Mr. Miltenberger cited rule 23(k) and (m) of the Rules of the Legislative Assembly as well as the parliamentary convention of not making reference to persons who are not able to defend themselves in this Chamber.

The point of order was raised after Mr. Miltenberger’s review of the unedited Hansard pertaining to the Member from Yellowknife Centre’s statement and oral questions made in the House on Monday, February 18, 2008.

Mr.

Miltenberger specifically referenced

Mr. Hawkins’s comments regarding the community of Fort Smith as well as the tone of the comments and the use of what Mr. Miltenberger identified as inaccurate, sweeping generalizations. Mr.

Miltenberger also objected to Mr.

Hawkins’s

reference to individuals not able to defend themselves in this Chamber.

I invited debate on the point of order, and Mr. Hawkins rose to clarify his comments, citing Beauchesne’s Parliamentary Rules and Forms regarding the tone and intent of Members’ comments. Mr. Hawkins also questioned whether the point of order had been raised at the earliest possible opportunity.

I reserved my decision to a later date, allowing for review of unedited Hansard and of the rules and authorities governing this Assembly.

To address Mr. Hawkins’s argument with regard to the timing of the point of order, I find the matter was raised by Mr.

Miltenberger at the earliest

opportunity. It is the practice of the House to allow Members an opportunity to review the unedited Hansard and raise a point of order regarding unparliamentary language at the commencement of the next day’s proceedings.

I will now address the practice regarding reference to individuals not present in the House. In reviewing Mr. Hawkins’s remarks in the unedited Hansard and considering the tone and intent of the Member, I find no evidence of intent to slander or slur, directly or indirectly, an individual not present in the House.

Mr.

Hawkins stated: “I questioned the

independence of a review conducted internally by a senior member embedded within an organization.” I accept Mr. Hawkins’s explanation that he was attempting to illustrate a point of argument. I find no point of order in this instance.

I will move now to the rules of the Legislative Assembly. Mr.

Miltenberger cited rule 23(k)

regarding the use of abusive or insulting language of a nature likely to create disorder, and rule 23(m) regarding introduction of a matter into debate that offends the practices and precedents of this Assembly.

Notwithstanding Mr. Miltenberger’s reference to the rules of the Assembly, I also took into consideration the language Mr. Hawkins used and referred to Marlowe and Monpetit, House of Commons Procedure and Practice. I quote from page 526:

“In dealing with unparliamentary language, the Speaker takes into account the tone, manner and intention of the Member speaking; the person to whom the words were directed; the degree of provocation; and, most importantly, whether or not the remarks created disorder in the Chamber. Thus, language deemed unparliamentary one day may not necessarily be deemed unparliamentary the following day.”

It is always difficult to evaluate the context or intent of words spoken by a Member. After careful review of Mr.

Hawkins’s comments as set out in the

unedited Hansard from February 18, 2008, as well as his remarks during debate on the point of order, I conclude that there was no point of order.

I would, however, like to take this opportunity to caution Members with regard to the statements they make in this House. While the particular statement or question may not strictly contravene our rules or constitute unparliamentary language, they often have other unintended consequences.

All Members of this House are protected by parliamentary privilege when they rise to speak. This is a fundamental right and immunity enjoyed by all parliamentarians in modern democracies. The onus is on each of us, individually, to exercise restraint with responsibility, wisdom and sensitivity to the impact our words may have on the people and communities that we all represent. Thank you, Members.

Item 2, ministers’ statements, Mr. Michael McLeod.