Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise today on a point of order under Section 23(m), where a Member introduces any matter in debate that offends practice and precedents of the Assembly, and further, under Section 23(i), where a Member imputes false or hidden motives to another Member.
Madam Speaker, I waited until today to review Hansard to ensure that I brought this matter forward in a timely way, as I am doing now. On Thursday, February 13, 2014, during debate of the point of order, in Hansard on page 4, I quote Premier McLeod, who made the following remarks which were referring to me: “…the Member has acknowledged the breach and now he’s trying to use process to not withdraw his remarks.”
I will deal with this particular offence, in my view, in two parts. Firstly, I am personally offended by the Premier’s comments were an attempt to put words into my mouth which I did not say. The Premier’s characterization of me in his comments are not accurate and, in essence, are an attempt to persuade the argument under debate at that moment by reaffirming something that I never said, nor did I imply. I acknowledged no breach and, further, did not agree with Mr. Miltenberger’s point of order. Rather, I used my time to remind the House of the necessity of process and certainly the freedom of speech, which Minister Miltenberger did not follow in his own stead by highlighting his concern through the grievance he raised to my comments. Instead of making note of them on the record five times, as originally pointed out in the initial discussion, he then chose to lay out his concerns further down the road, which is the following day.
I again remind the House of Beauchesne’s, Section 319, and further reaffirmed by Speaker Delorey’s
ruling on February 16, 2006, in short, they all must be brought forward in a timely way; secondly, Madam Speaker, for Premier McLeod to suggest, “…and now he’s trying to use process to not withdraw his remarks.”
These are not my rules. They belong to the Assembly, and if we are anything, we are certainly the pinnacle of process. If it is not followed here, why should it be followed anywhere?
I further affirm concern under Section 23(i) and find a characterization of these specific comments personally offensive to the work I’m trying to do here.
In closing, Madam Speaker, I’m requesting, through you, that the Premier immediately apologizes for the vexatious and frivolous comments he made towards me and that his remarks are struck from Hansard of that day, completely struck off the official Hansard, so they do not incorrectly reflect what I said and stand for days to go. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. I will allow some further comment to the point of order. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Member based his case on Thursday about the fact on how we did not raise it at the earliest opportunity. He just stated that he stands by his comments and that he waited until he read Hansard before he raised it, so I’m wondering what side of the argument he’s taking.
He’s also said that he stands by his remarks. So, I think I was justified in saying that for the Member to suggest that because in previous rulings the Speaker said he didn’t raise it at the first opportunity, it was not a point of order. I think rather than addressing comments where he was calling other officials of the government criminals, he was trying to use process so that it wouldn’t deal with those comments.
So, Madam Speaker, I think we will wait for the ruling by yourself, or the Speaker. Thank you.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. To the point of order, Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Madam Speaker. Of course, I will not talk about the imminent ruling that is still before the House. I want to speak specifically to what was brought here today and the point of order. I want to focus on the words quoted by Mr. McLeod, and I had to go back to Hansard to review it myself. I quote, “The Member has acknowledged the breach,” and I want to focus just on those words and those words alone.
Madam Speaker, I’ve looked back and I reviewed Hansard and I don’t believe Member Hawkins talked about acknowledging any breach, so I believe those words are a bit misquoted by the Premier and I just wanted to share those thoughts on record. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Any further comments to the point of order? If not, we will review what was said, the point of order, and provide a ruling at a future date. Thank you, colleagues.
