Thank you, Mr. Dent. Item 5, recognition of visitors in the gallery.

Speaker's RulingMembers, before we go on to the next item on the agenda, I would like to provide my ruling on the point of order that was raised yesterday by the Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee. Ms. Lee rose on a point of order, following comments made by the honourable Member for Thebacha, Mr. Miltenberger, in his Member's statement. While she did not indicate the appropriate rule, or identify the offending comment specifically, your Chair, in reviewing the unedited Hansard, has determined Ms. Lee's point to be that the Member for Thebacha had contravened Rule 23(j) by suggesting she had uttered a deliberate falsehood. I quote the Member for Range Lake, from page 1174 of the unedited Hansard, "The Member of Thebacha is suggesting, somehow, that I am speaking a falsehood, or that I am somehow suggesting that he is not being a good Member, or that I am saying things that are not true."

In order to provide the context for Ms. Lee's point of order, your Chair will need to quote from Mr. Miltenberger's statement, from page 1173 of the unedited Hansard. I quote, "The Member for Range Lake made reference to an e-mail that I sent to the executive director of the day care that is currently experiencing some trouble. It wasn't addressed to her. She imputed some interpretation to that e-mail that is grossly incorrect. Referencing e-mails that weren't sent to the individual, and misinterpreting them, is not appropriate. I think it creates a false impression that is far from the truth."

To provide further context to the matter, I will now refer to the concluding portion of the Member for Range Lake's statement, and I quote from page 1166 of the unedited Hansard, "I can also tell you that I received an e-mail from Minister Miltenberger on this issue, that basically states that what I say here, or what we say, is completely irrelevant."

Your Chair is of the opinion that this is a case where, in the absence of any other factors, the House is prepared to accept two views of the same matter. In essence, there are two truths, and they are largely a matter of interpretation. Therefore, I rule that Ms. Lee does not have a point of order. In addition, I propose that this House take a further step to prevent this type of issue from being raised. I know our rules state that Members should refrain from citing documents that are not before the House, unless they are prepared to table them. In this case, the document in question was tabled later in the

day. In the future, your Chair, and the House, I am sure, would appreciate it if Members would refrain from citing from documents until they are tabled and, even then, I caution Members to be very careful in their interpretation and characterizations. In fact, I would encourage all Members to quote directly from the document, rather than attempting to summarize and paraphrase passages.

Before I conclude, I feel compelled to share some thoughts with you. In past rulings, I have cautioned Members to remain respectful of each other, regardless of their opposing views, but I'm sure that it has not done much good. Over the course of the past two weeks, your Chair has noticed an alarming number of instances, on both sides of the House, where Members have shown a complete lack of respect for each other and our institution. Members' statements have been used as vehicles to debate with one another and fire verbal volleys at each other. The language being used and, more importantly, the tone of the language being used, both in statements and in question period, is often disrespectful and inciteful.

I would like to remind Members, with all due respect to other parliaments in the Commonwealth, we are not a partisan politics political institution. Our consensus system of government demands more from each of us in our dealings with each other, both inside and outside the Chamber.

I would also like to note that the conduct of Members and the heckling that occurred at the time Ms. Lee was trying to articulate her point of order was extremely troubling. It is the duty of the Chair to decide whether there are points of order, and I would appreciate complete silence when Members have risen on points of order or points of privilege. You owe this much to your colleagues and to the Chair.

Members, when bringing a point of order to the attention of the Chair, a Member should first state that he or she has a point of order, and then wait for the Chair to recognize you to state your point of order. I also remind you that in rising on a point of order, a Member should clearly and concisely state the point of order and cite the rule or practice that has been infringed upon. It is not the time for explanation or for the purpose of clarifying something said. That will come later when the Member being complained of is called to explain or, if the Chair permits, debate on the point. Thank you for your attention, Members.

---Applause

Item 6, oral questions. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.