Mrs. Groenewegen rose on a point of order in relation to a response provided by the Premier, Mr. Roland, to Oral Question 428-16(2) on October 6, 2008. Mrs. Groenewegen raised the point of order after reviewing the unedited Hansard for that day and therefore did so at the earliest possible opportunity.
The Member for Hay River South referred to rule 23(m) of the Rules of the Legislative Assembly, which states that a Member will be called to order if the Member “introduces any matter into debate that offends the practices and precedents of the Assembly.”
Mrs. Groenewegen stated that Mr. Roland, in responding to her question, made reference to matters pertaining to a confidential exchange of information contained in correspondence between the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning and the Premier. Mrs. Groenewegen referred to the following comments made by Mr. Roland from page 30 of the unedited Hansard of October 6, 2008:
“I offered some opportunities for improvements from the last bit of criticism I had about the strategic initiative committees, and I got a response from the chair of P&P on that. I guess that offer wasn’t good enough either.”
Mrs. Groenewegen felt that Mr. Roland, in making these comments, contravened the convention of committee confidentiality.
On October 7, 2008, I opened the floor to debate on the point of order and heard from both Mrs. Groenewegen and Mr. Roland.
In speaking to the point of order, Mrs. Groenewegen stated that the Premier erred in making reference to a confidential document that was part of an interaction between committee and Cabinet.
Mr. Roland, in his remarks, defended his response as a reply to issues that were raised publicly in the House. The Premier did admit to alluding to a letter from the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning but stated, “I didn’t go into detail about what that was.”
Colleagues, three issues come to light in reviewing this matter. The first is that previous rulings have dealt only with the confidentiality aspect of discussions that have taken place at an in camera meeting of a committee. It should be noted that correspondence coming out of these meetings is also considered confidential.
The second issue centres around the principle of not divulging committee information prior to it being reported in the House. I quote here from House of Commons’ Procedures and Practice, Marleau and Montpetit, at page 879, where they state, “Committees make their views and recommendations known to the House by way of reports.” Marleau and Montpetit also add, at page 885:
“It is not in order for Members to allude to committee proceedings or evidence in the House until the committee has presented its report to the House. This restriction applies both to references made by Members in debate and during oral question period.”
The third and final issue is to point out to Members that, in fact, a breach of confidentiality is an issue of privilege and not simply one of process or procedure. In support, I quote here again from Marleau and Montpetit at page 838:
“Divulging any part of the proceedings of an in camera committee meeting has been ruled by the Speaker to constitute a prima facie matter
of privilege. Alleged breaches of committee confidentiality should properly be raised as a matter of privilege.”
Members, after careful review of rule 23(m) of the Rules of the Legislative Assembly and of the unedited Hansard for October 6 and 7, 2008, I do not find in this instance that the Member has a point of order. There was no breach of confidentiality here, because the Premier, while making reference to the existence of a letter, did not divulge the contents of that letter.
I have heard many Members rise in this House to defend our consensus style of government and comment on its effectiveness. Members must also be aware that the functioning of our unique form of government depends on the ability of all Members to understand and respect the important role confidentiality must play in the relationship between committees and the Executive Council.
Mr. Roland, do you have a point of order? What is your point of order?