Rules of Debate / Decorum

Unparliamentary language: expression "we were lied to"; naming of a Member

March 24, 1993

Debates, pp. 17486-8

On March 24, 1993, during Question Period, Mr. David Barrett (Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca) accused Hon. Harvie Andre (Minister of State and Government House Leader) of lying to the Standing Committee on External Affairs and International Trade which had been studying the North American Free Trade Agreement. When the Member refused to withdraw the allegation, the Speaker requested that he remain in his seat after Question Period so that the matter could be discussed further.^[1]

After Question Period, the Speaker again asked Mr. Barrett to withdraw his allegation. The Speaker's statements are reproduced in extenso below.

Decision of the Chair

Mr. Speaker: I wonder if I could return to the matter that engaged us for a moment or two during Question Period. I asked the honourable Member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca to remain in the Chamber and I see that he has done so.

I think all of us who are in public life know that there are times when we feel very strongly about issues. That is a good thing, because as I have said many times, this is not a tea party and the long history of this place is that the men and women who vote in our country and in the country from which our institutions came have insisted on sending strong-minded and idealistic people to the House of Commons. We all understand that.

The dispute that took place a few minutes ago no doubt stems from strong-minded views on both sides of the House.

The difficulty is that one could make light of this. I sometimes have said to the many groups of students that come to the House of Commons that the distance between both sides of the Chamber has at least been considered to be two sword lengths. It is an adversarial system, and for better or for worse, we who have inherited it and adjusted it to our own needs have nonetheless maintained it because we believe as we do in our court system, the adversarial system is probably as competent a way of getting at the truth and the facts as has been developed by any civilized people anywhere. It is not the only way and it is obviously not perfect but that is what it is.

However, it only works if we respect the traditions of this place and the rules that we have set for ourselves. That means that conduct in the Chamber has to have some restraints upon it.

I take nothing away, as I said at the beginning of these brief remarks, on how strongly we may feel about things. As your Speaker of course I am all sweetness and light, and kindness and gentleness, and I am not supposed to have a single thought in my head. Perhaps some of you will remember that there were times when I was sitting there that I may have provoked some anguish on the part of a Speaker myself. Most of us have probably been in that position at one time or another.

The point is that the institution and our country has to take precedence over our own anger or our own convictions when it comes to remarks in this place. I have never said that there had to be some kind of antiseptic, absolute order in a place like this. There never has been and I doubt there ever will be unless we just send zombies here. But there has to be reasonable order. When I say reasonable order I say that because without it there is no free speech and that is the fundamental that this place is all about: the right to speak.

If we do not abide by the rules that we set for ourselves, that right to speak will be lost.

The honourable Member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca is well and honourably known to me. When I say well-known that implies many things. I know the honourable Member very well. I also know his passion, his convictions and his principles. Along with most decent-minded people in British Columbia, I admire that. I also know that he has had a great deal of parliamentary experience, not just in this place but as premier of my province in the legislature of British Columbia. His contribution to public life has been extensive and no doubt will continue to be.

Now that is as far as I can go in this disputatious place. I think I heard some honourable Member say a moment ago: "Just a minute, Mr. Speaker, you are going to get him re-elected". That of course is not my purpose.

My purpose is to ask him upon consideration if he could, in the interests of this place and of our traditions, just very quietly say that he withdraws his offensive words and then perhaps we could end that part of the issue. The issue to which he takes such umbrage continues and there are other places to debate it.

I wonder if the honourable Member could assist the Speaker. The honourable Member for Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca.

And Mr. Barrett having addressed some remarks to the House:

Mr. Speaker: I have asked the honourable Member to make his remarks, and I hope that they will be of assistance to the Chair. I want to hear his words. He may have said something which I may not have heard because of comments in the House. The honourable Member.

And Mr. Barrett having continued to address the issue:

Mr. Speaker: Just a minute. It may be that things were said. Whether they were said with the intention to mislead, which is what is necessary in order to amount to a lie, is a matter of opinion. But we cannot use those words here. I am going to ask that the honourable Member consider perhaps for a few hours his position, and I hope that he will find it appropriate to withdraw.

The Right Honourable the Prime Minister.

And the Prime Minister and Mr. Barrett continuing to address the issue:^[2]

Mr. Speaker: I have asked the honourable Member to reconsider his position and I have to take it that he has considered his position and is not going to change it.

This is regrettable, I think. But under the rules which we have set for ourselves, this is a situation in which I think now, and the Right Honourable the Prime Minister has probably spoken for most of the Members in this place, we have tried to urge our colleague to withdraw but he is not going to do so. The only sanction that the Chair has, I think under these circumstances, is regrettably to name the honourable Member.

Mr. Barrett, I have to name you for disregarding the authority of the Chair. Pursuant to the authority granted to me by Standing Order 11, I order you to withdraw from the House for the remainder of this day's sitting.

F0725-e

34-3

1993-03-24