Welcome to the Assembly. Recognition of visitors in the gallery.
I would like to make a ruling on the point of order raised by Mr. Kakfwi on January 24, 1997. The rules and procedures of this House require the Speaker to rule on all points of order and privilege as they arise in the House. I would therefore like to rule on the point of order raised by the Member for Sahtu, Mr. Kakfwi, on Friday, January 24 regarding dress and decorum.
Speaker's Ruling
In providing this ruling, I considered past practices and rulings that have been made on the question of dress and decorum in the Assembly. I do not intend to address, in great detail, the specific point raised by Mr. Kakfwi so as not to provide further profile to this particular incident.
First, to the question of what attire and dress in the chamber would be considered a matter for a ruling by the chair if Rule 12 is challenged. In our rules, under the heading, Order and Decorum, Rule 12(9), provides for the following and I quote:
"When in the Assembly, every Member shall be attired in native dress or in a manner appropriate to the dignity of the Assembly."
This is perhaps one of the most difficult rules that we have with respect to its interpretation and application. For example, other rules under the same section are far more clear, such as the following, and I quote Rule 12(10):
"Smoking is not permitted during any proceedings of the Assembly. Food and beverages, other than water, may not be brought into or consumed in the chamber."
By way of illustration, that rule is easy to interpret and when an infraction occurs, it is obvious to the chair and the rule can be clearly and quickly applied. This, as I indicated, is not as simple when considering the attire of Members. This question has been raised before in the 13th Assembly and it also has been raised in other Assemblies. The chair has previously allowed some latitude in the matter when it is raised more as a way of providing, some might say, comic relief. However, I feel that comic relief of this nature is not something that I will continue to tolerate and I am sure those who follow the actions of Members in the House, through television and radio, do not wish to see their elected members behaving in a manner that may discredit the Legislative Assembly as a whole.
To the specific point of order raised by Mr. Kakfwi, he felt, and I quote from Mr. Kakfwi's comments contained on page 343 of the unedited Hansard:
"Mr. Speaker, there are two points. One, that the wearing of a tie that has Mickey Mouse on it offends the dignity of the Dene jacket that is worn. The second point raised was that the wearing of a Mickey Mouse tie offends the dignity of the House in which the Member is sitting."
With regard to the first point, on the question of wearing a tie with a traditional Dene jacket, I would suggest it would be very difficult to deal with this issue in isolation of all Members' opinions on the matter. I do not intend to waste the time of the House to do this and will comment on this later. I do note, however, that the Member for Mackenzie Delta, in responding to the point of order, did indicate some understanding of Mr. Kakfwi's concern and I quote from his comments contained on page 343 of the unedited Hansard:
"I do have to agree with my colleague who raised the point in regards to wearing just the traditional jacket without a tie. I was told that I had to wear a tie. I do agree that when we are using traditional dress, that we should not wear a tie."
Other jurisdictions are not of much assistance to us in addressing this matter. The House of Commons' standing orders are virtually silent on the subject of Members' dress. Many Speakers in the House of Commons, and in other jurisdictions, have ruled that male Members must wear a jacket, shirt and tie.
In general, Speakers have enforced conservative, contemporary standards relating to dress. Native dress is recognized specifically in our rules, which should be the case, as rules should reflect the Members' cultures and traditions of the jurisdiction they are elected to serve.
I am of the opinion that it would be impossible for the Speaker to produce a dress code where certain items may or may not offend the dignity of the House and the many traditions in the Northwest Territories. It is also clear that there does have to be a standard that has to be applied to ensure the dignity of the House is maintained. I think the constituencies we represent expect more of us in this regard.
In researching this point, I noted that, in the House of Commons, it is usually up to the Speaker where he or she views the dress as disruptive to the conduct of the House. Problems rarely arise unless the attire has been chosen specifically intended to disrupt the House and then the Speaker must focus, not on the dress, but on the disruption.
I am confident that when Members get up in the morning and contemplate their attire for the day, that they do so without any attempt to cause disruption or discomfort to other Members or to make a political statement. I wish to be quite clear that, if I find that any Member does dress to cause a disruption, I will deal with that Member with the full authority you have given me as Speaker.
The present Rule 12(9) does not give the Chair a clear definition as to what or what is not an acceptable mode of dress. Comments last week indicated many Members are also uncertain. I therefore refer the matter of attire of Members and wording of Rule 12(9) to the Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures, to provide guidance and direction so that we do not continue with this type of debate in the House.
In light of this referral and, in anticipation of additional clarity on the issue, I rule that Mr. Kakfwi does not have a point of order.
On another somewhat related issue, while considering this ruling, I am conscious of the fact that it was raised during question period. The matter of raising points of order or questions of privilege during question period has concerned me for some time. Such points of order or questions of privilege take up the valuable time allotted to question period. I agree that this is a concern and would point out that a number of other jurisdictions do not permit points of order or matters of privilege to be raised during question period. We have the longest question period of all the Canadian jurisdictions, which may be necessary in our consensus style of government. In our consensus style, it is equally important that we make efficient and, I would hope, effective use of the time available, so that as many Members as possible can ask questions. I therefore rule that:
Questions of privilege and points of order that Members may wish to raise during question period, ought to be taken up after the question period, unless the Speaker considers it to be an extremely grave or urgent matter.
Members, thank you for your attention. Item 6, oral questions. Mr. Enuaraq.