electronic Hansard or in miscellaneous listings of Members of the House. However, these applications might be described as derivative in that they depend upon or are drawn from the listing which appears in the weekly appendix to Debates. Therefore, the designation of political affiliation in Debates must be the primary focus.

With very great respect to those who maintain an opposite view, the Chair must advise that it can find no prescription limiting the designations inserted under political affiliation in the Appendix to Debates to those parties officially recognized as such pursuant to the Canada Elections Act.

The absence of such a limiting prescription must be weighed against the combined weight of our past practice in this regard and our long-standing tradition of respecting the word and legitimate demands to self-definition of individual Members.

Having tried to perform this balancing act in the present instance with very great attention and care, the Chair is persuaded to yield to the request of the honourable Member for Annapolis Valley—Hants and accordingly hereby directs that he be listed as an Independent Conservative in the weekly Appendix to Debates, in the Appendices to the bound volumes of Debates and Journals, and in any documents or circumstances consequential to those Appendices.

I recognize that this was not necessarily a particularly easy decision to make, but I hope that it meets, after the long discussion that took place, with the approval of the Members of the House.

Shortly after the Speaker’s ruling on Mr. Nowlan’s question of privilege, Mr. Lapierre rose on a point of order to ask for guidance on the procedure to formally advise the House of his and other Members intention to be designated as Members of the Bloc Québécois. The Speaker referred the Member to the Table Officers.^[6] (The internal administrative system set up required a written notification to the Clerk of the House of the wish of the Member to be redesignated. This arrangement is not mentioned in the official records of the House.)

F0131-e

34-2

1990-12-13