Rules of Debate / Order and Decorum

Unparliamentary language: quoting from a document

February 3, 2009

Debates, pp. 300-1

On January 27, 2009, shortly after the commencement of a new session, Michel Guimond (Montmorency–Charlevoix–Haute-Côte-Nord) rose on a point of order which he had first raised in the previous session, on December 3, 2008.^[1] His point of order concerned e-mails from the public which had been read in the House on December 2 and 3, 2008, by Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke)^[2] and by Larry Miller (Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound)^[3] which, he alleged, had contained unparliamentary language. He questioned the right of Members to do indirectly what they could not do directly. The Speaker indicated that the Chair did not rule on matters raised in previous sessions or Parliaments but that, now that it had been raised again, he could take it under advisement.^[4] On January 29, 2009, Mrs. Gallant and Mr. Miller apologized for the remarks that had been found offensive by other Members.^[5]

On February 3, 2009, the Speaker delivered his ruling. He stated that Standing Order 18 as well as House of Commons Procedure and Practice, 2000 clearly indicated that Members may not use offensive language in the House. Although Members are permitted to quote from private correspondence as long as they identify the sender by name and take full responsibility for its contents, the Speaker reminded Members of Mr. Speaker Parent’s ruling to the effect that Members cannot quote words which the Members are not themselves permitted to use and urged Members to use more judicious language in their interventions. Because the Members involved had already expressed regrets about the remarks in question, the Speaker declared the matter closed.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised by the hon. Member for Montmorency–Charlevoix–Haute-Côte-Nord concerning remarks read in the House by the hon. Member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke on Tuesday, December 2, 2008.

The Member for Montmorency–Charlevoix–Haute-Côte-Nord raised this point of order for the first time on December 3, 2008, during the previous session, and raised it again on January 27, 2009.

I would like to thank the hon. Member for raising this question, and the hon. Government House Leader and the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Government House Leader for their interventions on December 3, 2008.

The Member for Montmorency–Charlevoix–Haute-Côte-Nord was concerned about the remarks that the Member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke read during the debate on December 2, 2008, on the Government motion on the economic and financial statement.

He asked the Member to withdraw her remarks that he considered unparliamentary and, at the same time, asked the Chair to rule on the right of Members to read extracts from e-mails or letters that contain remarks that would not normally be acceptable in the House.

For his part, the hon. Government House Leader was concerned about the noise and unparliamentary language that we were hearing in the House at that point. The Parliamentary Secretary defended the right of the Member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke to quote the text contained in the e-mail.

I undertook to review this matter and then inform the House of my decision on this matter, but the session was prorogued the next day.

As the Member for Montmorency–Charlevoix–Haute-Côte-Nord mentioned in his remarks, section 18 of the Standing Orders stipulates that:

No Member shall speak disrespectfully of the Sovereign, nor of any of the Royal Family, nor of the Governor General or the person administering the Government of Canada; nor use offensive words against either House, or against any Member thereof.

Moreover, as the Member for Montmorency–Charlevoix–Haute-Côte-Nord mentioned, House of Commons Procedure and Practice states on page 525 that:

The proceedings of the House are based on a long-standing tradition of respect for the integrity of all Members. Thus, the use of offensive, provocative or threatening language in the House is strictly forbidden. Personal attacks, insults and obscene language or words are not in order.

This matter has been raised on several occasions in the past. It is true that Members may quote from documents. House of Commons Procedure and Practice mentions on page 517 that:

They—

meaning Members:

—may quote from private correspondence as long as they identify the sender by name or take full responsibility for its contents.

However, my predecessor, Mr. Speaker Parent, stated on November 18, 1998 (page 10133 of Debates) that:

I would remind all hon. Members that we cannot use words in here which are used by someone else which we ourselves are not permitted to use. I would caution all Members in their statements.

I also indicated on November 8, 2006, that the Chair would not tolerate Members using unparliamentary language when they are quoting somebody. Having reviewed the words that caused the difficulty, words I would not repeat, it is clear to me that they were clearly unparliamentary.

The Member for Montmorency–Charlevoix–Haute-Côte-Nord was entirely right to point out that House practice does not allow someone to do indirectly that which they would not be permitted to do directly.

I want to take this opportunity once again to remind the hon. Members to use more judicious language in their interventions. The political climate in the House was very heated last December, but I trust that a moderate climate will now become the norm and, to that end, I urge all the Members not to disregard the rules of civility and courtesy.

I want to thank the Member for Renfrew–Nipissing–Pembroke and the Member for Bruce–Grey–Owen Sound for the regrets they expressed about the remarks made on December 2 and 3, 2008. Consequently, I consider this matter resolved. I thank the House for its attention on this matter.