Parliament’s hyper-partisan climate has made the Speaker’s job doubly difficult, but Greg Fergus can defuse crisis situations with his moderate demeanour. But the Conservatives feel that any venal sin is reason for his dismissal.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 27, 2024.

OTTAWA—Three strikes and you’re out.

House Speaker Greg Fergus is currently on strike two.

According to the New Democrats, this strike was really the fault of the Liberal Party organization, and should not be blamed on the Speaker.

In the end, it was much ado about nothing. The Conservatives are all about focusing on anything negative, especially if it involves members associated with the governing Liberals.

Conservatives would not want the public to focus on the good numbers that have dominated the news recently.

A drop in inflation and a reinforcement of Canada’s AAA credit rating may make the governing Liberals smile.

But they don’t make the news with the same ferocity as a generic press release from Fergus’ local riding association which had not-so-nice things to say about Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre.

Fergus’ first strike occurred early in his tenure when he made the mistake of appearing in a partisan tribute video wearing his speaker’s robes.

He apologized for the mistake, and dodged the firing bullet with all parties eventually accepting his apology.

That was before Fergus threw Poilievre out of the House of Commons for refusing to apologize for the use of unparliamentary language against the prime minister.

In that exchange, both Poilievre and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau traded insults. The difference was that Trudeau quickly withdrew his statement while Poilievre would not.

The hyper-partisan climate in Parliament has made the Speaker’s job doubly difficult, but Fergus has a moderate demeanour, and is usually ready with a smile to defuse crisis situations.

The latest mess was not of his own making. The party posted generic information about the local riding association’s spring gathering, and included some negative comments about the leader of the opposition.

In normal circumstances, this would probably go unnoticed, but the Conservatives have obviously decided that any venial sin is reason for Fergus’ dismissal.

What must be particularly difficult for Fergus is that, although he is bound to impartiality in the management of House debate, he needs to get re-elected as a Liberal.

The Speaker is chosen from amongst Members of Parliament, most of whom are attached to a political party.

Never in Canadian history has a non-aligned member served as House Speaker.

So Fergus has to tread a very fine line between impartiality in the House, and partisan politics in the local community.

He also happens to represent a riding within a stone’s throw of Parliament, which makes it much easier for Hill staffers and political followers to keep an eye on all material that emanates from his local association.

Long-serving House Speaker Peter Milliken served a decade as Speaker, and also had the distinction of being the only one to preside over four Parliaments.

He was succeeded by Andrew Scheer, who used his private time in the Speaker’s chair to reach out to caucus members in a bid to become his party’s leader.

Having spent most of his parliamentary career in neutral positions, as deputy Speaker and then Speaker, Scheer managed to secure huge caucus support when he ran for the Conservative Party leadership.

One of the perks of being the Speaker is that you can organize parliamentary dinners on a regular basis, and invite small numbers of members to join you in Speaker’s chambers.

As Speakers don’t attend caucus meetings or parliamentary committees, most of their energy can be devoted to building relationships behind the scenes.

Those relationships are often partisan, as private dinners can include only members of your own party, but no one in the public has access to the list.

So it is easy to be quietly partisan but—heaven forbid—you have an event in your own riding for local activists.

Even though Speakers are expected to prepare for re-election, their hands are ultimately tied when it comes to riding-organized events.

Fergus cannot be blamed for this cock-up, but when you are the Speaker, the last thing you want to be making is the news.

The summer break is looming. That is good news as it will give all parliamentarians a chance to cool off in their ridings, and lower the political temperature.

That may not make the official opposition very happy. Their strong lead in recent polls reinforces the wish to have an election as soon as possible.

Chaos in the Commons plays into that scenario because an unruly Parliament is usually a precursor to an election.

Instead, Speaker Fergus can use the summer period to nurture government and opposition relationships.

He will need them to hang on to his job.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Going after an unpopular prime minister will likely not cost Pierre Poilievre politically. But it does give Canadians a glimpse into what kind of leadership he would provide if he were elected prime minister. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 6, 2024.

OTTAWA—Disrespect for Parliament is the only way to explain Pierre Poilievre’s exit from House last week.

Perhaps he is spending so much time on the campaign trail that he thinks hateful language against his opponent will attract voters to his cause.

“Shameless, spineless” leadership and “wacko” were comments exchanged between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Poilievre on April 30.

But Trudeau withdrew his unparliamentary attacks while Poilievre refused to.

As a result, House Speaker Greg Fergus was forced to “name” Poilievre and eject him from the House.

Fergus offered several chances for Poilievre to withdraw his accusations, but the leader refused to do so and made a dramatic exit with his whole team in tow.

Under House rules, the leader of the opposition was allowed back the day after his ejection, and he did not have to apologize.

Going after an unpopular prime minister will likely not cost Poilievre politically. But it does give Canadians a glimpse into what kind of leadership he would provide if he were elected prime minister.

Most leaders start their term in office showing respect for their opponents and the workings of Parliament.

By the end of their time, personal hubris and frustration may overtake calm, but it usually doesn’t start out that way.

In Poilievre’s case, his parliamentary outbursts are reflective of his dripping hate for the prime minister.

In the session where Poilievre was asked to withdraw his accusation that Trudeau is “the guy who spent the first half of his adult life as a practising racist” the attacks of both leaders were caustic.

Trudeau, for his part, had to apologize for name-calling of the leader of the opposition. The prime minister accused Poilievre of courting white supremacists, as allegedly the previous week, a symbol of white supremacist group Diagalon was seen at a carbon-tax protest which Poilievre attended.

At the end of the week, few spectators outside the House will pay that much attention to what appears to be a schoolyard scrap in Parliament.

But Poilievre’s refusal to respect the ruling of the House Speaker will have repercussions.

Conservatives have all made it clear that they are after Fergus’ head, claiming he is too close to the Liberals.

For its part, the government lost no time in comparing Poilievre’s tactic to that of former U.S. president Donald Trump, who recently complained that he was being muzzled in a New York courtroom because he violated a gag order.

Tories were complaining they were muzzled by the Speaker, and it was clear that Poilievre wanted to be kicked out.

Normally, this level of heat in the House usually happens just before an election.

When tempers get high, it is very difficult to cool things down, and sometimes the only way to clean the place up is by going to the people in an election.

That could be the reason behind the drama. As Poilievre is riding high in the polls, the timing for an election could not be better for the Conservatives.

Most people won’t be paying that much attention to the parliamentary shenanigans as Canadians generally expect that level of behaviour from politicians at the best of times.

But for those who do, the decision by Poilievre to simply ignore the Speaker’s ruling and focus his attack on Fergus should be a harbinger of what to expect in a Poilievre government.

Government Whip Steven MacKinnon linked Poilievre directly to Trump, referring to the dark state influence on the politics of both leaders.

Poilievre has worked hard to try and separate his party’s right-wing perspective from that of the former American president.

But his actions in the House make the link for him.

The government has obviously decided to pivot from “happy days” and attack the nature of Poilievre’s political support.

A week earlier, Trudeau had accused Poilievre courting conspiracy theorists and extremists. He highlighted Poilievre’s refusal to denounce American conspiracy theorist Alex Jones who recently endorsed Poilievre for “saying the same things as me.”

Trudeau is banking on the fact that the majority of Canadian voters may not want to be associated with white supremacists and conspiracy theorists.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

After the 30-hour vote marathon by the Conservatives, the temperature in Parliament continued to rise. Public opinion polls showed that most observers were not impressed with the parliamentary chaos.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 18, 2023.

OTTAWA—Andrew Scheer is looking a little more ruddy than usual. And it isn’t because of a cheeky response to Christmas cheer.

Instead, the former Speaker is ruby red because he got caught doing exactly what he was excoriating House Speaker Greg Fergus for. He used his parliamentary office for a partisan video, and was quietly fined $500 earlier this year because of the infraction.

Speaker Fergus will face a similar fine, following a report from the Procedure and House Affairs Committee on his ill-advised decision to film a retirement video for a former Liberal colleague in his speaker’s robes. PROC members voted to fine Fergus and seek a second apology, but they stopped short of making his transgression a sackable offence.

That decision was opposed by the minority Conservative and Bloc Québécois committee members, but the main opponent of the ill-fated Speaker’s video was forced into silence himself when it was revealed that Scheer had made a similar mistake earlier this year.

The former Speaker and erstwhile Conservative leader has been vociferous in his calls for Fergus’ head, but he was muted on Dec. 14 when it was revealed that he paid a fine earlier this year for an eerily similar breach.

Scheer wrongfully filmed a political video in his office. Unlike Fergus’ retirement message, Scheer shot a campaign pitch in support of a parachute candidate in a southwestern Ontario byelection last June.

The fine was levied quietly, as are all decisions from the Commons Board of Internal Economy, but was leaked to the media last week when Fergus received the PROC decision. Tories and the Bloc continued to call for Fergus’ resignation, but the majority of parliamentarians felt he had committed a non-fireable error.

Fergus definitely dodged a bullet, but so did Parliament. The idea of dumping a new Speaker just months after the resignation of his predecessor in the face global scorn would have fomented the already precarious climate in Canada’s House of Commons.

After the 30-hour vote marathon by the Conservatives, the temperature in Parliament continued to rise. Public opinion polls showed that most observers were not impressed with the parliamentary chaos.

The Conservatives, still well ahead in the polls, suffered a precipitous five-point drop in the days following the filibuster. The drop may take a little wind out of their sails. A huge lead tends to fuel arrogance in any political party, while a tight race forces parties to behave in a manner that the public would expect.

Scheer claimed his attacks were largely based on his experience and knowledge of rules, stemming from the time he served as Speaker. But now that everyone knows he has broken the same rules that he claims to know so well, he won’t be as sanctimonious in his assessment of Fergus’ mistake.

No doubt, Fergus will have to work hard to rebuild the confidence that he lost because of his lapse of judgement. But turning the Speaker’s office into a revolving door would have done nothing to restore the confidence of Members of Parliament.

As his survival is dependent on support from Liberals and New Democrats, Fergus will be closely watched for bias in favour of those two parties. Liberals have privately expressed that they are worried he will be overly tough on them in an effort to prove his impartiality.

All in all, the parties will be walking on political eggshells in the new year.

Time with loved ones over Christmas will give all members a chance to enjoy some well-needed rest and family time. That should mean a happier perspective when they return to work in January.

But next year everyone will be moving into pre-election mode, which could stoke the negative vibes that were experienced before the Christmas break.

The Tories obviously want an election as soon as possible, so any way that they can provoke a crisis plays into their disruptor agenda. The Bloc is moving up in the polls, so the survival of Parliament depends more on the viewpoint of the New Democratic Party.

They continue to check off their list of accomplishments in working with the Liberals. Last week’s dental care announcement was another example of how the partnership has been helpful for Canadians. Whether the New Democrats translate that work into future seats remains to be seen. But they have certainly held up their end of parliamentary work.

The Liberals are going to work hard to keep Parliament happy, because they need time and space to rebuild their popularity.

Meanwhile, to all Parliamentarians and Canadians: HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 23, 2023.

OTTAWA—I was wrong.

In a previous column, I predicted civility in the House of Commons would last two weeks.

That prediction was predicated on a break week in the parliamentary calendar.

I figured the Members of Parliament could last at least five sitting days without allowing the place to run amok.

Instead, newly-minted speaker Greg Fergus spent two days in a civil chair.

On the third, the place erupted.

It all started out rather calmly. On Oct .18, Fergus was rising from his place to announce a new series of “reflective guidelines” that he would be using in his attempt to replace chaos with order.

He chose to introduce the guidelines just before the most-watched Question Period of the week.

On Wednesdays, all questions are devoted to the prime minister, which makes him a prime target on multiple issues and pretty much guarantees that the opposition will succeed in getting their messages on the news.

Normally, the House Speaker delivers orders, decisions, reflections, introductions, and announcements in the moments following Question Period.

This time, Fergus decided to break with convention, and deliver a lengthy reflection on protocol before questions began. He was obviously trying to make the point that everyone needs to know there is a new level of decorum that has arrived with the election of a new Speaker.

That desire ran smack into the wishes of Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre to lead off with his own questions.

When Poilievre refused to cede his spot to the Speaker, all hell broke loose.

Poilievre claimed, “The Speaker has a plethora of occasions to stand on his feet and make any point he wants or any declaration he likes. He does not need to do it in the middle of the sacred period during which we hold the government to account.” Poilievre went on to accuse Fergus of breaking the rules, and then former House Speaker Andrew Scheer backed up his leader’s right to proceed immediately with questions.

Fergus continued with his message about excessive heckling, which fell on deaf ears as Conservative MPs continued to interrupt with heckling.

While Fergus pleaded that “excessive, disruptive and loud heckling must be toned down,” his message simply engendered more disruption in the Chamber.

In the end, Poilievre got to deliver his question after a 20-minute speech from the House Speaker.

People quickly forgot the contents of the question. What came out of Wednesday’s Question Period is that, again, the call for parliamentary civility has simply fallen on deaf ears.

That may surprise the general public, as there was much focus on a kinder, gentler place when Government House Leader Karina Gould took over at the helm back in September.

But it was no surprise to those of us who have been involved in parliamentary matters for decades.

After all, the instrument that gives voice to Parliament is a mace. Ceremonial, of course, it was initially designed to kill people by clubbing them to death. When armour was introduced, it became less useful as a military weapon, but continued in ceremonial form.

Canada’s current mace was fashioned in after the original one was destroyed in the 1916 parliamentary fire that killed seven people.

Its design includes the Arms of Canada, the rose of England, the harp of Ireland and the thistle of Scotland. The staff incorporates the rose, shamrock, thistle, and the fleur-de-lys.

No words can be spoken without the presence of the mace, reminding us that Parliament is a verbal battlefield, and it isn’t always pretty.

The temperature tends to go up toward the end of a Parliament, particularly when there is election fever in the air.

With the Conservatives running so high in the polls, they have the wind in their sails, and it shows in their Question Period vigour.

Vigour includes testosterone, and the closer political parties get to voting day, the more emotions can run wild.

In a minority Parliament, the tension can be even more evident as at any moment the place could be shut down.

The New Democrats are facing some internal pressure from their supply-and-confidence agreement with the Liberals.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh felt the sting of that pressure in a reduced confidence motion at the party’s national convention in Hamilton last weekend.

However, he has his heart set on completing pharmacare, part of the triad of the supply agreement policy initiatives along with childcare and dental care. Without that, he won’t pull the plug.

If last Wednesday’s Question Period is any indication, Conservatives are raring to go.

From where they sit, an election couldn’t happen soon enough.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 9, 2023.

OTTAWA—There is a reason people love politics.

The adrenalin of the fight, the rollercoaster ups and downs make it a show worth watching.

The majority of Canadians don’t spend every waking moment focused on Question Period. They live their lives, struggle with family and financial issues, and focus on Ottawa when casting a ballot every four years or so.

For political junkies like me, we watch politics because we love the thrust and parry. Last week was a sight to behold.

The country went from the abyss to the mountaintop in a single vote. The House of Commons morphed from a forum that applauds war criminals to a place that elected the country’s first Black speaker.

Concurrently, Manitoba voted for massive change by choosing the first ever First Nations leader to head up its legislature.

The elections of Greg Fergus on the Hill and Wab Kinew in Winnipeg are reasons to celebrate this fragile construct called democracy.

Members of Parliament were shouting with joy on the choice of Fergus, and some wiped tears from their eyes on witnessing the election of the first Black Canadian House Speaker.

The same optimism met Kinew’s landslide victory, some likening it to the “orange crush” of 2011 which saw then-federal NDP leader Jack Layton come ever so close to forming government. The reaction of Indigenous leaders last week was compelling. This is what real reconciliation looks like.

Manitoba voters overwhelmingly rejected a government that sadly ran an election campaign ad on not exhuming the bodies of two murdered Indigenous women believed to be buried in a landfill.

Does anyone think that would have been a campaign poster if those women had been white? The outgoing government launched a blatant attempt at racial wedge-politics that failed miserably.

That is why elections matter and why—as Canadians—we can be proud of the choices made at the ballot box last week.

Of course, some pundits can even find a negative twist on those votes.

“Why not sooner?” said some, while others fear the Speaker’s election was just tokenism. Those were some of the brickbats sent his way within moments of Fergus being ceremoniously dragged into the job.

The Quebec MP quickly showed us why he is not a token choice.

With wit and depth, Fergus got to work, warning MPs to treat him like a new car and avoid denting him on the first day.

All and sundry rose to pledge fealty and gentleness, promising they would do their best to make the House of Commons a more civil place.

That might not last too long. I give it two weeks. And that because during one of those weeks the House will not be sitting.

The debates ahead will make the House of Commons a place worth watching, where speeches are measured by the depth of ideas, not the talons of tongues.

Fergus may follow the Peter Milliken school of speakership. Milliken, the longest serving speaker who was elected in successive Liberal and Conservative government terms, understood that some heckling can stand the House in good stead.

It is a bit like the valve on a pressure cooker. Letting out a little steam is the only way to avoid a major explosion.

Most importantly, Fergus needs to treat all Members of Parliament, and political parties, equally.

The last House Speaker not chosen by secret ballot was John Bosley, who served in the chair for the first two years of prime minister Brian Mulroney’s majority government.

The opposition felt Bosley’s rulings were too one-sided (present company included), and a raucous parliamentary period prompted changes to the standing orders—or House rules—which resulted in the election of speakers by secret ballot.

The first speaker so chosen was Progressive Conservative John Fraser. The British Columbian MP was so popular that he was re-elected and served almost eight years.

He combined a wry sense of humour with taut control over decorum in the House.

Fraser and Milliken garnered the respect of all members. That is the challenge facing Fergus.

A lifelong Liberal, who served as a political assistant and party organizer before being elected, he will have to leave his partisan hat at the door.

His sunny personality will be a help there as Fergus has a reputation across party lines for being a positive, friendly force.

That positivity must be tempered by a strong arm in the oversight of Question Period.

Fergus will need to be a gentle giant, but not too gentle.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.