This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
{
"time": "2024-10-07 15:50:00",
"attribution": {
"en": "Mr. Peter Julian",
"fr": "M. Peter Julian"
},
"content": {
"en": "<p data-HoCid=\"8595151\" data-originallang=\"en\">Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8595152\" data-originallang=\"en\">The original interpretation of the Speaker was regarding a question of privilege, and I would submit that this is quite a different thing. The motion that has been submitted is within the framework of <em>House of Commons Procedure and Practice</em>. This is our bible procedurally, and I refer you to page 1229. It states: </p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8595153\" data-originallang=\"en\"> It is a long-standing practice of the House that editors of the Debates may exercise judgement as to whether or not changes suggested by Members constitute the correction of an error or a minor alteration. The editors may likewise alter a sentence to render it more readable but may not go so far as to change its meaning. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8595154\" data-originallang=\"en\">The motion submitted by the member for <a data-HoCid=\"278288\" href=\"/politicians/leah-gazan/\" title=\"Leah Gazan\">Winnipeg Centre</a>, I would submit, is in order because in Standing Order 67, we have the ability to put forward debatable motions that \u201cmay be required for the observance of the proprieties of the House, the maintenance of its authority, the appointment or conduct of its officers, the management of its business, the arrangement of its proceedings, the correctness of its records.\u201d</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8595155\" data-originallang=\"en\">In terms of both the question of privilege, which we understand the Speaker has ruled on, and the motion itself, I would submit that the motion is clearly in order.</p>",
"fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"8595151\" data-originallang=\"en\">Madame la Pr\u00e9sidente, j'invoque le R\u00e8glement. La d\u00e9cision initiale de la pr\u00e9sidence portait sur une question de privil\u00e8ge. Je suis d'avis que cette approche est tout \u00e0 fait diff\u00e9rente.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8595152\" data-originallang=\"en\">La motion pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e respecte le cadre pr\u00e9vu dans l'ouvrage <em>La proc\u00e9dure et les usages de la Chambre des communes</em>. C'est en quelque sorte notre bible pour les questions de proc\u00e9dure. Je vous renvoie \u00e0 la page 1229, o\u00f9 on peut lire ce qui suit:</p>\n<blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8595153\" data-originallang=\"en\"> Il est depuis longtemps \u00e9tabli \u00e0 la Chambre que les r\u00e9viseurs des D\u00e9bats peuvent juger eux-m\u00eames si les changements propos\u00e9s par les d\u00e9put\u00e9s visent \u00e0 corriger des erreurs ou constituent des modifications secondaires. Ils peuvent \u00e9galement modifier une phrase afin d'en faciliter la compr\u00e9hension, mais sans aller jusqu'\u00e0 en changer le sens. </p>\n</blockquote><p data-HoCid=\"8595154\" data-originallang=\"en\">\u00c0 mon avis, la motion pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e par la d\u00e9put\u00e9e de <a data-HoCid=\"278288\" href=\"/politicians/leah-gazan/\" title=\"Leah Gazan\">Winnipeg-Centre</a> est recevable parce que, selon l'article 67 du R\u00e8glement, nous pouvons d\u00e9battre de motions \u00ab n\u00e9cessaires \u00e0 l'observation du d\u00e9corum, au maintien de l'autorit\u00e9 de la Chambre, \u00e0 la nomination ou \u00e0 la conduite de ses fonctionnaires, \u00e0 l'administration de ses affaires, \u00e0 l'agencement de ses travaux, \u00e0 l'exactitude de ses archives \u00bb.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"8595155\" data-originallang=\"en\">En tenant compte de la question de privil\u00e8ge \u2014 et nous sommes conscients que la pr\u00e9sidence s'est prononc\u00e9e sur ce point \u2014 et de la motion en elle-m\u00eame, j'estime que la motion est manifestement recevable.</p>"
},
"url": "/debates/2024/10/7/peter-julian-4/",
"politician_url": "/politicians/peter-julian/",
"politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/4198/",
"procedural": false,
"source_id": "12909725",
"h1": {
"en": "Routine Proceedings",
"fr": "Affaires courantes"
},
"h2": {
"en": "Admissibility of Routine Motion",
"fr": "La recevabilit\u00e9 d'une motion pour affaire courante"
},
"document_url": "/debates/2024/10/7/",
"related": {
"document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2024%2F10%2F7%2F"
}
}