Madam Speaker: I have a ruling for the House.
During members' statements on March 19, 1998, the Leader of the official opposition (Mr. Doer) on a point of order asked that the Speaker take under advisement a previous ruling concerning use of the terms "racist" and "racist policies." He indicated that the official opposition would like the ruling in question expunged from the record.
I would like to draw to the attention of the House Citation 119 of Beauchesne, Fifth Edition, which states that Speakers' rulings, once given, belong to the House. The Speaker is not vested with the power to alter them of his or her own accord. If they have been given under misrepresentation, the House itself, and not the Speaker, should take the initial steps to avoid the consequences of implications.
The record of meetings of the Standing Committee on Rules of the House indicates that on February 7, 1983, Speaker Walding stated: "We have two procedures that the House can adopt with regard to Speakers' Rulings: one is the appeal . . . and the other is a substantive motion having to do with a Speaker's Ruling." Speaker Walding went on to say: "That is all the House can do. It is specifically forbidden for the House to reflect on a Speaker's Ruling, unless it is by means of one of those two things."
The honourable Leader of the official opposition did not have a point of order. I believe it is clear what options are available to the House based on the two references I have cited.
* (1420)