Rules of Debate / Unparliamentary Language

Raised on a point of order

Debates p. 17912

Background

On May 26, Mr. Collenette (York East) rose on a question of privilege to denounce the allegation made the day before by Mr. Thacker (Lethbridge—Foothills), during consideration of an opposition motion under supply, when the latter said that Liberal backbenchers "choose to protect their personal incomes rather than choosing to vote against Cabinet schemes". The Speaker took the matter under consideration and ruled a few days later.

Issue

Does the imputing of motives to the Members of a party constitute unparliamentary language?

Decision

No. The expression is acceptable in this context.

Reasons given by the Speaker

According to one authority, expressions which are unparliamentary when applied to individual Members are not always so considered when applied to a whole party. Moreover, since the Standing Orders prohibit the use of disrespectful or offensive language towards Members, a Member must bring such language to the attention of the House by way of a point of order and not by way of a question of privilege.

Sources cited

Standing Order 35.

May, 19th ed., p. 430.

References

Debates, May 26, 1982, pp. 17786-7.