Parliamentary Privilege / Rights of the House

Power to discipline: censure, reprimand and the summoning of individuals to the Bar of the House; Member seizing the mace from the Table; prima facie

April 22, 2002

Debates, p. 10654

On April 17, 2002, Keith Martin (Esquimalt–Juan de Fuca) briefly seized the mace following the adoption of an amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill C-344, An Act to amend the Contraventions Act and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (marihuana). The amendment resulted in the withdrawal of the Bill and the referral of its subject matter to the Special Committee on Non-Medical Use of Drugs. Later during the sitting, Ralph Goodale (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians) rose on a question of privilege, maintaining that Mr. Martin had committed an affront to the dignity of the House and an assault on its order and decorum, and gave notice that he would elaborate on the legal aspects at the earliest opportunity. The Acting Speaker replied that the Speaker would look into the matter and report to the House. Marlene Catterall (Ottawa West–Nepean) then rose on a point of order to request that, until the question of privilege was resolved, Mr. Martin not be allowed to speak in the House. The Acting Speaker rejected the request and said that it would be left to the Speaker to judge the gravity of the Member’s transgression. Mr. Martin then apologized both to the Chair and to the House for seizing the mace, stating that he had done so in the heat of the moment to make a point. The Acting Speaker accepted his apology but added that it would be up to the Speaker to pursue the matter further.^[1]

On April 22, 2002, the Government House Leader stated that Members had a duty to defend the dignity of the Parliament. John Reynolds (Leader of the Official Opposition) responded that, as Mr. Martin had apologized to the House for his actions, the matter should be considered closed. He also contended that the Government House Leader had not raised the matter in a timely fashion.^[2]

The Speaker delivered his ruling immediately. He stated that, in his view, the issue had been raised in a timely manner. He stated that the incident in the Chamber had been contrary to the Standing Orders and that he believed that there had been a prima facie breach of privilege of the House. Consequently, he invited the Government House Leader to move his motion.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: I am reluctant to get into a lengthy argument in this case at this time anyway.

In my opinion, what took place in the House was contrary to the Standing Orders.

In my opinion it is a situation where I believe the Minister should be allowed to put his motion. I believe there has been a prima facie breach of the privileges of the House. The Minister sought to raise the matter on Thursday morning and got my approval to delay it because of the events that had transpired on Wednesday night, so it was not raised at the earliest opportunity, but I indicated there would be no prejudice in respect of time because of the delay on Thursday morning.

Accordingly, in my view the motion is one that could now be brought before the House and I invite the Minister to move his motion.

Mr. Goodale moved a motion to find Mr. Martin in contempt of the House and to suspend him from its service until he appeared at the Bar of the House to apologize.^[3] During debate on the motion, Mr. Reynolds moved an amendment to remove the requirement for Mr. Martin’s suspension from the service of the House, and instead to recognize his disregard for the authority of the Chair, to accept his previous apology and to consider the matter closed.^[4] On April 23, 2002, Mr. Reynolds’ amendment was defeated and the main motion was adopted.^[5] On April 24, 2002, Mr. Martin appeared at the Bar of the House and delivered an apology. The Speaker then invited him to return to his seat.^[6]