Parliamentary Privilege / Procedure

Procedure for dealing with matters of privilege: length of interventions regarding a question of privilege

June 13, 2012

Debates, p. 9374

On June 13, 2012, Bob Zimmer (Prince George—Peace River) rose on a point of order^[1] to question the relevance of statements being made by Kevin Lamoureux (Winnipeg North)^[2] during his intervention on a question of privilege raised by Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley) concerning Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures.^[3]

Resolution

The Acting Speaker (Barry Devolin) ruled immediately. He specified that interventions related to points of order or questions of privilege are expected to be brief and concise, explaining the event and the reasons why its consideration should be given precedence over other House business. He reminded Members that the Speaker has the right to terminate the discussion if he or she feels no new relevant points are being made.

Decision of the Chair

The Acting Speaker: Before I go to the hon. Member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, at the time the hon. Member for Prince George—Peace River rose, I was also rising to interrupt.

I would like to provide all hon. Members with some guidance in terms of the way in which a point of order or question of privilege ought to be raised. I will quote from House of Commons Procedure and Practice, by O’Brien and Bosc, page 143, related to the initial discussion of points raised. It states:

A Member recognized on a question of privilege is expected to be brief and concise in explaining the event which has given rise to the question of privilege and the reasons why consideration of the event complained of should be given precedence over other House business.

It goes on to state on page 144:

The Speaker will hear the Member and may permit others who are directly implicated in the matter to intervene. In instances where more than one Member is involved in a question of privilege, the Speaker may postpone discussion until all concerned Members can be present in the House. The Speaker also has the discretion to seek the advice of other Members to help him or her in determining whether there is prima facie a matter of privilege involved which would warrant giving the matter priority of consideration over other House business. When satisfied, the Speaker will terminate the discussion.

I bring this to the House’s attention. Before I go to the Member for Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel and back ultimately to the Member for Winnipeg-North, I will remind all hon. Members that in the case of a question of privilege, the floor is not the Members’ until they choose to stop. The Speaker has the right to terminate that discussion if the Speaker feels that relevant points that have not been previously raised have not been brought forward. That is left to the judgment of the Speaker.