Chapter 6 — Order and Decorum

131

6.1Introduction

The Legislative Assembly is a deliberative body. In upholding the ideals of democracy, elected representatives with distinct beliefs and viewpoints engage in debate prior to deciding on any questions that are before the Assembly. In order to ensure that parliamentary proceedings are conducted in a civil manner, Members’ ability to represent their constituents must be sustained, and their right to freedom of speech must be respected. A number of rules included in the Standing Orders support these aims. Many of these are derived from the historical practices that originated in Parliament at Westminster and have been part of the Standing Orders ever since British Columbia gained provincial status in 1871.

It falls primarily on the Speaker, as Presiding Officer, to ensure that Members adhere to these rules, customs and traditions. However, it is the responsibility of each Member to contribute toward the orderliness of the Legislative Assembly’s proceedings, and to respect the dignity and authority of the institution.

6.2Unwritten Rules of Chamber Decorum

Not all rules of order and decorum are included in the Standing Orders. Some rules have been developed from Speakers’ directives and from adopted practice. These unwritten rules include matters of Chamber etiquette, including a prohibition on smoking and a prohibition on the consumption of any food or beverage in the Chamber, other than water.

6.2.1Chamber Etiquette

Following a practice that has deep historical roots and dates to Parliament’s early days at Westminster, Members are required to bow to the Chair upon entering, exiting and navigating across the Chamber adjacent to the Bar of the House.

In keeping with the Westminster tradition, the government and those Members supporting the government occupy the seats to the right of the Speaker, and the opposition occupies the seats to the left. Each Member has an assigned seat in the Chamber, which is typically designated by the Caucus Whip. Members are free to exit or move 132 around the Chamber if they wish, for example, to quietly consult with a colleague in another part of the Chamber. Members are not limited to occupying their own seats in the Chamber, unless they wish to seek the recognition of the Chair and participate in proceedings. Any comments, including informal or “off the cuff” heckling or commentary, may only be made while Members are in their assigned seat.

When moving around the Chamber, Members should use the back aisles, and should refrain from using the centre aisle. Members wishing to navigate directly across the Chamber should do so at the north end, near the Bar of the House, pausing to bow to the Chair as they cross the centre aisle.

Members should be mindful of not disturbing proceedings of the Legislative Assembly. In order to do this, Members may wish to engage the services of the Chamber Attendants, who distribute water in the Chamber and can assist Members with delivering notes within and outside the Chamber, and with passing materials on to staff who may be waiting in the Speaker’s Corridor.

6.3Rules for Minimizing Interruptions During Debate

STANDING ORDER 17

(1) When the Speaker is putting a question, no Member shall walk out of or cross the House, or make any noise or disturbance.

(2) When a Member is speaking, no Member shall pass between the Member and the Chair, nor interrupt the Member, except to raise a point of order.

(3) No Member may pass between the Chair and the Table, nor between the Chair and the Mace, when the Mace has been taken off the Table by the Sergeant-at-Arms.

The provisions of Standing Order 17 are intended to prevent unnecessary interruptions when a Member is speaking. The only interruption typically permitted is for a Member to seek recognition from the Speaker to raise a point of order. In practice, however, Members and the Speaker have accorded some leniency to this rule to allow another Member to seek leave to make an introduction of a visitor in the public galleries.

Standing Order 17 includes a prohibition on Members passing between the Speaker and the Member who is addressing the Speaker. This rule is intended to help minimize distractions for the Member addressing the Speaker. The Standing Order also outlines that nothing should come between the Chair and the Mace, the symbol of the Speaker’s authority, or the Chair and the Table.

133

As noted in House of Commons Procedure and Practice:

The Speaker usually overlooks the many incidental interruptions, such as applause, shouts of approval or disapproval, or mild heckling that sometimes punctuate speeches, as long as disorder does not arise. Members have been called to order for whistling and singing during another Member’s speech. Excessive interruptions are swiftly curtailed, particularly when the Member speaking requests the assistance of the Chair. Speakers have consistently attempted to discourage loud private conversations in the Chamber and have urged those wishing to carry on such exchanges to do so outside the Chamber. (3rd ed., p. 643).

6.3.1Points of Order While a Member Is Speaking

A point of order is raised by a Member to call attention to any departure from the Standing Orders or from parliamentary practice. A Member may interrupt another Member and bring attention to the alleged breach of order before business has moved forward to other proceedings. The Member who has the floor resumes their seat until the matter is resolved or disposed of. When recognized, the Member raising the point of order must briefly state the matter to the Speaker which they consider to have been breached.

Points of order are not to be used to direct remarks to the Legislative Assembly, to engage in debate or to move a motion. Furthermore, a dispute between Members as to the allegation of facts does not constitute a point of order.

A point of order is raised by a Member to call attention to any departure from the Standing Orders or from parliamentary practice.

In the Legislative Assembly, while permitted under Standing Order 47A(e), the practice has been that points of order are not raised during Oral Question Period. A Member wishing to raise a point of order relating to proceedings during Oral Question Period should do so once Oral Question Period has concluded.

The validity of a point of order is a matter for the Speaker (or Chair) to determine. Once the decision is rendered, it is final and cannot be appealed (see decision of Speaker Lovick, B.C. Journals, June 12, 1997, pp. 97-8).

As a Member speaking can be interrupted on a point of order, it is important for the Speaker to try to predict what points of order could be expected to arise while another Member has the floor. Presumably, the point of order may arise from:

a. some happening extraneous to the content of the speech of the Member who has the floor (e.g., hour of interruption, Member reading speech in its entirety), or

b. the content of the speech.

134

In relation to the content of a Member’s speech, the most frequent occurrence that gives rise to interruptions is when a Member speaking misquotes or unfairly criticizes another Member. In the Legislative Assembly, the practice has been to correct a misrepresentation or a misquote at the end of a speech — although Members have frequently interrupted another Member’s speech on a “point of order” to seek withdrawal or correction of an alleged misrepresentation.

6.3.2Questions of Privilege While a Member Is Speaking

Standing Order 26 permits Members to interrupt almost any business before the Legislative Assembly in order to raise a question of privilege. However, in practice, a Member wanting to reserve their right to raise a question of privilege or to outline the issue of concern in a question of privilege waits until the Member speaking has concluded their remarks.

6.3.3Misuse of Points of Order and Questions of Privilege

The misuse of points of order and questions of privilege as deliberate interruptions has been denounced in many Commonwealth jurisdictions. Numerous Speakers have ruled that points of order must not be used as disorderly interruptions of parliamentary proceedings (see B.C. Journals, April 13, 1982, pp. 41-2).

Points of order and questions of privilege should not be used as deliberate interruptions of Legislative Assembly business.

Members may not rise on a point of order or a question of privilege and then proceed to move adjournment of the Legislative Assembly or of debate under such guise (see House of Commons (Canada) Hansard, June 21, 1994, p. 5698; December 4, 1992, p. 14633). In such cases, the Speaker will prevent the Member from proceeding further, and will call upon the Member who first had possession of the floor to proceed.

Members are also precluded from rising on a point of order or a question of privilege to challenge a Speaker’s decision (see decision of Speaker Lovick, B.C. Journals, June 12, 1997, pp. 97-8).

There is no easy way to measure the merit of each point of order, question of privilege or explanation of speech (as may be given in accordance with Standing Order 42(1)). Each must be judged by the Chair on its own merit to ensure that it does not amount to an abuse of parliamentary practice and time.

6.3.4Use of Electronic Devices

The common use of portable electronic devices resulted in a necessity to outline acceptable practice relating to the presence and use of such devices during proceedings of the 135 Legislative Assembly. Speaker Barisoff first addressed the issue in a memorandum sent to Members in 2006, which outlined the restrictions surrounding the use of electronic devices in the Chamber. In 2008, he issued a statement in the Legislative Assembly on the same subject (see B.C. Journals, March 4, 2008, pp. 35-6). Successive Speakers issued memoranda on the subject at the beginning of a new Parliament, until the Legislative Assembly codified the prevailing and accepted practice by adopting Standing Order 17A in 2018.

STANDING ORDER 17A

(1) Electronic devices must not be used by a Member who is in possession of the floor, or during the following proceedings:

(a) Speech from the Throne;

(b) Royal Assent;

(d) Oral Question Period;

(e) Speaker’s rulings;

(f) divisions;

(g) at any other designated time pursuant to instructions by the Speaker.

(2) Members must ensure that electronic devices are used in a manner which does not disrupt the orderly conduct, or impinge on the dignity or decorum, of parliamentary proceedings.

(3) Electronic devices, such as laptop computers and handheld devices such as smart phones, must be operated silently at all times. Phone conversations are not permitted. Electronic devices must not be used to take photographs or make a video or audio recording of proceedings.

(4) Ministry officials present during Committee of Supply or Committee of the Whole proceedings may use electronic devices to access information.

As outlined in the Standing Order and reinforced in a statement of Speaker Plecas, “In essence, the use of technology in this Chamber must never impinge on the dignity or decorum of parliamentary proceedings” (B.C. Hansard, November 22, 2017, p. 2183). Speakers maintain the right to direct any Member from discontinuing the use of electronic devices if they find that its use is inconsistent with accepted practice.

Members are prohibited from using electronic devices while in possession of the floor. This provision remains in place to discourage Members from reading the entirety of a prepared speech, and from receiving interruptions or external distractions on their devices while they are speaking.

136

A Member using an electronic device in the Chamber during permitted times must ensure that it is on silent mode. In the past, the Chair has found that any electronic sound, such as beeping, vibrating or ringing, is a violation of this rule (see B.C. Hansard, November 27, 2017, p. 2380). Members are also prohibited from making any video or audio recordings of any proceedings of the Legislative Assembly, regardless of whether they take place in the Chamber, the Douglas Fir Committee Room or the Birch Committee Room. Personal photography during proceedings is also not permitted, though the Speaker may authorize a designated photographer to be present on distinct special occasions.

To enable a Minister to provide as fulsome an answer as possible to questions asked in proceedings of the Committee of Supply or a Committee of the Whole, government officials accompanying the Minister are permitted to use electronic devices during proceedings for the purpose of accessing information.

6.4Disorderly Conduct

Under Standing Orders 19 and 20, the Speaker is entrusted with a range of options to address disorderly conduct. These are used should a Member refuse to heed the Speaker’s request to bring their behaviour into line with the rules and practices of the Legislative Assembly, and for breaches of order and decorum.

Under Standing Orders 19 and 20, the Speaker is entrusted with a range of options to address disorderly conduct.

The powers given to the Speaker (or Chair) under these Standing Orders are informally referred to as “summary powers” of the Chair to deal with gross disorder. In the Legislative Assembly, the Sergeant-at-Arms may be called upon by the Chair to enforce the summary powers, as well as the substantive powers given to the Legislative Assembly, pursuant to the naming procedure provided for in Standing Order 20.

STANDING ORDER 19

The Speaker or the Chairperson of the Committee of the Whole shall order a Member whose conduct is grossly disorderly to withdraw immediately from the House or Committee of the Whole for the remainder of that day, and the Sergeant-at-Arms shall act on such orders as may be received from the Chair in pursuance of this Order.

Standing Order 19 deals with grossly disorderly conduct. A refusal to withdraw offending words when requested to do so by the Chair, or a Member failing to resume their seat when the Speaker stands, is considered grossly disorderly conduct. In general, disregarding the authority of the Chair is gross disorder. In the normal spirit of parliamentary 137 compromise, each case is judged by its own special circumstances, bearing in mind that the most severe disciplinary action is the naming process under Standing Order 20.

The power of the Chair under Standing Order 19 is amply illustrated in a decision of Speaker Davidson. This notable decision embraces several important principles concerning the disciplinary powers of the Chair in the Legislative Assembly, and also the availability of the Sergeant-at-Arms to enforce the summary powers of the Chair. Speaker Davidson’s decision outlined (B.C. Journals, October 11, 1983, pp. 226-7):

On Friday last the Honourable Member for Skeena raised, as a matter of privilege, an allegation that the Honourable Leader of the Opposition has been impeded and obstructed in his duties, contrary to the long-established usages and customs of Parliament.

In support of this allegation, the Honourable Member has cited Standing Orders 1, 19 and 20, as well as excerpts from Parliamentary Practice in British Columbia, including references from the 4th edition of Beauchesne and the 18th edition of Sir Erskine May. The Honourable Member concludes his recitation of the rules relating to the power to punish disorder with two submissions; (one), that “the ancient usages (of Parliament) have been codified with our Standing Orders,” and (two), “any remedy is within our own power.”

The Chair completely agrees with the second submission that the remedy, i.e., punishment of disorder is within our own power. However, the first submission that the ancient usages have been codified in our Standing Orders is clearly contrary to the Honourable Member’s own citation from Sir Erskine May, which states under the heading, “Dual Source of Modern Powers to Punish Disorder”…“the power to punish disorder is regulated partly by practice and partly by standing order.”

Furthermore, the Honourable Member for Skeena’s citation from Sir Erskine May, in support of his matter of privilege, clearly states, under the heading “Disciplinary Powers of the Speaker Under Ancient Usage”, as follows: “It is still open to the House to proceed against a Member according to ancient usages in preference to relying upon the powers conferred by standing order.”

Without doubt then, as at Westminster, our rules and procedures are an amalgam of customs, usages and Speakers’ decisions, as recorded in the Journals of the House, and some codification of rules known as Standing Orders.

In this result, the authorities which have been advanced to the Chair do not merely fail to support the basic proposition advanced by the Honourable Member, but they are in direct contradiction thereto. This being the case, the Chair is bound to conclude that there is no foundation established for a matter of privilege.

I should also note that the Honourable Member, in his submission, raises the question of whether or not the Standing Orders of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom may properly be applied in this House, pursuant to

138

our Standing Order 1, last adopted on February 20, 1930, which refers us to the “usages and customs” at Westminster, as far as they may be applicable to this House. “Custom”, by definition, means habitual or usual practice. It may well be that there was never any intention that a Standing Order of Westminster, newly adopted from time to time, would necessarily be applicable to this House, but it is a fact that the Westminster Standing Order providing for sessional suspension was adopted many years ago and the use thereof must now of necessity have become the usual practice or “custom” of that House, and therefore under our Standing Order 1, qualifies as being applicable to our House. On the other hand, if one still insists that the Westminster rule as to sessional suspension is not applicable, per se, to this House, then we have a complete void, as our own Standing Orders to not specifically provide for the consequences of a forcible ejection from the House after repeated refusal of a member to leave after repeated direction from the Chair. If such a void did then exist (although for the reasons stated, the Chair is of the opinion it did not), the Chair made a ruling of the first instance and that ruling was supported by the House.

Speaker Davidson’s ruling notes that the “summary powers” of the Chair described in Standing Order 19 do not require the Chair to name the offending Member prior to the order to withdraw from proceedings in the House, in a Committee of the Whole or in the Committee of Supply.

6.5Suspension of a Member for Disorderly Conduct

Standing Order 20 takes its inspiration from the Standing Orders of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom, though its provision of penalties is unique to the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia. This Standing Order escalates the provision of Standing Order 19 by allowing the Chair to immediately entertain a motion to suspend a Member acting in a gravely disorderly fashion and disregarding the authority of the Chair.

STANDING ORDER 20

(1) Any Member who disregards the authority of the Chair or refuses to comply with an order of the Chair, or abuses the rules of the House by persistently and willfully obstructing the business of the House, or otherwise, may be named by the Speaker or by the Chairperson of the Committee of the Whole, and, if the offence has been committed in the House, the Speaker shall forthwith put the question, on a motion being made without amendment, adjournment or debate, “That such Member be suspended from the service of the House”, and, if the offence has been committed in a Committee of the Whole, the Chairperson shall forthwith suspend the proceedings of the Committee and report the circumstances to the House, and

139

the Speaker shall, on a motion being made thereupon, put the same question, without amendment, adjournment or debate, as if the offence had been committed in the House itself.

(2) If any Member is suspended under this Order, the suspension shall continue for a period not to exceed 15 consecutive sitting days from and including the day of suspension.

(3) When a Member has been suspended under this Order, the Speaker shall order that Member to withdraw immediately from the House, and if the Member shall refuse to obey the direction of the Speaker, when summoned under the Speaker’s orders by the Sergeant-at-Arms to obey such direction, the Speaker shall call the attention of the House to the fact that recourse to force is necessary in order to compel obedience to his or her direction, and the Member named by him or her as having refused to obey his or her direction shall thereupon and without any further question being put, be suspended from the service of the House for 30 consecutive sitting days, from and including the day of suspension.

6.5.1Location of an Offence

An offence under Standing Order 20 is not restricted to an occurrence on the floor of the Chamber or to the floor of a committee room when proceedings of the Legislative Assembly are designated to take place in those locations. The suspension of a Member under Standing Order 20 may still be imposed if the Member causes a disturbance from outside the Chamber but still within the Chair’s view, such as from outside the Bar of the House (see House of Commons (U.K.) Hansard, November 10, 1937, vol. 328, c. 1773). The same may apply if a Member causes a disturbance from the public galleries.

6.5.2Naming a Member

House of Commons Procedure and Practice explains:

“Naming” is the term used to designate a disciplinary measure invoked against a Member who persistently disregards the authority of the Chair. If a Member refuses to heed the Speaker’s requests to bring his or her behaviour into line with the rules and practices of the House, the Speaker has the authority to name the Member, that is, to address the Member by name rather than by constituency or title as is the usual practice…. (3rd ed., p. 646).

The naming procedure is one of the most serious punishments available to the Legislative Assembly, and is used when the offence warrants more serious action than an order to withdraw for the balance of the day’s sitting under Standing Order 19. Speaker Schroeder delivered a decision that distinguished in broad terms the circumstances where the 140 provisions of Standing Orders 19 and 20 are applied. The Speaker stated (B.C. Journals, April 7, 1981, p. 77):

Standing Order 20 in our own Standing Orders says that a member whose conduct is grossly disorderly shall be ordered “to withdraw immediately from the House during the remainder of that day’s sitting.” It then further explains how that order shall be carried out. May, in his eighteenth edition, on page 429 says: “When…a member persists in disorderly conduct or conducts himself in a grossly disorderly manner the Speaker is enjoined…” — by a standing order — “forthwith to order him to withdraw from the House for the remainder of the sitting….” That in itself perhaps does not clarify the matter, but if you read just a little further it is clarified. It says: “…if he thinks” — this is the Speaker or the Chairman, by the way — “the authority and the dignity of the House would not be sufficiently vindicated by excluding the offender from the House for the remainder of the sitting…” then the remedy would be to name him.

So it appears to the Chair that when a member is excluded, if it is not thought sufficient that the remainder of the sitting would vindicate the House, then the second procedure should be engaged at that time.

In other Commonwealth jurisdictions, it has been more common to have Members suspended from the service of the House for a period of time (usually the remainder of the day’s sitting), rather than to have the Member named and then suspended. In the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, the Speaker has the discretion to deal with an offending Member summarily under Standing Order 19 (withdrawal for the balance of the day’s sitting), or under the more stringent provision of Standing Order 20 (naming). The latter procedure is used when it is considered that the offence warrants more serious action than an order to withdraw for the balance of the day’s sitting. There are two instances when Members have been formally “named” in the Legislative Assembly more recent history (see B.C. Journals, July 30, 1979, pp. 108-9; June 27, 1979, p. 40).

6.5.2.1Naming Process

The naming process is as follows: The Speaker will state, “(Member’s name), it is my duty to name you (for disregarding the authority of the Chair), and I now do so.”

The Government House Leader then immediately moves the motion “That the Member for (electoral district name) be suspended for (length of suspension) from the service of this House.” A vote on the motion is taken forthwith. As outlined in Standing Order 20, the suspension shall be for a period of up to 15 consecutive sitting days, and the question on the motion is put without amendment, adjournment or debate.

These proceedings are exempt from interruption (including adjournment proceedings and points of order), and can be taken after the moment of interruption.

Standing Order 20(3) provides for the necessity of “recourse to force,” through the assistance of the Sergeant-at-Arms, “in order to compel obedience” by the Member to the Speaker’s order for withdrawal (see B.C. Hansard, October 5, 1983, pp. 2512-3; see 141 also decision of Speaker Davidson, B.C. Journals, October 5, 1983, p. 212). An invocation of subsection (3) of Standing Order 20 may also extend the period of the Member’s suspension to 30 consecutive sitting days.

The naming process in a Committee of the Whole is outlined in Chapter 11 (Committees of the Whole).

6.5.3Suspension Outside of Standing Orders 19 and 20

Standing Orders 19 and 20 do not limit the historical parliamentary privilege that the Legislative Assembly holds to discipline and suspend its own Members. A Member may be suspended from the service of the Legislative Assembly by a separate substantive motion agreed to by the Assembly (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §11.31, pp. 231-2). In the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, this may be done on a motion to concur with such a penalty as recommended in a report of the Conflict of Interest Commissioner, pursuant to the Members’ Conflict of Interest Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 287, s. 22(1)(d)), as well as by any other substantive motion to that effect, of which notice must be given.

6.6Effect of Suspension or Order to Withdraw

STANDING ORDER 21

A Member who is ordered to withdraw or is suspended from the service of the House is also thereby suspended from the Legislative Chamber and Committees of the House for the same period.

As outlined in Standing Order 21, a Member who has been ordered to withdraw or who has been suspended is barred from attending proceedings of the Legislative Assembly, regardless of whether those proceedings are taking place in the Chamber, the Douglas Fir Committee Room or the Birch Committee Room. In the Legislative Assembly, it has been the practice that a suspended Member is also excluded from the public galleries and from the Speaker’s Corridor, unless that Member is meeting with the Speaker, the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly or other Table Officers.

Standing Order 21 also outlines that a Member who has been ordered to withdraw or who has been suspended is barred from participating in and attending meetings of parliamentary committees, regardless of their location.

A suspension does not usually strip a Member of their right to be located on the Legislative Precinct or to use legislative resources, including their office. Should a suspended Member be uncertain as to the limitations of their circumstances, they should consult with the Speaker or the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly.

142

A Member suspended under the provisions of Standing Order 20 is also subjected to the penalty outlined in the Members’ Remuneration and Pensions Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 257). Section 10(3) of the Act states:

10(3) If a member is named and suspended from the service of the Legislative Assembly, a deduction at the rate determined under subsection (1) must be made from the basic compensation payable to the member for every day that the member remains suspended after the day the suspension is ordered.

If the Legislative Assembly considers it just and reasonable to do so, it may withdraw this penalty by resolution, pursuant to section 11 of the Act.

6.7Instances of Grave Disorder

Standing Order 22 gives both the Speaker and the Chair of a Committee of the Whole (or any other authorized occupant of the chair) the power to recess or adjourn the sitting should grave disorder arise.

STANDING ORDER 22

(1) In the case of grave disorder arising in the House, the Speaker may recess or adjourn the House until the next sitting without question put.

(2) In the case of grave disorder arising in a Committee of the Whole, the Chairperson may recess the sitting of the Committee without question put.

With respect to proceedings of a Committee of the Whole, should grave disorder arise which affects the reputation and dignity of the Legislative Assembly, the Speaker may take the chair immediately without waiting for the Chair to report progress or report the circumstances to the Legislative Assembly (see Beauchesne, 6th ed., §909, p. 251). Further guidance is outlined in Chapter 11 (Committees of the Whole).

In the House of Commons of the United Kingdom, precedents exist where the Speaker suspended the sitting for an hour due to grave disorder. Upon the Speaker’s resumption of the chair, the state of disorder continued, and the Speaker adjourned the House without question put (see House of Commons (U.K.) Journals, November 21, 1984, vol. 241, p. 41; May 27, 1976, vol. 232, p. 360; April 11, 1923, vol. 178, p. 88; November 13, 1912, vol. 167, p. 409). In the Senate of Canada, an earthquake and the disorder that ensued forced the Speaker to suspend the sitting to allow for an evacuation of the Chamber and the building in which it is housed. After a delay that extended well beyond an hour that did not make it possible for Senators to return to the Chamber, Hansard notes: 143 “…the Senate was adjourned…and the mace was duly removed in the presence of the Speaker, the Clerk and the Table Officers” (Senate (Canada) Hansard, June 23, 2010, p. 921; see also Senate (Canada) Journals, June 23, 2010, p. 683).

Grave disorder is difficult to define; what is spirited in one House may be disorder in another. When it is impossible for the Chair to be heard in relative silence after several attempts have been made, or when several Members are on their feet and refuse to resume their seats or respond to a call to order from the Chair, it may be said that grave disorder exists. The Chair in this situation, as in all parliamentary situations, must gauge the temper of the House and the likelihood of the Members coming to order promptly.

6.8Motion Concerning Discipline of a Member

STANDING ORDER 39

If any motion is made concerning the conduct of any Member, or his or her right to hold a seat, that Member may make a statement, remain in the House during the debate and, notwithstanding Standing Order 18, participate in any resulting vote.

The Legislative Assembly retains the collective right to discipline its Members, further explained in Chapter 17 (Parliamentary Privilege). A matter relating to the discipline of a Member may only be debated by way of a substantive motion, of which notice is required.

Debate on such a motion may take place pursuant to the provisions of the provincial Constitution Act (R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 66, s. 27) and the Members’ Conflict of Interest Act (s. 22). Standing Order 39 provides that a Member who is the subject of such a motion has the right to participate in the debate on the motion, and also to vote on it.

Prior to 1985, a Member was required to withdraw from the Chamber during the debate on a motion touching upon their conduct. This practice was deprecated for the reason that a Member should be entitled to hear the case against them. This principle was recognized when the Speaker of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom permitted the Members in question to remain in the House during a debate relating to their conduct (see House of Commons (U.K.) Hansard, July 26, 1977, vol. 936, c. 365).

Standing Order 39 provides that the Member in question is entitled to vote on the motion at the conclusion of the debate. While there is no doubt about the Member’s right to vote in these circumstances, each Member would undoubtedly wish to consider the propriety of casting their vote, depending on the particular circumstances in each case.

144

6.9Strangers

A stranger in a parliamentary context refers to anyone who is not a Member or an official of the Legislative Assembly, or anyone who has not expressly been authorized by the Legislative Assembly to be present on the floor of the Chamber during proceedings of the Assembly.

The term “strangers” is a purely technical one in its parliamentary connotation, and it is not intended in any way to reflect or express any parliamentary attitude toward members of the public.

The term distinguishes between Members and non-Members, and emphasizes that strangers are allowed in the Chamber only by authority of the Legislative Assembly. The term also extends to those who observe parliamentary proceedings from the public galleries. It underscores the right of the Legislative Assembly to conduct its proceedings “in private” — that is to say, without the presence of strangers. While the last known private sitting in British Columbia occurred in pre-Confederation times in 1864, there are more recent occurrences of such sittings in the Houses of Commons of the United Kingdom and Canada (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §17.22, p. 374; House of Commons Procedure and Practice, 3rd ed., p. 427).

The term “strangers” is a purely technical one in its parliamentary connotation, and it is not intended in any way to reflect or express any parliamentary attitude toward members of the public (see statement of Speaker Ellis, New South Wales Legislative Assembly Hansard, October 5, 1967, p. 2113).

STANDING ORDER 23

If any Member takes notice that strangers are present, the Speaker or the Chairperson (as the case may be) shall forthwith put the question “That strangers be ordered to withdraw” without permitting any debate or amendment: provided that the Speaker, or the Chairperson, may, whenever he or she thinks proper, order the withdrawal of strangers. A stranger does not include an infant being cared for by a Member.

In 2018, Standing Order 23 was amended to exclude an infant being cared for by a Member from the definition of a “stranger.” Following the adoption of this amendment, Speaker Plecas provided the following guidance to Members in a memorandum dated March 15, 2018:

As Members indicated during consideration of this change, the Legislative Assembly is a progressive work environment and this amendment provides an opportunity to express support for Members who are new parents with

145

their responsibilities to care for an infant while also maintaining legislative duties and attendance.

While infants are generally defined as children under the age of 2, I would prefer that the Assembly apply this amended Standing Order to newborn and very young infants who require a Member’s care. For their safety, the infant should remain in the arms of the Member, and not walk or crawl in the Chamber, or be left unattended. Recognizing the unpredictable spirit of the very young, Members should ensure that disruptions to parliamentary proceedings are minimized, for the benefit of the infant, the Member and the House as a whole.

The amendment to the Standing Order supports Members who are required to be present in the House to vote, and it is not intended to be used by Members who intend to seek the floor to participate in debate, or to preside over the Chamber or a Committee.

Members are forbidden to bring strangers onto the floor of the House while the Legislative Assembly or a Committee of the Whole is sitting. By longstanding practice in the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, former Members have been granted permission by the Speaker to attend proceedings on the floor of the Chamber, and special permission has been extended in the past to individuals such as sitting parliamentarians or visiting Table Officers from other jurisdictions. Such strangers, who are typically admitted by way of a floor pass issued by the Office of the Speaker, must not cause any disturbance, and are limited to observing proceedings from the guest chairs located around the perimeter of the Chamber.

With regard to the conduct of admitted strangers, a decision of Speaker Reid noted the following (B.C. Journals, July 3, 2013, p. 15):

The view of the Chair is that verbal communication by guests ought not to be engaged in at all while the House is actively conducting its business. [Furthermore,] guests ought not to participate in any way in support of Members of the House through applause or otherwise. Guests are not entitled to display approval or disapproval with respect to anything that transpires during the sitting of the House.

The rules of conduct for admitted strangers extend to the Douglas Fir Committee Room and the Birch Committee Room when proceedings of the Legislative Assembly take place in those locations. Any deviation from these rules may result in an order under Standing Order 23 for a stranger to withdraw.

During the consideration of a bill in a Committee of the Whole and the consideration of Estimates in the Committee of Supply, ministry officials are permitted, by longstanding practice, to be present with the Minister who is being questioned. Any such official must obtain the Speaker’s permission to be on the floor of the Chamber or committee room in the form of a floor pass.

146

Any other staff who do not have authorization to be on the floor of the Chamber or a committee room in which proceedings of the Legislative Assembly are taking place must communicate with Members in written form, through the assistance of the Chamber Attendants.

In B.C., it has been the practice to order strangers to withdraw from the Chamber while a division (recorded vote) is being held. On Opening Day, strangers have been permitted to remain on the floor of the Chamber for divisions, but such an occurrence should be sanctioned by the Legislative Assembly after consultation between the recognized caucus House Leaders (see decision of Speaker Barnes, B.C. Journals, July 6, 1995, pp. 148-9).

If a Member notices that a stranger is present on the floor of the Chamber, the Member should rise on a point of order to raise the matter with the Chair, and, as outlined in Standing Order 23, move “That strangers be ordered to withdraw.” The Chair will then put the question on the motion, which cannot be debated or amended. In addition to Members being allowed to move such a motion, the Chair also has the authority to order the withdrawal of strangers without putting a question to that effect to the Legislative Assembly.

6.9.1Strangers in Meetings of Parliamentary Committees

In meetings of parliamentary committees, strangers are admitted to observe proceedings, subject to the committee’s right to deliberate in camera. In a committee context, all persons who are not Members, officers or staff of the Legislative Assembly are referred to as “strangers” — save for the recent exclusion of an infant in the care of a Member from this definition. Parliamentary committees have a special relationship with witnesses who appear before them. Further information on witnesses and others engaged with parliamentary committees is outlined in Chapter 14 (Parliamentary Committees).

6.9.2Removal of Strangers for Misconduct

Standing Order 24 tasks the Sergeant-at-Arms and their staff with the removal of strangers for reasons of misconduct. While this enforcement extends to the Chamber and committee rooms, it has historically most often been enforced for misconduct of strangers in the public galleries.

STANDING ORDER 24

Any strangers admitted to any part of the House, Committees of the House or galleries who misconduct themselves, or who do not withdraw when directed to do so, shall be taken into custody by the Sergeant-at-Arms, and no person so taken into custody shall be discharged without special order of the House, or of the Speaker if the House be recessed or adjourned.

147

The public galleries are open during sittings of the Legislative Assembly to allow the public to access proceedings of the Assembly and its committees, and this is where most strangers are admitted. The public galleries remain open to the public during extended evening sittings. Unacceptable behaviour of admitted individuals is not tolerated. In instances of misconduct in the public galleries, Erskine May notes:

Individual instances of misconduct on the part of visitors admitted to the galleries of the House of Commons have occurred from time to time. On such occasions, the offenders have been removed from the galleries, the galleries have been closed on the Speaker’s direction or the Speaker has issued a warning of an intention to clear the galleries if disorderly behaviour were to continue. The Speaker has suspended the sitting while the Public Gallery has been cleared. The Serjeant and their staff, with or without an express direction from the Speaker, remove from the gallery of the House any visitor behaving in a disorderly manner. Disorder in the galleries should not as a general rule be noticed by the House. (25th ed., §6.59, p. 138).

Furthermore, House of Commons Procedure and Practice notes:

From time to time, there have been instances of misconduct in the galleries, and the security staff have acted to remove demonstrators or strangers behaving in a disruptive way. In cases of extreme disorder, the Speaker has directed that the galleries be cleared. (3rd ed., p. 294).

Examples of misconduct of strangers and action taken by the House, with or without a finding of a breach of the House’s privileges, are outlined in Erskine May, 25th ed., §§11.24-11.25, pp. 228-9.

6.10Order in Addressing the Chair

STANDING ORDER 36

Every Member desiring to speak shall do so from their assigned place and address the Speaker.

Generally, a Member, upon being recognized by the Speaker, may speak to any motion that has been proposed to the Legislative Assembly and which is open to debate. During some proceedings, where no actual motion is proposed, a Member may be recognized by the Speaker where the rules so permit (such as Statements by Members, responses to Ministerial Statements, oral questions, questions of privilege, points of order and items under Routine Business). There may be instances when the Speaker is bound by an order of the House that sets the number of speakers or sets a time-allocated debate on a particular item of business.

148

When wishing to speak, a Member shall rise in their assigned seat to be recognized by the Chair, and shall not move from their place while speaking (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §21.6 pp. 431-2). While Caucus Whips may provide the Chair with speaking lists, the Chair retains discretion over whether to follow the order contained in the speaking lists. Members should therefore rise to be recognized by the Chair when they wish to participate in proceedings.

It is not proper for a Member to rise while another Member is speaking, except to raise a point or order or a question of privilege. In debate, only one Member should be standing at any given time.

When wishing to speak, a Member shall rise in their assigned seat to be recognized by the Chair, and shall not move from their place while speaking.

It is irregular for a Member to direct their speech to any person other than the Speaker. Any Member occupying the chair is referred to as Speaker, as it is the office that is being addressed, and not the person. By longstanding parliamentary convention, all remarks are addressed through the Chair, and not to an individual Member. During proceedings, Members must refer to other Members by electoral district name or portfolio title for Ministers, rather than in the second person (see decision of Speaker Plecas, B.C. Journals, November 7, 2017, pp. 58-9). In a spirited debate, the Speaker acts as a buffer between Members, and heated words tend to be less inflammatory when directed through the Speaker. In a Committee of the Whole and the Committee of Supply, Members must direct their comments through the Chair.

6.10.1Member to Resume Seat

The wording of Standing Order 38 removes any uncertainty as to a Member’s duty to relinquish the floor in the situations described.

STANDING ORDER 38

A Member who is addressing the House shall take his or her seat when

(a) called to order by the Speaker,

(b) a point of order is raised by another Member, or

The onus is on the Member at all times to be aware whether or not the Speaker has risen. A plea of being distracted or failing to observe the Speaker for any other reason will seldom be successful. In B.C., this rule is strictly observed. The Speaker will generally call for order before rising, but he or she is under no obligation to do so.

149

6.10.2Members’ Dress

For much of the Legislative Assembly’s history, the Standing Orders did not contain any provisions with respect to expectations for Members’ dress during parliamentary proceedings. In 2019, the Standing Orders were amended with the addition of a new Standing Order 17B (see B.C. Votes and Proceedings, October 31, 2019, p. 3). This new Standing Order provides clarity and certainty on dress guidelines and expectations for Members, including a requirement for professional contemporary business attire and affirmation that Indigenous attire, traditional cultural attire and religious attire are considered appropriate dress for Members, reflecting a long-accepted practice.

STANDING ORDER 17B

(1) Members shall dress in professional contemporary business attire for all proceedings of the House.

(2) Indigenous attire, traditional cultural attire and religious attire are appropriate dress for Members.

(3) Headdress must not be worn during proceedings of the House, except when worn under the provision of subsection (2).

(4) Clothing and badges with brand names, slogans, advertising or messages of a political nature are not permitted to be worn during proceedings of the House.

(5) The Speaker shall oversee dress expectations for Members, may provide guidance, and may authorize exceptions to dress guidelines in appropriate circumstances.

Standing Order 17B affirms an established practice of placing discretion with the Speaker to authorize exceptions and relax dress standards in certain circumstances, such as for medical reasons.

Members should seek the Speaker’s permission in private in advance of wearing any lapel pins or ribbons in the Chamber in support of a special cause. Pursuant to precedent established by the Office of the Speaker in granting such requests, it is customary good practice for approved pins or ribbons to be provided to all Members. Pins or stickers featuring slogans or political messages are not permitted to be worn.

Members must also seek the Speaker’s permission to deviate from accepted standards of dress, even on a temporary basis. Members most often do this when making a statement in the Chamber relating to a sport team in their community, requesting the Speaker’s permission to wear that team’s jersey while making the statement. Members have also previously sought the Speaker’s permission to wear a uniform or special attire relating to a community event.

150

6.11Use of Respectful Language in Debate

The proceedings of the Legislative Assembly are based on centuries of tradition of mutual respect and integrity. Standing Order 40 requires Members to address all comments in debate in a respectful manner, and prohibits personal attacks and insults. The provisions of subsections (3) and (4) are discussed in Chapter 7 (Rules of Debate).

STANDING ORDER 40

(1) No Member shall speak disrespectfully of Her Majesty, nor or any Member of the Royal Family, nor the Governor General or the Chief Executive Officer or Administrator for the time being carrying on the Government of Canada, nor of the Lieutenant Governor or the Chief Executive Officer or Administrator for the time being carrying on the Government of the Province.

(2) No Member shall use offensive words against any Member of the House.

(3) No Member shall be irrelevant in debate.

(4) No Member shall reflect upon any vote of the House passed during the current Session, except for the purpose of moving that the vote be rescinded.

The prohibition against speaking or using offensive words extends to motions in writing, as well as in speeches (see B.C. Journals, October 20, 1921, p. 4; January 29, 1908, pp. 20-1).

In addition to a prohibition on speaking ill of, or using offensive words against, the individuals listed in Standing Order 40(1), it should be noted that:

Attacks against and censures of judges and courts by Members in debate have always been considered unparliamentary and consequently treated as breaches of order…. While it is permissible to speak in general terms about the judiciary or to criticize a law, it is inappropriate to criticize or impute motives directed to a specific judge or to criticize a decision made under the law by a judge. (House of Commons Procedure and Practice, 3rd ed., pp. 621-2).

6.11.1Unparliamentary Language

Standing Order 40(2) prohibits offensive words against another Member, which is difficult to enforce in the face of persistent abuse. As noted in Erskine May, “Good temper and moderation are the characteristics of parliamentary language. Parliamentary language is never more desirable than when a Member is canvassing the opinions and conduct of their opponents in debate” (25th ed., §21.21, p. 495).

The main areas of transgression for use of unparliamentary language are (see Erskine May, 24th ed., p. 445; see also 25th ed., §21.24, pp. 496-7):

151

1. Imputation of false motives.

2. Misrepresenting another Member’s language, and accusations thereof.

3. Charges of uttering a deliberate falsehood.

4. Abusive and insulting language likely to create disorder.

In making remarks in the Legislative Assembly, Members should bear in mind the following:

1. Members must never question the impartiality of the Speaker, either directly or indirectly. It follows that the actions or words of the Speaker are not to be criticized by any means, except by way of a substantive motion, for which notice is required (see decision of Speaker Brewin, B.C. Journals, June 7, 1999, pp. 268-9).

2. Members cannot quote another Member’s words to avoid offending Standing Order 40; a Member cannot do indirectly what the Member is unable to do directly (see decision of Speaker Shantz, B.C. Journals, February 16, 1962, p. 47).

3. The conduct of a Member cannot be canvassed in debate, nor can charges of a personal character be made, except by a substantive motion, for which notice is required (see Erskine May, 25th ed., §21.24, p. 497).

4. It has also been held that reflections on Members, where particular individuals have not been named or identified, are equivalent to reflections on the Legislative Assembly (see Erskine May, 18th ed., p. 141).

The codification of unparliamentary language is impractical, as the Speaker must consider the context in which the words were spoken — i.e., the person to whom the words were directed, the degree of provocation and whether or not the remarks created disorder in the House (see decision of Speaker Plecas, B.C. Journals, November 7, 2017, pp. 58-9; see also House of Commons Procedure and Practice, 3rd ed., p. 624).

On this point, Beauchesne notes:

It is impossible to lay down any specific rules in regard to injurious reflections uttered in debate against particular Members, or to declare beforehand what expressions are or are not contrary to order; much depends upon the tone and manner, and intention, of the person speaking; sometimes upon the person to whom the words are addressed, as, whether that person is a public officer, a private Member not in office, or whether the words are meant to be applied to public conduct or to private character; and sometimes upon the degree of provocation, which the Member speaking had received from the person alluded to; and all these considerations must be attended to at the moment, as they are infinitely various and cannot possibly be foreseen in such a manner that precise rules can be adopted with respect to them.

An expression which is deemed to be unparliamentary today does not necessarily have to be deemed unparliamentary next week. (6th ed., §486(1)(2), p. 143).

House of Commons Procedure and Practice further notes:

152

If language used in debate appears questionable to the Speaker, he or she will intervene. Nonetheless, any Member who feels aggrieved by a remark or allegation may also bring the matter to the immediate attention of the Speaker on a point of order.… Since the Speaker must rule on the basis of the context in which the language was used, points of order raised in regard to questionable language must be raised as soon as possible after the alleged irregularity has occurred.

If the Speaker did not hear the word or words in question, or if there is a dispute as to what words were actually used, the Chair may set the matter aside pending a review of the record, and if necessary, return to the House at a later time with a ruling. The Speaker has also ruled that if the Chair did not hear the offensive word or phrase and if the offensive language was not recorded in the Debates, the Chair cannot be expected to rule in the absence of a reliable record. (3rd ed., pp. 623-4).

For using offensive words, Members have been admonished and suspended. The power to enforce the Chair’s decision in these matters is clearly contained in the Standing Orders. Immediate intervention is essential if the dignity of the Legislative Assembly is to be preserved.

Generally speaking, a withdrawal of an unparliamentary term or an apology for its use will satisfy the Legislative Assembly. It is only when the offending Member refuses to make an unqualified withdrawal that difficulty arises. It has been held that the Speaker’s authority is to demand an unqualified withdrawal of unparliamentary language, and that an apology is left to the judgment of the Member.

6.11.1.1Withdrawal and Apology Required by the Speaker

On one occasion in the Legislative Assembly, a Member made unparliamentary remarks relating to another Member. Upon being asked to withdraw the remarks, the Member, without comment, left the Chamber. When the offending Member came back into the Chamber, the Speaker requested that the Member withdraw the unparliamentary remarks and apologize, observing that failing to do so would result in the Member being ordered to withdraw from the House for the remainder of the sitting. The Member in question apologized for their remarks and unequivocally withdrew them (see B.C. Hansard, April 15, 2008, p. 11405).

When asked by the Chair to withdraw unparliamentary remarks, the Member may stand in their place and simply state: “I withdraw.”

6.11.2Use of a Language Other Than English

From time to time, Members will illustrate their speeches with short terms and phrases in a language other than English, especially to demonstrate respect for Indigenous peoples or to celebrate the cultural diversity of their constituents.

153

English is the de facto official language in British Columbia, and as such, proceedings of the Legislative Assembly primarily unfold in English. From time to time, Members will illustrate their speeches with short terms and phrases in a language other than English, especially to demonstrate respect for Indigenous peoples or to celebrate the cultural diversity of their constituents. Members who wish to speak at length in a language other than English should follow the direction provided by Speaker Lovick (B.C. Journals, April 9, 1997, pp. 26-7):

Pursuant to Standing Orders 119 and 120, I wish to provide Honourable Members with guidelines relating to the use of a language other than English when addressing the Assembly.

Standing Order 120 charges the Speaker with supervising the recording and transcribing of debates in the House, but Honourable Members will appreciate that we do not have simultaneous translation facilities.

The House therefore requires some rules to guide those Members who wish, quite properly, to acknowledge their own ethnic backgrounds and to celebrate the multicultural reality of our province.

The following guidelines are offered to assist any Member addressing the House in a language other than English:

1. No presentation shall be made in a language other than English unless the script, and the English translation thereof, shall have been supplied to the Speaker at least one hour prior to the time it is intended to make the presentation.

2. The Member proposing to make the presentation in a language other than English, shall be responsible for the accuracy of the translation and the parliamentary propriety of the content of the remarks.

3. The translation will be included in the official Hansard report of the speech in place of the words as spoken, and accompanied by a notation to the effect that the English translation was supplied by the Member.

4. The Member shall furnish a sufficient number of copies of the remarks, and the English translation, so that each Member can be supplied with copies immediately following its delivery in the House.

5. Members will be expected to be brief in their presentation in the language other than English.

I believe that the above guidelines will permit us to acknowledge the diversity of cultures in the province, while at the same time allowing the Speaker and Hansard staff to carry out their obligations under the Standing Orders.