Introduction

On 6 December 2023, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs (the Committee) received the following order or reference from the House of Commons which was adopted unanimously:

That the Speaker's public participation at an Ontario Liberal Party convention^[1], as Speaker of the House of Commons, constitute a breach of the tradition and expectation of impartiality required for that high office, constituting a serious error of judgment which undermines the trust required to discharge his duties and responsibilities and, therefore, the House refer the matter to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs with instruction that it recommend an appropriate remedy, provided that the committee: (a) meet within 24 hours after receiving this order of reference to consider the matter; (b) ensure this matter take priority over all other business; (c) shall have the first priority for the use of House resources for the committee meetings, subject to the special orders adopted on Monday, May 16, 2023, and Monday, December 4, 2023; and (d) be instructed to report back to the House not later than on Thursday, December 14, 2023.^[2]

On 7 December 2023, the Committee commenced its study, hearing from six witnesses during one meeting. The Committee wishes to thank all witnesses who participated in this study on short notice.

Background

A. The Deputy Speaker’s 5 December 2023 Ruling Regarding the Hon. Andrew Scheer, P.C., M.P.’s Question of Privilege

On 4 December 2023, the Honourable Andrew Scheer, P.C., member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, raised a question of privilege in the House of Commons, concerning the Speaker’s public participation at the Ontario Liberal Party (OLP) leadership convention.

Mr. Scheer told the House that on 2 December 2023, the Speaker appeared by video at the leadership election for the OLP as part of a tribute to outgoing interim leader of the OLP, John Fraser.^[3] Mr. Scheer continued by noting that the Speaker made these remarks from the Speaker’s office while dressed in his Speaker’s robes.^[4] Mr. Scheer alleged that by making these remarks, the Speaker failed to uphold the impartiality of the Office of the Speaker.

The Speaker recused himself from participation in this question of privilege. On 5 December 2023, the Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons ruled on the question of privilege raised by Mr. Scheer. In his ruling, the Deputy Speaker acknowledged that the Speaker had apologized for the perception of partisanship that his involvement in the Liberal convention had created. The Deputy Speaker noted that the preferred means to bring such a matter before the House is through a substantive motion on notice.^[5] He also acknowledged that this is an important matter to settle as soon as possible. Given this, instead of insisting that a substantive motion be placed on notice, the Deputy Speaker ruled that this matter should have priority over other orders of the day and allowed Mr. Scheer to move his motion.

B. The Role of the Speaker of the House of Commons in Respect of Impartiality

The Speaker’s procedural and institutional roles have their roots in the earliest days of the British House of Commons, but have evolved since into a distinctly Canadian institution.

Under section 44 of the Constitution Act, 1867, the first order of business at the first sitting of the House of Commons following each federal general election is the election of the Speaker from among its membership. Since 1985, the election of the Speaker has been held using a secret ballot election, a measure meant to underscore that the Speaker represents all members of the House.

The Speaker of the House of Commons interprets and applies the rules and traditions of the House and ensures the smooth conduct of House business. The Speaker also has many administrative and diplomatic responsibilities. However, much of the office of Speaker is not set down in any constitutional or statutory documents, but rests on history, practice and convention.

Today, an expectation exists among members of the House, and the wider public, that the Speaker’s duties ought to be carried out with scrupulous impartiality and independence.

The Speaker must be fair and impartial. Although a member of the House of Commons, the Speaker does not participate in debate or vote unless there is a tie, in which case the Speaker generally votes to maintain the status quo.

House of Commons Procedure and Practice, 3^rd edition, states the following about the impartiality of the Speaker of the House of Commons:

When in the Chair, the Speaker embodies the power and authority of the office, strengthened by rule and precedent. He or she must at all times show, and be seen to show, the impartiality required to sustain the trust and goodwill of the House. The actions of the Speaker may not be criticized in debate or by any means except by way of a substantive motion.^[6]

This exigence of impartiality of the Speaker in carrying out parliamentary duties is likewise found in other parliamentary democracies that employ the Westminster model.

In the United Kingdom’s House of Commons, “[t]he chief characteristics attaching to the office of Speaker in the House of Commons are authority and impartiality.”^[7] Indeed, once elected to that role, “the Speaker severs all ties with his or her former party and is in all aspects of the job a completely non-partisan figure.”^[8]

In Australia’s House of Representatives, “[o]ne of the hallmarks of good Speakership is the requirement for a high degree of impartiality in the execution of the duties of the office.”^[9] In New Zealand’s House of Representatives,

[a]lthough expected to perform their role in a wholly impartial way, the Speaker in New Zealand does not sever all links with a political party, as the Speaker of the House of Commons does in the United Kingdom.^[10]

Summary of Witness Testimony

A. The Honourable Greg Fergus, P.C., M.P., Speaker of the House of Commons

a) The Speaker Apologizes to the Committee, the House and the Public

The Honourable Greg Fergus, P.C., M.P., Speaker of the House of Commons, began his appearance by giving an unreserved apology to the members of the Committee, the House and the public. He stated that he should never have made a tribute video for John Fraser, member of Provincial Parliament, Legislative Assembly of Ontario, which was shown at the OLP’s leadership event held 2 to 3 December 2023.

Mr. Fergus stated that the video was a mistake because it reflected negatively on his impartiality, as Speaker. He indicated that the incident was a hard-learned lesson but that it was not an error of intention. Further, he underlined that it was a mistake that he will not repeat.

Mr. Fergus indicated that he holds a deep respect for the institution of Parliament, as well as for decorum, tradition, members, staff and the public.

b) Observations Regarding the Speaker’s Tribute Video to Mr. Fraser Shown on 2 December 2023

The Speaker stated that his office received a request on 27 November 2023, from a member of Mr. Fraser’s family. The request asked Mr. Fergus for a personal, tribute video to be shown at a surprise party to mark Mr. Fraser’s retirement.

According to Mr. Fergus, the member of Mr. Fraser’s family provided assurances to him that the tribute video would be shown on 1 December 2023 at a private, intimate gathering to be attended by Mr. Fraser’s team (e.g., his friends, family, political team) and not at a public or partisan event. As such, Mr. Fergus stated that he considered it to be a personal video, and not a partisan one.

Mr. Fergus stated that, in hindsight, he should have taken a moment to better consider the request. He stated that he did not consult with his chief of staff, nor with the Clerk of the House of Commons. For this, he apologized and stated that his decision demonstrated a lack of judgment.

The tribute video itself was filmed quickly by a member of Mr. Fergus’ staff, in between two meetings. As such, Mr. Fergus was wearing the Speaker’s robes.

In the video, Mr. Fergus talked about his friendship with Mr. Fraser, with whom he has been friends since 1989. Mr. Fergus told the Committee that he considered Mr. Fraser to be a role model, and that, as a friend, Mr. Fraser and his family had always been very supportive of his family.

Mr. Fergus stated that he found out that the tribute had been shown publicly, without his consent, at the same time as the public did. He indicated that he was sickened that it was shown at a partisan event, and it made him realize that he should never have filmed the video in the first place. He stated that he phoned his chief of staff but he did not contact Mr. Fraser.

Some members of the Committee indicated that, in their view, the Speaker’s decision to make the video demonstrated a lack of judgment on his part and brought into question his impartiality. Further, they also questioned not consulting with the Clerk beforehand, wearing the Speaker’s robes in the video, insufficiently apologizing in the House on 4 December 2023, and not cancelling his trip that week to Washington, D.C.

Mr. Fergus told the Committee that had he not recorded the message, the whole incident could have been avoided. He stated that should it be the will of the House to allow him to continue as Speaker, he would do his best to regain the confidence of all members of the House through hard work.

c) The Speaker’s International and Interparliamentary Affairs Visit to Washington, D.C.

Mr. Fergus told the Committee that he contemplated cancelling his travel to Washington, scheduled for the week of 4 December 2023. However, he decided to proceed with the visit because he informed the House that he would recuse himself with respect to matters related to this question of privilege. Additionally, he informed the Committee that there were meetings organized in Washington that had been previously cancelled, and he did not want to cancel them another time. Some members of the Committee raised questions about Mr. Fergus’ comments, while in Washington, at an event for Claus Gramckow of the Friedrich Naumann Foundation.

d) The Speaker’s Past Involvement in Political Activities

Some members of the Committee raised with Mr. Fergus the political positions and roles he previously held. In response, Mr. Fergus indicated that in reviewing his background, a person could be given the impression that his past was a statement about himself today. He noted that his past was a matter of the public record.

He stated that his rulings in the House have been made in consultation with the Clerk and reflect the best of Canada’s parliamentary traditions, practices and procedures.

Further, some members raised Mr. Fergus’ use of the term “our party” to describe the OLP during an interview on 1 December 2023 with the Globe and Mail. Mr. Fergus expressed his regret for using the word “our.”

e) Steps Taken to Prevent Future Incidents

Mr. Fergus stated that, even before the current question of privilege arose, he had been putting in place procedures and protocols to review and evaluate communications to and from his office.

He explained that the work was currently in draft form and that he had been in contact with the presiding officers in other jurisdictions to receive their best practices.

He stated that, in the future, his office would rely heavily on the Clerk and House Administration to review similar requests for the Speaker’s participation, with the view of ensuring that incidents of this kind never happen again.

f) Other Observations

Mr. Fergus noted that in his youth, as a Black/racialized Canadian, he had not seen many Black/racialized Canadian in the role of Member of the House, let alone Speaker. To that end, he apologized to Black/racialized Canadians if they feel that he has let them down. He indicated that his election as Speaker was symbolic of Canada’s generosity.

Mr. Fergus also noted that he will accept the House’s decision in relation to the question of privilege.

B. Eric Janse, Acting Clerk of the House of Commons

Eric Janse, Acting Clerk of the House of Commons, appeared before the Committee with Michel Bédard, Interim Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, and Jeffrey LeBlanc, Acting Deputy Clerk of the House of Commons.

a) Parliamentary Privilege and the Role of the Committee

Mr. Janse told the Committee that when considering a question of privilege, a committee usually takes three steps. First, a committee seeks to determine the facts of the events in question. Second, a committee determines whether, in its opinion, the events constitute a breach of members’ privileges or a contempt of the House. Finally, a committee may examine corrective measures. Ultimately, the House itself decides whether its privileges have been breached and appropriate corrective measures.

b) The Role of the Speaker

Mr. Janse told the Committee that, from his perspective, it is important that Speakers act impartially and are perceived to be impartial. Speakers, according to Mr. Janse, must balance their responsibilities as Speaker with those of representing their constituents as members elected under a particular political party. The Standing Orders of the House do not provide a framework for the impartiality of the speakership within or outside of the Chamber. Mr. Janse explained that the impartiality of the Speaker is largely a question of practice.

c) Observations Regarding the Speaker’s Tribute Video to Mr. Fraser Shown on 2 December 2023

Mr. Janse explained that as Acting Clerk, he is available to provide advice to the Speaker and all members. Typically, Mr. Janse is consulted for procedural questions, and is rarely asked to provide advice regarding political questions.

The Speaker did not seek Mr. Janse’s advice regarding his decision to record a tribute video for Mr. Fraser. Mr. Janse told the Committee that had he been consulted, he would have advised against recording such a video or he would have recommended that the Speaker canvas all parties in the house for their advice on the matter.

d) The Speaker’s International and Interparliamentary Affairs Visit to Washington, D.C.

Mr. Janse told the Committee that the Speaker’s visit to Washington, D.C. was initiated soon after his election. He noted that typically Speakers do not travel during a sitting week and are usually accompanied by members of other parties; however, this is not always the case.

e) Other Observations

Mr. Janse shared with the Committee observations about the impartiality of the Speaker in other jurisdictions. He noted that the legislatures in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and the Yukon have contemplated the issue of impartiality of the Speaker. Mr. Janse also noted that in the United Kingdom, the Speaker runs unopposed as an independent candidate in future elections. In Ghana, the Speaker resigns as a member of Parliament.

f) Recommendations

Mr. Janse told the Committee that the Speaker was provided written and oral briefings when he assumed his role. While these materials included some information on impartiality, Mr. Janse acknowledged this section was not as detailed as it should have been. Mr. Janse described this as a lesson learned for House Administration.

In response to a question about the application of Speaker impartiality outside of Parliament, Mr. Janse suggested it could be a Committee study. Mr. Janse advised against creating an enumerated list of activities that Speakers should abstain from, noting the challenges of creating a comprehensive list. He noted that the challenge is even greater in the age of social media.

C. John Fraser, Member of Provincial Parliament, Legislative Assembly of Ontario

a) Observations Regarding the Speaker’s Tribute Video to Mr. Fraser Shown on 2 December 2023

John Fraser was elected to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, as the member for Ottawa South, in August 2013 and intends to seek re-election. From August 2022 until December 2023, Mr. Fraser served as interim leader of the OLP. He appeared to discuss his participation in the tribute video to him in which Mr. Fergus appeared.

Mr. Fraser told the Committee that he has known Mr. Fergus for over 30 years and characterized their relationship as one of deep and enduring friendship.

In mid-November 2023, the OLP, through a volunteer, asked his family to coordinate a personal video tribute to him. Since the tribute video was prepared as a surprise, Mr. Fraser was not involved in its preparation and did not take part in the discussions with Mr. Fergus.

Mr. Fraser explained that Linda Hooper, his wife, contacted Mr. Fergus’ office to ask if he would film a tribute video for him. He stressed that Mr. Fergus was contacted because of their close personal friendship, and not as Speaker of the House.

Since Mr. Fraser was not involved in the preparation of the video, he was unable to provide details about any assurances that would have been given to Mr. Fergus about the private nature of this video.

Mr. Fraser indicated that he has spoken with Tommy Desfossés, Chief of Staff to the Speaker, three times since the video became public.

D. Simon Tunstall, Chief Returning Officer, 2023 Leadership Election, Ontario Liberal Party

a) Observations Regarding the Speaker’s Tribute Video to Mr. Fraser Shown on 2 December 2023

Simon Tunstall, Chief Returning Officer, 2023 Leadership Election told the Committee that he had not seen the video tribute the Speaker had filmed for, Mr. Fraser. He noted that his focus at the time was counting the ballots.

Mr. Tunstall explained that prior to Mr. Fraser’s appearance before the Committee, he was not aware of who had contacted the Speaker’s office to request a tribute video and was unaware of the contents of that communication.

Mr. Tunstall indicated that it was likely a non-political audio-visual company that compiled the videos. He noted that it is likely that they were the ones to identify the Speaker by his title in the label shown on the video but could not be sure.

Recommendations

In respect of this matter, the Committee makes the following recommendations:

Recommendation 1

That the Speaker undertake the appropriate steps to reimburse a suitable amount for the use of parliamentary resources that were not related to the performance of parliamentary functions.

Recommendation 2

That the House Administration be tasked with preparing, as part of the briefing binder, guidelines for any future Speaker of the House that presents clear boundaries for impartiality and non-partisanship.

Recommendation 3

That the Speaker issue another apology clearly stating that filming the video both in his office, and in his robes was inappropriate, his remorse for the situation, and a clear outline of what he and his office will do to ensure this does not happen again; and that the principle of respect, impartiality, and decorum are values he will continue to prioritize as Speaker.