Is a ruling on Mark Warawa imminent? - Macleans.ca

Is a ruling on Mark Warawa imminent?

The Backbench Spring reaches a pivotal moment

by

I’m told the Speaker hopes to deliver a ruling on Mark Warawa’s question of privilege after Question Period this afternoon.

That may or may not render moot the Liberal motion on members’ statements. That motion is on today’s notice paper in preparation for a potential debate tomorrow.

Conservative MP Brent Rathgeber wondered yesterday about how statements would be distributed among parties were the Liberal motion to pass. The Liberals tell me that statements would be allocated proportionally—the current system seems to basically follow this rule. I emailed Mr. Rathgeber to ask about the Liberal motion and in the course of that conversation he suggested that party affiliation should be ignored entirely and statements should be allotted randomly, similar to how the order for private members’ bills is established.

It should be random ( by lottery) the way PMB Precedence is established … The point is slots are given to Members; not parties.  This is an important distinction and important in re-establishing the significance of the Member. Matters of Private Members should be managed outside the caucus apparatus, as is done with PMB and Motion Precedence.

Speaking with reporters after QP yesterday, Thomas Mulcair said the New Democrats would support the Liberal motion, but also suggested it might not amount to much of a change.