Parliamentary Privilege / Rights of the House

Contempt of the House: fiscal update presented outside the House of Commons

December 4, 2014

Debates, pp. 10167–8

On November 17, 2014, Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) rose on a question of privilege concerning a financial update given by Jim Flaherty (Minister of Finance) to a private audience of financial professionals rather than in the House. Allowing representatives of banking and financial institutions preferential access to this information, Mr. Cullen argued, impeded Members from accessing critical information needed to fulfill their parliamentary duties, thus constituting a contempt of the House and its Members. In response, Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) contended that economic or fiscal updates have often been made outside the Chamber and as these updates are not governed by the Standing Orders, it is the Minister’s decision as to whether to make policy statements inside or outside of the House. After another Member spoke, the Speaker took the matter under advisement.^[1]

Resolution

The Speaker delivered his ruling on December 4, 2014. He stated that, although the release of and accessibility to information is vitally important to all Members given their role as legislators, not every proceeding or activity with respect to the delivery of or access to information by Members implicitly involves their parliamentary duties. As the Speaker did not find that Members were obstructed in the performance of their parliamentary functions, he could not conclude that a prima facie breach of privilege had occurred.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised by the hon. Member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley concerning the Economic and Fiscal Update by the Minister of Finance on November 12, 2014.

I would like to thank the hon. member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley for raising this matter, as well as the hon. Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and the hon. House leader of the official opposition for their interventions.

The hon. Member for Skeena—Bulkley Valley explained that on November 12, 2014, the Minister of Finance delivered the Government’s official Economic and Fiscal Update to a private audience of financial professionals rather than in the House. This, he argued, obstructed Members’ access to that critical information, which is required to fulfill their parliamentary functions, thereby constituting contempt of Parliament if not a breach of Members’ privileges.

The hon. Government House Leader responded that since the Economic and Fiscal Update is not the Budget, it is not governed by the Standing Orders. Consequently, the Minister was not obligated to deliver that statement in the House and, in fact, there is a long-standing practice of the Government making announcements outside the House on a range of policy issues.

The release of and accessibility to information is, of course, a matter of importance to all Members since it touches the role of Members as legislators. The Chair shares Speaker Parent’s views when he indicated on November 6, 1997 at page 1618 of Debates that this role should not be trivialized. In fact, we should take every opportunity to underline its significance in our system of responsible Government.

That is not to say, however, that every proceeding or activity related to delivering or accessing information by Members implicitly involves their parliamentary duties.

For instance, in 2009, Speaker Milliken was asked to determine whether the public release of the Government’s Third Report on the Economic Action Plan made in Saint John, New Brunswick, was a breach of privilege.

In a ruling on October 5, 2009, Speaker Milliken stated:

Matters of press conferences or release of documents, the policy initiatives of the government, are not ones that fall within the jurisdiction of the Speaker of the House unless they happen to be made in the House itself.

It is very difficult for the Chair to intervene in a situation where a minister has chosen to have a press conference, or a briefing or a meeting and release material when the Speaker has nothing to do with the organization of that [event].

In fact, a review of economic and fiscal updates delivered by the Minister of Finance has revealed that, since 2009, the minister has provided this update to a business audience in various provinces, with last year’s being delivered to the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce on November 12, 2013. Furthermore, the Chair can find no cases of questions of privilege or points of order in relation to these updates.

In addition, Speakers have consistently ruled that there are certain fundamental conditions that must exist in order for it to constitute a matter of contempt or privilege. As O’Brien and Bosc states at page 109:

In order to find a prima facie breach of privilege, the Speaker must be satisfied that there is evidence to support the Member’s claim that he or she has been impeded in the performance of his or her parliamentary functions and that the matter is directly related to a proceeding in Parliament.

Based on the precedents established by previous Speakers, I cannot find evidence that Members were obstructed in the performance of their parliamentary functions. Accordingly, I must conclude that there are not sufficient grounds to arrive at a finding of a prima facie breach of privilege in this case.

I thank the House for its attention.