Privilege / Impeding a Member

Impeding a Member

Journals pp. 183-4

Debates p. 1842

Background

At the outset of the sitting, Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre) rose on a question of privilege to object to the actions taken by Mr. Benson (Minister of Finance) who had made available to Members of Parliament certain material related to the white paper on income tax reform which was also to receive general public distribution. Mr. Knowles characterized this material as "propaganda" and opposed the idea of its production by the Government at public expense without any prior consultation with the Members. Acknowledging that he was raising a grievance and a complaint, Mr. Knowles said it was more because the Government had asked the opposition parties to join them in committing what he described as a "malpractice". He therefore moved that the action of the Minister be referred to the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections and that the committee be empowered to determine the total sum being spent on the campaign. After hearing comments from Members, the Speaker deferred his decision so that he could evaluate any pertinent precedents.

Issue

Does the action undertaken by the Minister of Finance in this case constitute a breach of privilege?

Decision

There are no evident grounds for allowing a prima facie question of privilege.

Reasons given by the Speaker

The only precedent discovered that is relevant to this case is useful in some respects, but is ultimately unsatisfactory because on that occasion no motion was raised and, consequently, the Speaker was not called upon to make a ruling. Unfortunately, neither the rules nor the authorities are of much use in situations of this kind. Relying, therefore, upon the general definition of privilege as a guide, it cannot be concluded that the conduct of the Minister of Finance "was an effort to obstruct or impede any Member of this House in the discharge of his duty or that such action had the tendency, directly or indirectly, to produce such results". Although there may be a grievance, the problem is really a matter of administration and can be debated in a variety of ways.

Sources cited

Debates, April 20, 1961, pp. 3825-6.

May, 17th ed., p. 109.

References

Debates, December 10, 1969, pp. 1789-94.