Question period for April 30th 2024 could certainly be described as eventful. For those needing a reminder, it was the day that Rachael Thomas was ejected from the HoC for challenging the speaker, followed by the ejection of the leader of the official opposition, Pierre Poilievre which sparked a Conservative party wide revolt.
While there has been much debate on social media in regards to Poilievre being named by Speaker Fergus, the first event, that of the naming of Rachael Thomas has garnered littel attention, until now.
On May 1st, 2024, Ms Thomas rose on a point of privilege which should concern every Canadian from coast to coast to coast. As previously mentioned, Ms Thomas was ejected for not retracting a statement she made challenging the authority of the speaker. This is where the problem lies. It would appear that Ms Thomas did, in fact, retract her statement, but the official records do not reflect theat retraction.
The Blues vs Hansard
Most Canadians that follow politics are aware of the Hansard report. In simple terms, it is an official record of what is said in the HoC. That being said, most Canadians are not aware that the Hansard is not the only record of the debates. The first record made is known as the Blues Report, so named because it was originally produced on blue paper. The Blues Report is the unofficial record of events, made from audio recordings in the Hoc. Corrections may be made to the Blues Report for readability or errors, which are then transcribed to the Hansard, which is the official record of procedings.
The Issue at Hand
In this particular instance, there are two words spoken by Ms Thomas in the Blues Report which did not make it into the official Hansard record. Those two words are “I withdraw”. The withdrawl that was omited was alegedly spoken by Ms Thomas at the request of the speaker. It is unknown if the speaker did not in fact hear the retraction, or if he simply ignored it in an effort to partisanly punish the Conservatives who were hammering the ruling Liberal leader Justin Trudeau at the time over his disasterous hard drug decriminalization in BC.
It should be noted that any changes to the Blues Report may not change the meaning of what was said in the HoC. Most changes are made for readability, but any errors may only be changed at the request of the member that was speaking at the time. In this case, Ms Thomas denies making a request for any changes. In fact, she had a written copy of the Blues Report, clearly mentioning her withdrawl, which are mysteriously missing from the Hansard.
In effect, the Hansard Record would support Speaker Fergus’ decision to name Ms.Thomas and deny her participation in the rest of the day’s proceedings which included a vote in the Hoc. As a result, Ms Thomas’ constituents were denied their constitutional right to representation in government. A clear violation of privilege and denial of the democratic process.
Conservative Whip, Kerry-Lynne Findlay, interjected to claim she had polled Conservative members present at the time and reported that eight members had heard the member use the words “I withdraw”, backing up Ms Thomas’ claim. It should also be noted that Ms Thomas claims her withdrawl can be heard on audio recordings made at the time.
So a few questions arrise from this discovery –
1 – Did Speaker Fergus not hear her withdrawl, or simply ignore it for partisan reasons?
2 – Who made the decision to remove Ms Thomas’ withdrawl from the Hansard Record?
3 – Can Canadians continue to trust the official records of the HoC?
Perhaps time will tell, but for now we all have to wait for the speaker to render a decision on this particular point of privilege.