Rules of Debate / Order and Decorum

Minister alleged to have misled the House regarding commitment to appear before a committee

March 14, 2008

Debates, p. 4196

On March 13, 2008, Yvon Godin (Acadie–Bathurst) rose on a question of privilege to accuse Josée Verner (Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages) of misleading the House during Oral Questions on March 12, 2008.^[1] Mr. Godin argued that, in responding to a question from Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa–Vanier) regarding her alleged refusal to appear before the Standing Committee on Official Languages, the Minister had misled the House by indicating that she had already appeared before the Committee and was prepared to do so again, despite a letter she had sent to the Chair of the Committee declining an invitation to appear. The Speaker stated that the matter appeared to be a disagreement over facts and not a valid question of privilege.^[2]

On March 14, 2008, the Speaker returned to the question of privilege. He maintained that at the root of the matter was a disagreement as to facts, but having examined the correspondence from the Minister to the Chair of the Committee, it appeared to him that there may have been a misunderstanding about what the Minister had said during Oral Questions. He requested that the Minister clarify the facts at an early opportunity.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: That concludes Question Period for today. With the consent of the House, I would like to go back briefly to the question of privilege raised yesterday by the hon. Member for Acadie–Bathurst and the statements by the hon. Member for Gatineau and the hon. Member for Ottawa–Vanier.

As I mentioned yesterday, when I quoted page 433 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, I still believe that:

In most instances, when a point of order or a question of privilege has been raised in regard to a response to an oral question, the Speaker has ruled that the matter is a disagreement among Members over the facts surrounding the issue. As such, these matters are more a question of debate and do not constitute a breach of the rules or of privilege.

However, having read a letter sent to the Standing Committee on Official Languages by the Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages, I can see that there may have been a misunderstanding about what the Minister said during oral question period on March 12.

In order to clear up what was likely a misunderstanding, I believe it would be highly appropriate for the hon. Minister to clarify the facts when the opportunity arises in the near future.

I thank the hon. Members for their attention.

Immediately following the Speaker’s ruling, Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform) rose on behalf of the Minister to table the correspondence with the Chair of the Committee.