Back to top

Rule 25. May also be used where Speaker says that a statement as opposed to specific terminology is unparliamentary.
Do not use for references to a Member not in attendance or referring to a member by name.
See also Address; Decorum; Veracity

2019-10-25_4767_PO: Unparliamentary language

TAMMY MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

I alluded to it earlier, and I guess I'm just looking for clarification. Why are the rules different for both sides of the House? A member on the opposite side can use the word "misleading" but our own caucus member here can't use the word. With no disrespect to the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, I think "mudslinging" and "stoop so low" and "playing in the mud" are unparliamentary words that should be added to that list. Mr. Speaker, I believe that everybody in this House needs to be treated equally.

[1:15 p.m.]

2019-10-25_4764_SS: Unparliamentary language

CLAUDIA CHENDER: The Premier has misled this House, the media, and the public about the true purpose of this bill, the circumstances leading up to it, and its legality. (Interruption)

THE SPEAKER: Order, please. The honourable member for Dartmouth South has indicated that the Premier has misled the House, and I ask you to retract that; it's unparliamentary.

The honourable member for Dartmouth South.

2019-10-30_4905_SR: Misleading the House

Before we begin the daily routine, I will bring some words on the point of order as brought up by the member for Sydney-Whitney Pier on Friday with respect to the words "misled" and "misleading." I thought I had heard the honourable New Democratic Party House Leader say that another member intentionally misled the House.

Today I reviewed Hansard from Friday to see that, in fact, I had misheard, so the member for Sydney-Whitney Pier's point of order is well taken. (Interruption) Pardon me? Cape Breton Centre, my apologies.

2020-02-20_5199_PO: 'Misrepresenting' in unparliamentary language

5191

SUSAN LEBLANC: We also know that the waiting list for public housing has not budged in years. When people facing eviction come into my office it is heartbreaking for them to be told to get in line behind thousands of others waiting for housing. In November of last year, the wait-list was at the highest number in four years at 5,316 households, that's including 1,639 families and 2,546 seniors.

Can the Premier please explain why the number of Nova Scotians on the wait-list for housing has barely budged during his time in office?

2020-02-20_5189_SS: Unparliamentary language

TIM HOUSTON: The reality is that the courts have decided. Despite the Premier's assertions here today and in the media - despite his assertions that he was unaware - the affidavits of two officers of the court, Mr. Cameron and Mr. Miller, confirm that he was well aware of these arguments, that he was in agreement with these arguments, and that he knew the instructions were very clear to his client.

I would like to ask the Premier today if he is being, if he can be more truthful on the instructions that he actually . . .

2020-02-20_5183_SS: Unparliamentary language

TIM HOUSTON: Actually, Mr. Speaker, both sides of this story are available to every Nova Scotian. The documents were released just a few hours ago when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled for the third time in favour of Mr. Cameron. We will find out, I'm sure, at which cost the Premier has tried to cover up his instructions in the fullness of time.

2020-02-25_5314_SS: Unparliamentary language

TIM HOUSTON: Mr. Speaker, every day an average of four Canadians are killed and 175 are injured in impairment-related crashes - every single day. Between 1,250 and 1,500 people are killed annually, and more than 63,000 are injured in Canada in impairment-related crashes. Crashes involving alcohol and/or drugs are the leading criminal cause of death in Canada. That's from MADD Canada.

Pages