Speaker of the House of Commons Greg Fergus calms Members of Parliament during Question Period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on Nov. 19.PATRICK DOYLE/The Canadian Press
House of Commons Speaker Greg Fergus urged MPs to end the standoff in Parliament over the Liberals’ refusal to release documents, saying the prolonged debate risks running into conflict with Parliament’s duty to review and approve government spending.
While Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed hope Thursday morning that his announcement of temporary and targeted sales tax breaks and $250 cheques would convince the NDP and other parties to end the logjam, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh would only offer to help suspend the debate briefly to approve the proposed measures.
The government has not been able to put forward any bills or motions for debate in the House of Commons since Sept. 26. That’s when the Conservatives launched a form of procedural protest over the government’s refusal to fully release documents related to a green technology fund that the House of Commons requested through a motion in June.
The Bloc Québécois and the NDP have both declined to give the minority Liberal government the votes it would need to shut down the debate and the Liberals have refused to fully comply with the June motion, providing Parliament with redacted documents instead.
The weeks-long standoff in Parliament over government documents is prompting debate over its potential impact on government spending and whether it could force an unprecedented intervention by Mr. Fergus.
Liberal ministers warned Wednesday that billions of dollars in new spending is at risk of not being approved because of the continuing debate in the House.
Treasury Board President Anita Anand tabled the government’s supplementary estimates Monday, which outline $24.8-billion in new spending, of which $21.6-billion requires a vote of approval by the House of Commons.
The House of Commons rules – officially known as the Standing Orders – says MPs must vote to approve the supplementary estimates by Dec. 10, including by scheduling four days for the opposition parties to set the agenda and move motions of their choice.
In a statement to the House Thursday afternoon, Mr. Fergus urged MPs to consider how the debate over the rights of Parliament could affect its role in approving government spending.
“The responsibility for the estimates must be balanced with another fundamental principle, that of allowing the opposition to present its grievances through motions examined during supply days before the House can adopt supplies,” he said.
“Without presupposing how or when the House will deal with its various questions of privilege as we get closer to the end of the current supply period, the chair wishes to encourage the House leaders to keep these various principles in mind. I’m confident that they can find ways to reconcile these important responsibilities.”
Bloc House Leader Alain Therrien responded, describing the situation as an “impending conflict” in the House of Commons’ rules and procedures that is becoming more likely by the day.
Mr. Therrien suggested the rules are unclear as to whether eventual votes to approve the government spending would take priority if the debate over documents continues into early next month.
Mr. Fergus thanked Mr. Therrien for his comments and repeated his call for MPs responsible for interparty negotiations to find a way of reconciling the competing priorities.
Don Boudria, a procedural expert who was government House leader under prime minister Jean Chrétien, says the current situation is highly unusual.
His interpretation of the rules is that the Speaker could intervene and ensure votes take place on the estimates by Dec. 10 if the standoff over documents had not yet been resolved, but he acknowledges the situation is not black and white.
“Parliamentary jurisprudence has not been established for this particular usage,” he said.
Olivier Duhaime, a spokesperson for Mr. Fergus, provided a similar conclusion.
“There do not seem to be recent precedents of a debate on the question of privilege conflicting with the requirements pertaining to the end of a supply period,” he said in an e-mail, adding that he could not speculate on how things may be resolved.