Thank you, Mr. Roland. Please be seated. Good afternoon, Members.
Speaker's Ruling
At this time, I would like to provide my ruling on the point of order raised by the Member for Yellowknife South, Mr. Bell. The point of order appears on page 1052 of unedited Hansard. The Member's point of order as stated by Mr. Bell: "I believe the Member has imputed motives toward myself and the committee with her suggestions that one of the recommendations had ulterior motives." Mr. Bell's point of order arose as a result of comments being made by the Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee, while she was replying to the Commissioner's opening address under item 9 on the orders of the day.
I permitted debate on the point of order and heard from the Member for Frame Lake, Mr. Dent. There being no other Members who wished to speak on the point of order, I reserved my decision to permit me to review the unedited Hansard. In reviewing the Hansard I made note of, and I am sure Members will recall, that there was one other point of order and a point of privilege raised during the reply being made by the Member for Range Lake. To the point of order that I reserved on, and in reviewing the unedited Hansard, there are two quotes that are, in my view, the basis of the point of order.
The first is on pages 1048 and 1049 of the unedited Hansard and I quote Ms. Lee:
Mr. Speaker, the instrument of this palace coup is the committee report filed on Tuesday and the committee report that was discussed yesterday. I think the people who need to answer to these actions are the authors of this report. Mr. Speaker, I believe it is very clear who has written the report and the interest of the public, the Members of the committee...Then the Member for Range Lake proceeded to name all the Members of the Special Committee on Conflict Process.
The second quote is contained on page 1051 of the unedited Hansard and I again quote Ms. Lee: "However, it seems like there was an ulterior motive to that motion and that is that a suggestion made for a certain action has to be taken by the Premier."
There are a number of rules that I reviewed in considering my ruling. First, Rule 41(1), which states:
41(1) Every Member may make one reply to the opening address given under rule 33 and may speak on any matter.Secondly, Rule 23, which states:
In debate a Member will be called to order by the Speaker if the Member:
(c) Persists in needless repetition or raises matters which have been decided during the current session:
(f) Reflects upon any previous vote of the Assembly except for the purpose of moving that it be rescinded;
(h) Makes an allegation against another Member, a house officer or a witness: and
(i) Imputes false or hidden motives to another Member.
Mr. Bell's point of order falls under Rule 23(h) and 23(i). However, as I pointed out during the debate yesterday, Ms. Lee came very close to breaching a number of other rules on a number of occasions. I rule that Mr. Bell does have a point of order based on the comments made by the Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee.
The Chair's normal course in dealing with this matter would be to ask the Member, Ms. Lee, to retract the offending comments. However, I do note that again on page 1052, and I quote from the comments of the Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee: "Mr. Speaker, my apologies. It was not appropriate for me to use the words ulterior motive so I will retract that and refrain from saying it again."
Therefore the Chair will accept the stated apology of the Member for Range Lake, which I trust is acceptable to the Member for Yellowknife South and the House. Thank you.
The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Handley.