SPEAKER'S RULING: A minister ought not to absent himself or herself from CWH on Supply if that minister's estimates are on the floor of the committee (Pt. of Privilege by Hon. M. Scott [Hansard p. 1247, 04/23/10]) Members have not been subject to an actual loss of time, but if the situation were otherwise that a member could be obstructed in his or her rights as a member, in effect that would amount to a matter of privilege.

MR. KEITH BAIN: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of privilege. Yesterday at the Law Amendments Committee we had many presenters appear before us and a request was made by our caucus, as well as the Liberal caucus, to have the opportunity to bring some of those concerns back to our caucus. That was denied - and I would like to table many bills that were at the Law Amendments Committee that were referred back to caucus - and the Law Amendments Committee met the next day.

MR. SPEAKER: Honourable members, we'll call our session to order for a brand new week and a brand new month. I hope everybody had a good weekend. Before we go to the daily routine, I have a Speaker's Ruling here I'm going to read on the issue that arose on Friday.

HON. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I rise on another point of privilege. As members of this House it is essential that we have access to all available information in order to represent Nova Scotians and hold government accountable.

HON. MICHEL SAMSON: Mr. Speaker, I rise today on a point of privilege. You will recall the extensive debate there has been in this Assembly surrounding the government's decision to build one single correctional facility rather than the two facilities proposed in Cumberland and Antigonish Counties. Repeatedly in this House, both the Premier and the Minister of Justice have denied that the previous government had done any work on this issue, but rather that it was simply a political promise.

HON. MANNING MACDONALD: I'm rising on a point of privilege. Mr. Speaker, I've been around this House a long time and in my 18 years coming to this place, I've never seen a worse example of a Speaker protecting the government. This is the worst I've ever seen.

Your ruling, Mr. Speaker, I believe, was contemptuous without even hearing a question. The Chief Clerk is a public employee, was a public employee, paid for by the people of this province and only under the direction of the Speaker's Office.

SPEAKER'S RULING: Tabling documents in House prior to release (Pt. of privilege by Hon. M. Samson [Hansard p. 2926, 11/03/10]) No prima facie case of breach of privilege.

On Wednesday, November 3rd, the member for Richmond rose on a point of privilege. He complained that he had asked the honourable Minister of Justice to table in the House the business case the minister relied upon in making his decision to build one jail rather than two. He advised that the government had, in his words, "leaked" two documents respecting jail site review and construction matters.

SPEAKER'S RULING: Justice Min./Prem. Misled House (Pt. of priv. by Hon. M. Samson [Hansard p. 2925, 11/03/10]) Not a point of privilege.

The third point of privilege was raised on October 23rd by the honourable Interim Leader of the NDP, who complained that the Premier had misled the House on October 21st with respect to his characterization of the federal NDP's vote on a matter in 2006. I find the matter was raised at the earliest possible opportunity, even though it was dealt with on the second day after the alleged matter.

MR. CHUCK PORTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Before we proceed I wish to rise on a point of privilege. This morning during the meeting of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, I rose on a point of order concerning decisions of the Chair taken in subcommittee, with respect to the matters within the jurisdiction of the Public Accounts Committee. These concerns were provided to the Chair in writing, a copy of which I will provide the House.