Rules of Debate / Unparliamentary Language

Use of term "mendacities"

Debates p. 18522

Background

Mr. Corbett (Fundy Royal) rose on a question of privilege to maintain that the term "mendacities" used with reference to him by Mr. Skelly (Comox-Powell River) during the debate held the day before on the motion for third reading of Bill C-111, An Act to provide Borrowing Authority, is unparliamentary because it connotes "lying and untruthfulness". Therefore, Mr. Corbett requested that Mr. Skelly withdraw his words. The Speaker ruled immediately.

Issue

Must the term "mendacities" be considered unparliamentary?

Decision

Yes. From now on the word mendacity as well as "mendacator" will be considered unparliamentary.

Reasons given by the Speaker

Any word that is a synonym of a word that is unparliamentary cannot be substituted for the unparliamentary expression, and from now on the word "mendacity" will be considered unparliamentary as well as "mendacator" and all other terms or expressions which mean the same thing. Therefore, a Member cannot accuse another Member of not telling the truth by substituting words which mean the same thing. Moreover, since this involves the use of an unparliamentary term, a Member must rise on a point of order and not on a question of privilege.

References

Debates, June 15, 1982, p. 18506.