Speech (House debate)

{
    "time": "2018-06-19 16:10:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "The Speaker",
        "fr": "Le Pr\u00e9sident"
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"5505464\" data-originallang=\"en\">I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on May 29, 2018 by the hon. member for <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> concerning documents published on the website of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in relation to Bill <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a>, an act to amend certain acts and regulations in relation to firearms.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505465\" data-originallang=\"fr\"> I would like to thank the member for <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> for having raised the matter, as well as the <a data-HoCid=\"229526\" href=\"/politicians/kevin-lamoureux/\" title=\"Kevin Lamoureux\">parliamentary secretary to the government House leader </a> for his comments. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505466\" data-originallang=\"en\">In presenting his case, the member for <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> contended that information on the RCMP website led readers to believe that Bill <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a> had already been enacted by acknowledging neither the parliamentary process nor the fact that the bill remains subject to parliamentary approval. He added that the presumptuous language used, including such phrases as \u201cwill be impacted\u201d, \u201cwill become prohibited\u201d, and \u201cis affected\u201d, is proof of contempt of Parliament.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505467\" data-originallang=\"fr\">The member returned to the House the next day to explain that the website in question had been updated that day to include a disclaimer about Bill <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a> in fact being a proposed law. He viewed this as an admission of fault.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505468\" data-originallang=\"fr\">For his part, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader explained that the matter raised was simply one of debate as there was clearly no presumption of anything in the information respecting Bill <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a> on the RCMP website.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505469\" data-originallang=\"en\">As the charge being made by the member for <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> is one of contempt, the Chair must determine if the information provided on the RCMP website does in fact anticipate a decision of Parliament. If it does, this would offend the authority of the House.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505470\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Having reviewed in detail the relevant information on the website, before the disclaimer was added, I found instances where some provisions of the bill were in fact framed as legislative proposals, using such phrases as \u201cproposed legislation\u201d and \u201cis expected to be\u201d. Despite these statements, the vast majority of the information was presented as though the provisions will definitively be coming into effect or are already the law of the land. Nowhere did I find any indication the bill was still in committee and was not yet enacted law.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505471\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Further to this, I reviewed the material to try to determine if the assertions being made could be related to existing regulations or statutory provisions. I can confirm that, although some elements of the information are rooted in existing statutory or regulatory provisions, many more would be new measures that would come into force only with the enactment of Bill <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a>. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505472\" data-originallang=\"en\">The member for <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> did acknowledge that some of the language is conditional but, even then, the Chair shares the member's concern that the website information suggests that the only approval required is that of the government.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505473\" data-originallang=\"en\">Parliament's authority in scrutinizing and adopting legislative proposals remains unquestionable and should not be taken for granted. The Chair is troubled by the careless manner in which the RCMP chose to ignore this vital fact and, for more than three weeks, allowed citizens and retailers to draw improper conclusions as to their obligations under the law. Changing the website after the fact does little to alleviate these concerns. Parliamentarians and citizens should be able to trust that officials responsible for disseminating information related to legislation are paying attention to what is happening in Parliament and are providing a clear and accurate history of the bills in question.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505474\" data-originallang=\"fr\"> The work of members as legislators is fundamental and any hint or suggestion of this parliamentary role and authority being bypassed or usurped is not acceptable. The government and the public service also have important roles when it comes to legislation, but these are entirely distinct from those of members as legislators. In fact, part of their responsibility is to state loud and clear that legislation comes from Parliament and nowhere else. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505475\" data-originallang=\"en\">As the member for <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> reminded us, some 30 years ago, Speaker Fraser had cause to state on October 10, 1989, at page 4461 of the <em>Debates</em> in ruling on a similar matter:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"5505476\" data-originallang=\"en\"> This is a case which, in my opinion, should never recur. I expect the Department of Finance and other departments to study this ruling carefully and remind everyone within the Public Service that we are a parliamentary democracy, not a so-called executive democracy, nor a so-called administrative democracy. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"5505477\" data-originallang=\"fr\"> Again, on November 6, 1997, at page 1618 of the <em>Debates</em>, Speaker Parent was equally clear about the respect owed to the authority of the House, stating:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"5505478\" data-originallang=\"fr\"> This dismissive view of the legislative process, repeated often enough, makes a mockery of our parliamentary conventions and practices. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"5505479\" data-originallang=\"en\">As Speaker, I cannot turn a blind eye to an approach by a government agency that overlooks the role of Parliament. To do otherwise would make us compliant in denigrating the authority and dignity of Parliament. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505480\" data-originallang=\"en\">Accordingly, the Chair finds this to be a prima facie matter of contempt of the House. I invite the member for <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> to move the appropriate motion. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505481\" data-originallang=\"en\">I thank all hon. members for their attention.</p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"5505464\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je suis maintenant pr\u00eat \u00e0 me prononcer sur la question de privil\u00e8ge soulev\u00e9e le 29 mai 2018 par l'honorable d\u00e9put\u00e9 de <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> concernant les documents publi\u00e9s sur le site Web de la Gendarmerie royale du Canada relativement au projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a>, Loi modifiant certaines lois et un r\u00e8glement relatifs aux armes \u00e0 feu.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505465\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Je remercie le d\u00e9put\u00e9 de <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> d'avoir soulev\u00e9 la question, ainsi que le <a data-HoCid=\"229526\" href=\"/politicians/kevin-lamoureux/\" title=\"Kevin Lamoureux\">secr\u00e9taire parlementaire de la leader du gouvernement \u00e0 la Chambre des communes</a> de ses observations \u00e0 ce sujet.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505466\" data-originallang=\"en\">Dans son expos\u00e9 des faits, le d\u00e9put\u00e9 de <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> a soutenu que de l'information publi\u00e9e sur le site Web de la GRC amenait les lecteurs \u00e0 croire que le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a> avait d\u00e9j\u00e0 \u00e9t\u00e9 adopt\u00e9 puisqu'il n'y \u00e9tait ni question du processus parlementaire ni du fait que le projet de loi devait \u00eatre approuv\u00e9 par le Parlement. Il a ajout\u00e9 que les formules pr\u00e9somptueuses utilis\u00e9es, notamment les expressions \u00ab [...] seront [...] toutes touch\u00e9es \u00bb, \u00ab deviendront aussi prohib\u00e9es \u00bb et \u00ab seront touch\u00e9es \u00bb, d\u00e9montrent qu'il s'agit d'un outrage au Parlement.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505467\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Le lendemain, le d\u00e9put\u00e9 a expliqu\u00e9 \u00e0 la Chambre que le site Web en question avait \u00e9t\u00e9 mis \u00e0 jour le jour m\u00eame et qu'on pr\u00e9cisait maintenant que le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a> n'avait pas encore \u00e9t\u00e9 adopt\u00e9. Selon lui, il s'agit l\u00e0 d'un aveu de culpabilit\u00e9. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505468\" data-originallang=\"fr\">De son c\u00f4t\u00e9, le secr\u00e9taire parlementaire de la leader du gouvernement \u00e0 la Chambre des communes a expliqu\u00e9 que cette question relevait du d\u00e9bat, car il n'y avait clairement aucune pr\u00e9somption de quoi que ce soit dans l'information concernant le projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a> qui se trouve sur le site Web de la GRC.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505469\" data-originallang=\"en\">\u00c9tant donn\u00e9 que le d\u00e9put\u00e9 de <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> soutient qu'il y a eu outrage, la pr\u00e9sidence doit d\u00e9terminer si l'information publi\u00e9e sur le site Web de la GRC tient pour acquis que le Parlement prendra une d\u00e9cision donn\u00e9e. Le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, cela porterait atteinte \u00e0 l'autorit\u00e9 de la Chambre.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505470\" data-originallang=\"en\">Apr\u00e8s avoir examin\u00e9 en d\u00e9tail l'information pertinente sur le site Web, avant la publication des pr\u00e9cisions, j'ai relev\u00e9 des cas o\u00f9 certaines dispositions du projet de loi \u00e9taient effectivement pr\u00e9sent\u00e9es comme des propositions l\u00e9gislatives au moyen d'expressions comme \u00ab modifications propos\u00e9es \u00bb et \u00ab devrait \u00eatre \u00bb. Malgr\u00e9 ces expressions, la vaste majorit\u00e9 de l'information \u00e9tait pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e comme si les dispositions entreront certainement en vigueur ou sont d\u00e9j\u00e0 en vigueur. Je n'ai trouv\u00e9 aucune indication pr\u00e9cisant que le projet de loi \u00e9tait toujours \u00e0 l'\u00e9tape de l'\u00e9tude en comit\u00e9 et qu'il n'\u00e9tait pas encore adopt\u00e9.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505471\" data-originallang=\"fr\">J'ai ensuite tent\u00e9 de d\u00e9terminer si les affirmations contenues dans la documentation pouvaient se rapporter \u00e0 des r\u00e8glements ou \u00e0 des dispositions l\u00e9gislatives en vigueur. Je suis en mesure de confirmer que, bien que certains \u00e9l\u00e9ments s'appuient sur des dispositions l\u00e9gislatives ou r\u00e9glementaires actuelles, de nombreux autres seraient de nouvelles mesures qui entreraient en vigueur seulement \u00e0 la suite de l'adoption du projet de loi <a data-HoCid=\"9710291\" href=\"/bills/42-1/C-71/\" title=\"An Act to amend certain Acts and Regulations in relation to firearms\">C-71</a>.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505472\" data-originallang=\"en\">Le d\u00e9put\u00e9 de <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> a reconnu que certaines formules \u00e9taient au conditionnel, mais, l\u00e0 encore, la pr\u00e9sidence partage la pr\u00e9occupation du d\u00e9put\u00e9 selon laquelle l'information publi\u00e9e sur le site Web laisse entendre que seule l'approbation du gouvernement est requise.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505473\" data-originallang=\"en\">L'autorit\u00e9 du Parlement concernant l'examen et l'adoption des propositions l\u00e9gislatives demeure incontestable et elle ne doit pas \u00eatre tenue pour acquise. La pr\u00e9sidence d\u00e9plore le manque d'attention dont la GRC a fait preuve \u00e0 l'\u00e9gard de ce principe fondamental et le fait que la GRC a permis pendant plus de trois semaines \u00e0 des citoyens et des d\u00e9taillants de tirer de fausses conclusions quant \u00e0 leurs obligations au titre de la loi. Modifier le site Web apr\u00e8s coup n'all\u00e8ge en rien ces pr\u00e9occupations. Les parlementaires et les citoyens doivent avoir l'assurance que les fonctionnaires responsables de diffuser de l'information concernant la l\u00e9gislation pr\u00eatent attention \u00e0 ce qui se passe au Parlement et fournissent des renseignements clairs et pr\u00e9cis sur les projets de loi en question. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505474\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Le travail des d\u00e9put\u00e9s \u00e0 titre de l\u00e9gislateurs est fondamental et la moindre indication ou insinuation que ce r\u00f4le parlementaire et cette autorit\u00e9 parlementaire sont contourn\u00e9s ou usurp\u00e9s n'est pas acceptable. Le gouvernement et la fonction publique ont aussi des r\u00f4les importants en ce qui concerne la l\u00e9gislation, mais ce sont des r\u00f4les enti\u00e8rement distincts de ceux que jouent les d\u00e9put\u00e9s en leur qualit\u00e9 de l\u00e9gislateurs. En fait, le gouvernement et la fonction publique sont responsables, entre autres, de faire clairement comprendre que les lois viennent du Parlement et de nulle part ailleurs.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505475\" data-originallang=\"en\">Comme le d\u00e9put\u00e9 de <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> nous l'a rappel\u00e9, il y a une trentaine d'ann\u00e9es, le Pr\u00e9sident Fraser a d\u00e9clar\u00e9, \u00e0 juste titre, le 10 octobre 1989, \u00e0 la page 4461 des <em>D\u00e9bats</em> dans une d\u00e9cision sur une question semblable: </p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"5505476\" data-originallang=\"en\"> \u00c0 mon avis, c'est une situation qui ne devrait jamais se reproduire. Je m'attends \u00e0 ce que le minist\u00e8re des Finances et les autres minist\u00e8res \u00e9tudient cette d\u00e9cision avec soin et je rappelle \u00e0 tous, dans la fonction publique, que nous sommes une d\u00e9mocratie parlementaire et non une d\u00e9mocratie de type ex\u00e9cutif ou de type administratif. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"5505477\" data-originallang=\"fr\">Le 6 novembre 1997, \u00e0 la page 1618 des <em>D\u00e9bats de la Chambre des communes</em>, le Pr\u00e9sident Parent a \u00e9galement \u00e9t\u00e9 clair au sujet du respect devant \u00eatre accord\u00e9 \u00e0 l'autorit\u00e9 de la Chambre lorsqu'il a affirm\u00e9:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"5505478\" data-originallang=\"fr\"> Cette mani\u00e8re hautaine de concevoir le processus l\u00e9gislatif risque, \u00e0 la longue, d'engendrer un manque de respect \u00e0 l'\u00e9gard de nos conventions et pratiques parlementaires. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"5505479\" data-originallang=\"en\">En ma qualit\u00e9 de Pr\u00e9sident, je ne peux fermer les yeux sur une fa\u00e7on de faire d'un organisme gouvernemental qui fait fi du r\u00f4le du Parlement. Autrement, nous nous ferions les complices du d\u00e9nigrement de l'autorit\u00e9 et de la dignit\u00e9 du Parlement.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505480\" data-originallang=\"en\">Par cons\u00e9quent, la pr\u00e9sidence juge qu'il y a, de prime abord, outrage \u00e0 la Chambre, et j'invite le d\u00e9put\u00e9 de <a data-HoCid=\"227983\" href=\"/politicians/glen-motz/\" title=\"Glen Motz\">Medicine Hat\u2014Cardston\u2014Warner</a> \u00e0 pr\u00e9senter la motion appropri\u00e9e. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"5505481\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je remercie les honorables d\u00e9put\u00e9s de leur attention.</p>"
    },
    "url": "/debates/2018/6/19/the-speaker-39/",
    "politician_url": "/politicians/geoff-regan/",
    "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/1640/",
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "10228961",
    "h1": {
        "en": "Government Orders",
        "fr": "Initiatives Minist\u00e9rielles"
    },
    "h2": {
        "en": "Privilege",
        "fr": "Privil\u00e8ge"
    },
    "h3": {
        "en": "Firearms Act\u2014Speaker's Ruling",
        "fr": "La Loi sur les armes \u00e0 feu \u2014 D\u00e9cision de la pr\u00e9sidence"
    },
    "document_url": "/debates/2018/6/19/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2018%2F6%2F19%2F"
    }
}