Speaker of the Senate
Speaker’s Ruling – Point of Order on Unparliamentary Language and Social Media
Honourable senators,
I am ready to rule on the point of order that Senator Plett raised on June 6, 2019, concerning comments made on Twitter by another senator. Many colleagues took part in consideration of the point of order, indicating how seriously all of us take the issue of decorum and language, both in the chamber and outside it.
This is, of course, not the first time such issues have been raised. On a number of occasions in recent weeks senators have expressed concerns about the use of unparliamentary language. As recently as May 16, I had occasion to caution all colleagues:
When you are using social media, please take your time before you send out tweets. If it is something you think will be offensive and you are not really sure whether or not it is something that is appropriate, I suggest you do not send, because it reflects poorly, not just on the people who are doing it, but on the whole chamber.
We have the enormous privilege of being members of the Upper House of the Parliament of Canada. With this enormous privilege comes enormous responsibility. Together, we all work for the good of our country. We can certainly disagree with each other. Indeed the exchange of conflicting ideas is vital to the health of our parliamentary system of government. We should, however, always approach one another with civility and respect, valuing the range of experiences and diverging views that we bring to Parliament. All of us are responsible for ensuring the proper functioning of this institution, and we must avoid undermining it, or undermining each other.
While the Speaker’s role in relation to the Ethics and Conflict of Interest Code for Senators is quite circumscribed, we should remember that our own Code requires that “[a] Senator’s conduct shall uphold the highest standards of dignity inherent to the position of Senator”. Under the Code, adopted by the Senate as a whole, senators are to “refrain from acting in a way that could reflect adversely on the position of senator or the institution of the Senate”. These principles should guide us in our behaviour, both in the Senate and outside it.
I therefore ask senators to focus on the substance of the issues we are addressing, and to avoid criticizing individuals or groups. By all means question and challenge policies and positions, but this should be done without undermining and attacking others who advance a particular point of view. This applies in the Senate, in committee, and outside proceedings. Historically, very few Speaker’s rulings have had to address issues of unparliamentary language. This is a testament to our long history of respectful debate. Our behaviour as parliamentarians should serve as a model to be emulated – by those who work with us, and those in our communities whom we represent.
In terms of the specific point of order, the definition in Appendix I of the Rules states that a point of order is:
A complaint or question raised by a Senator who believes that the rules, practices or procedures of the Senate have been incorrectly applied or overlooked during the proceedings, either in the chamber or in committee.
The concern raised by Senator Plett does not relate to proceedings, and so does not constitute a point of order. This is generally supported by the analysis of the ruling of May 2, 2019, dealing with a question of privilege, which noted that the Speaker’s authority is limited to our proceedings.
I do, however, thank Senator Plett for raising his concern. It has given me the opportunity to emphasize the importance of civility and respect in all our dealings, both with each other and with others, irrespective of whether they are in the context of parliamentary proceedings or not.