The Daily Program / Statements by Members

November 29, 1996

Debates, pp. 6898-900

On November 28, 1996, after Oral Questions, Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie) raised a question of privilege regarding remarks by Eleni Bakopanos (Saint-Denis) during the period reserved for Statements by Members. Mr Duceppe alleged that Ms. Bakopanos had made erroneous assertions about him and asked that she withdraw her remarks. The Speaker said that he would look into the matter to determine whether there had been a personal attack.^[1]

The Speaker ruled on November 29, 1996, immediately before the time set aside for Statements by Members. He touched on the importance of the period reserved for members’ statements: it enables members to express opinions on a wide range of subjects and he would interfere only reluctantly with their freedom of expression. With respect to the remarks made by Ms. Bakopanos, the Speaker noted that it is not the role of the Chair to pronounce on the truthfulness of what members say. He said he was concerned, however, by the choice of words in her statement, since they bordered on a personal attack. The Speaker concluded by saying that he intended to be very vigilant in ensuring that no one was the victim of a personal attack in the House, and he urged all members to treat their colleagues with the respect due to them.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: Dear colleagues, before proceeding with Statements by Members, I would like to return to the question raised yesterday by the honourable member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie following the statement made by the honourable member for Saint-Denis pursuant to Standing Order 31.

The member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie alleged that the facts as presented by the member for Saint-Denis were incorrect. He asked the member for Saint-Denis to withdraw what she had said and related his version of the facts.

Although members enjoy considerable latitude in the choice of the subjects they wish to raise under Standing Order 31, it is for the Chair to determine whether those statements are in order. The Chair may, for example, interrupt a member improperly applying Standing Order 31 or using language that might offend.

I would furthermore remind members that statements constituting personal attacks are not permitted. Speaker Sauvé pointed out on January 17, 1983, at page 21874 of Debates, that:

The time set aside for members’ statements should not be used to make personal attacks.

Members’ statements are an effective and essential mechanism enabling members to express their opinions on a range of subjects. The Chair does not want to block this means of expression in any way.

I have reviewed the blues, as I promised I would yesterday, and I have very carefully considered the words of the member for Saint-Denis. It is not for the Chair to make a pronouncement on the truth of members’ statements. I am concerned, however, by the member’s choice of words, since we were very close to a personal attack.

On many many occasions in the past, the Chair has reminded members of the need to honour the conventions and traditions of this House, especially that of conducting themselves with the courtesy appropriate to elected representatives.

An important element of this courtesy is refraining from levelling a personal attack at someone else. The words expressed are broadcast instantaneously to all regions of the country. Once they have been uttered, it is very difficult to retract them, and the impression they leave is not always easily erased.

Statements by Members must not be used to make personal attacks. This is fundamental to maintaining order in Parliament.

My colleagues, the Chair cannot always predict the course of debates. members will understand that the Chair is often caught between respect for freedom of speech and the rapid delivery of 60-second statements. For this reason, I must count on the goodwill of every member. I intend to be very vigilant to ensure no one is the victim of personal attacks in this House.

I encourage all members to treat their colleagues with the respect they are due. I thank you for your attention in this matter.

P0309-e

35-2

1996-11-29