PROC Committee Report

Dissenting Opinion of the Bloc Québécois

“All of the Speakers who came before you were faced with the challenge of moving from a sometimes very partisan role to one where they had to set aside partisanship and become impartial. I am sure that you will be able to fulfill this role and that you will maintain the impartiality required for our Parliament to do noble work for our fellow citizens. They expect nothing less from us.” (Alain Therrien, House Leader, October 3, 2023)

The Bloc Québécois wishes to stress that the Speaker of the House of Commons plays a fundamental role in the Canadian Parliament, and just like a referee, the Speaker must embody impartiality, fairness and judgment. These qualities are essential to guaranteeing trust, order and decorum, and to ensuring that the legislative process runs smoothly for the sake of democracy and of the confidence of Quebeckers and Canadians in their elected representatives and in Parliament as the legislative assembly that represents them.

The Bloc Québécois finds it unfortunate that the actions of Speaker Fergus, elected by a majority on October 3 following a controversy, are once again distracting from the important business of Parliament, which is to address the issues affecting the public, particularly those related to the current economic situation.

The Bloc Québécois is critical of Mr. Fergus’s lack of judgment in the performance of his duties as Speaker when he decided to send a video tribute to his friend, John Fraser, Interim Leader of the Ontario Liberal Party, during the leadership race on December 3, 2023.

His decision to deliver a thank-you message as part of a partisan event, while wearing the official robes of his office as Speaker of the House, in the offices he occupies to carry out his duties, and by using House resources in doing so, is an undeniable error of judgment likely to cast doubt on his impartiality and undermine the confidence of the Members of the House.

Despite Mr. Fergus citing his lack of experience during his testimony before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs on December 11, 2023, the Bloc Québécois finds that due to the seriousness of the Speaker’s misconduct and lack of judgment, as well as the cumulative impact of his actions in the performance of his duties, he has lost the confidence of a large part of the House, made up of at least 149 Members (the Bloc Québécois and the CPC).

Although the Bloc Québécois placed its trust in Mr. Fergus in good faith when he was elected on October 3, 2023, a number of factors have raised serious doubts in the Bloc Québécois about his ability to properly carry out the role of Speaker of the House, in keeping with the tradition and customs of Parliament as a Westminster-style democratic institution.

From the outset, the Bloc Québécois had advised Mr. Fergus of the need to set an example and carry out his role as Speaker with all the high standards and judgment required given the crisis that the Chair had just gone through. Despite the Bloc Québécois’s request, Speaker Fergus acted contrary to this recommendation just a few weeks into his term of office.

Bias and error of judgment

• 1.      Partisan video as Speaker

For the Bloc Québécois, there are a number of ways in which Mr. Fergus demonstrated that he did not live up to the standards that Members are entitled to expect from a Speaker in terms of his ability to exercise sound judgment in carrying out his duties. In addition to having recorded a video in which he paid tribute to a friend at a partisan event in his capacity as Speaker of the House, Mr. Fergus testified before the Committee that he had neither validated his decision to pay tribute in his capacity as Speaker, nor sought advice from the team responsible for assisting him in the exercise of his duties as Speaker. On this point, Éric Janse, Clerk of the House of Commons, confirmed that the Speaker had not sought his advice before recording his message and sending it to the addressee for broadcast. This seems to us to be a blatant lack of judgment and discernment on the part of the Speaker. Once newly appointed Speaker, Mr. Fergus should have taken all necessary steps to assess the risk of breaching his duty of impartiality and to confirm that his decision was appropriate in the circumstances.

This situation seems all the more problematic to us since, according to Mr. Janse’s answer to the Bloc Québécois, the Speaker must be impartial at all times, not only when he is in the chair carrying out his duties.[1] In the Bloc Québécois’s view, one can justifiably say that Mr. Fergus’s actions may set a dangerous precedent that risks considerably lowering the expectation of judgment and impartiality from the Speaker of the House of Commons in carrying out his duties. The Bloc Québécois cannot allow such a precedent to emerge for the sake of democracy and public confidence in the institution of Parliament.

Mr. Fergus also told the Committee that he did not have time to think, which is why he made the video. It is concerning that the Speaker was unable to consult his own staff or the advisors who maintain parliamentary tradition. This admission further undermines the Bloc Québécois’s confidence in the Speaker. The Chair is sometimes called upon to make important decisions quickly, ones with potentially serious consequences. This makes it essential that the occupant of the Chair be able to quickly and with good judgment analyze what action to take when called to do so.

• 2.      Trip to Washington while the House was debating a matter of privilege concerning him

Furthermore, the Bloc Québécois finds it completely inappropriate that Mr. Fergus chose to travel to Washington on a parliamentary mission as Speaker in the midst of parliamentary turmoil. The leaders of the Official Opposition and the Bloc Québécois formally called for the removal of his duties as Speaker following the events of December 3, 2023. Based on the testimony from the Speaker’s staff, it is apparently not customary for the Speaker of the House to go on an official trip while the House is sitting. What is more, discussions between the Speaker’s staff and the Office of International and Interparliamentary Affairs obtained by the Committee show that Speaker Fergus’s primary motivation for going to Washington was a private retirement party for (another) friend. Mr. Fergus therefore sought to legitimize his private trip to Washington in the middle of a parliamentary week with meetings in the United States related to his duties as Speaker of the House.

Mr. Fergus chose to leave the country in the midst of the turmoil in order to honour a personal and private commitment, rather than remain in Ottawa to try to regain the confidence of parliamentarians. Again, the Bloc Québécois finds that Mr. Fergus showed irresponsible behaviour. The Bloc Québécois also finds it totally unacceptable for the Speaker to repeat the same kind of behaviour in the wake of the question of privilege raised in the House by the various parties concerning the partisan video that he had recorded. During his trip to Washington, the Speaker delivered a public speech outlining his political past as an activist and Liberal member of Parliament.

• 3.      Difficulty acknowledging his mistake and his belated apology

It is also very unfortunate that Mr. Fergus was unable to acknowledge his mistake at the appropriate time and was slow to adequately apologize for his partisan and inappropriate actions. It would appear that Mr. Fergus told the House at the outset that he regretted that his message, which he described as apolitical and personal to a long-time friend, had been broadcast publicly. In a Canadian Press article on December 4, 2023, he went on to acknowledge how his actions had been interpreted. The Bloc Québécois wishes to commend Mr. Fergus for the heartfelt and sincere apology he finally delivered before the Committee during his appearance on December 11, 2023. The Speaker acknowledged, albeit belatedly, that he had made a significant mistake. The Bloc Québécois also believes that Mr. Fergus’s instructions regarding a protocol to improve communication within the Speaker’s Office fail to restore the Members’ confidence, since the Bloc Québécois places the blame not on the Administration, but squarely on Mr. Fergus. Furthermore, a protocol alone cannot serve as a bulwark or remedy for a repeated lack of judgment.

• 4.      Decision to stay on despite the breakdown in trust in the House

Lastly, it is inconceivable that, despite the fact that two opposition parties representing 149 Members have withdrawn their confidence in the Speaker through their respective leaders (Bloc Québécois and the Conservative Party of Canada), he has expressed his firm conviction that he is able to remain in the Chair and to regain the confidence of the House.

Outcome

In light of all of the above, the Bloc Québécois cannot help but consider the lack of judgment shown by Mr. Fergus since he was elected Speaker of the House of Commons. However, the Bloc Québécois reiterates that it advised the Speaker that, given his highly partisan past, his behaviour and impartiality were under scrutiny, and that he had yet to prove himself worthy of the full confidence of the Bloc Québécois Members. The Speaker told the Committee that he recalled the conversation during which he was eager to reassure the Bloc Québécois Whip and House Leader that he would not disappoint the Members of the House of Commons. The Bloc Québécois had a right to expect that the Speaker would behave thoughtfully and beyond reproach, and that he would make decisions free from any appearance of bias. The result was the Bloc Members’ irreversible loss of confidence in the Speaker.

Breach of privilege

In section B of the Committee’s report into the Speaker’s public participation at an Ontario Liberal Party convention, the testimony of Mr. Janse, Clerk of the House of Commons, clearly dictates how a question of privilege must be analyzed following an order from the House. He said 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.”

The Bloc Québécois clearly believes that Speaker Fergus’s actions constitute a breach of parliamentary privilege and that a significant number of Members of the House have lost confidence in him as Speaker. No amount of financial penalty would remedy the error that was committed, and in no way would it restore the necessary and inalienable trust that must exist between all parliamentarians and the Speaker. On the contrary, it would set a precedent whereby partisan actions and a lack of judgment can be committed by Speakers of the House, in return for payment of a fine. This would fundamentally alter the stature of the Chair and considerably weaken the level of expectation placed on it. This would undermine the Speaker’s authority and affect order and decorum in the House, as well as public and Member confidence in the democratic institution of Parliament.

The Bloc Québécois fails to see how introducing a financial penalty would restore the confidence of its 32 Members in his impartiality, discernment and sound judgment. It is also important for the Bloc Québécois to point out that the Committee was asked in the order of reference from the House to recommend an appropriate remedy. Considering this, it is inappropriate to consider any training or mentoring mechanism for the Chair. The Bloc Québécois suggests that the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs could launch a study, at a later date, on how to improve training practices when electing a new person to the Chair.

Recommendations of the Bloc Québécois

Whereas the order of reference from the House of Commons states that “the House refer the matter to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs with instruction that it recommend an appropriate remedy.”

In light of the above, the Bloc Québécois makes two possible recommendations for similar circumstances:

• A)     That the Speaker resign from his office as Speaker as he no longer has the confidence of a substantial number of Members; and
• B)     That, further to debate in the House on adopting this Committee report, the House hold a secret ballot similar to balloting for electing a Speaker as per Standing Order 4 of the House.