Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
March 6, 2012
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on February 27 by the Minister of Public Safety regarding cyber-campaigns following the introduction in the House by him...
The Speaker ruled that direct online threats against a Minister constitute a prima facie question of privilege, while an inundation of office communications does not.
December 13, 2011
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on November 16, 2011, by the hon. Member for Mount Royal regarding the negative impact an organized telephone campaign...
The Speaker ruled that misleading phone calls to a Member's constituents, while reprehensible, did not meet the high threshold of a prima facie breach of privilege as they did not actually prevent the Member from performing his duties.
March 25, 2011
The Speaker: Order, please. I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on March 10, 2011, by the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development concerning an alleged sit-in...
The Speaker ruled that an uninvited visit by a Member and delegation to a Minister's office was improper but did not meet the high threshold for a prima facie question of privilege.
October 5, 2010
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on September 22, 2010, by the hon. Member for Portage–Lisgar concerning an e-mailed media release issued by the Press...
The Speaker ruled that a media release critical of a Member did not breach privilege as the comments were made outside the House and did not impede her parliamentary duties.
April 1, 2010
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on March 24, 2010, by the hon. Member for Joliette, concerning comments made on the social networking site Twitter by the hon....
The Speaker ruled that while he cannot police Members' social media use outside the Chamber, commenting on the presence or absence of other Members online is improper and should be avoided.
March 24, 2009
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised by the hon. Member for Malpeque on March 5, 2009, concerning information disseminated by the Department of Fisheries and...
The Speaker ruled that the partisan use of a departmental website did not meet the high threshold of a prima facie question of privilege as it did not directly obstruct the Member's parliamentary duties.
February 12, 2009
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised by the hon. Member for Cumberland–Colchester–Musquodoboit Valley on February 3, 2009, concerning an RCMP investigation...
The Speaker denied a Member's question of privilege, ruling that an ambiguous RCMP report did not meet the high threshold of directly impeding his ability to perform parliamentary duties.
February 12, 2009
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised by the hon. Member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce–Lachine on Wednesday, February 4, concerning the alleged misuse of...
The Speaker ruled that an offensive email sent via parliamentary resources was not a breach of privilege as it did not impede a member's duties, and the matter was closed after an apology.
December 4, 2008
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised by the hon. Member for Malpeque on November 27, 2008, concerning a letter that the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the...
The Speaker ruled that a Parliamentary Secretary's use of franking privileges to influence an external election was not a prima facie breach of privilege because it did not obstruct any Member's parliamentary duties.
June 17, 2008
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised by the hon. Member for Scarborough–Rouge River on May 26, 2008, regarding the report of the Conflict of Interest and...
The Speaker found a prima facie question of privilege where an Ethics Commissioner's interpretation of the Conflict of Interest Code could allow a Member's freedom of speech to be restricted by the filing of a libel suit.