Skip to content

Yukon premier accuses opposition of ‘unholy alliance’ gatekeeping government speech

Opposition defeats Liberals in vote on ministerial statements needing majority house leader consent
34336379_web1_231027_YKN_news_MINISTERIAL_STATEMENTS_954-wb_1
Premier Ranj Pillai (centre) is accusing the opposition parties of gatekeeping government speech due to their support for a motion respecting an all-party committee recommendation that will require house leader consent on ministerial statements. Yukon Party Leader Currie Dixon (left) and Yukon NDP Leader Kate White (right) and their MLAs all voted in favour of the motion. (Dana Hatherly/Yukon News)

Opposition MLAs have defeated the minority Yukon Liberal Party government in a vote on a motion to require that ministerial statements get majority house leader approval before going to the floor of the Yukon Legislative Assembly.

The opposition parties maintain it will ensure a better use of precious time in the legislature. The governing party claims it’s an affront to free speech.

Premier Ranj Pillai has called the three Yukon NDP and eight Yukon Party MLAs being in alignment on this matter an “unholy alliance” with an “unstoppable desire” to gatekeep the government’s remarks in the legislature.

“It is a sad day for democracy,” he told the house prior to the vote on Oct. 25.

“The conspirators of the Yukon Party and NDP have used their majority on the standing committee on rules, elections and privileges to try to amend the standing orders in this house to limit an important mechanism of this legislature to provide information to Yukoners.”

That all-party committee is made up of two Yukon Liberal Party MLAs, two Yukon Party MLAs and a Yukon NDP MLA. It recommended a change to the legislative assembly’s standing orders by adding a new standing order:

“Prior to recognizing a minister or cabinet commissioner on the ministerial statement, the speaker must be satisfied that the government house leader and at least one house leader of a party in opposition to the government are in agreement that the ministerial statement should be delivered that day.”

The new rule immediately went into effect after the vote.

As part of the daily routine starting at 1 p.m. that Wednesday, visitors were welcomed, tributes were paid, documents were tabled, no reports of committees were provided, no petitions were presented, a bill was introduced and notices of motions were given.

Then Pillai rose to give a ministerial statement in the four minutes allotted to him. He used his ministerial statement to speak about ministerial statements. Opposition parties each had four minutes to respond to Pillai’s ministerial statement about ministerial statements. Then Pillai had another four minutes to respond.

“This then brings us to question period,” Speaker Jeremy Harper told the house, as usual.

After the question period, which is allotted no longer than 30 minutes, the floor turned to the opposition business. The opposition sets the agenda every other Wednesday. Four opposition motions were on the orders of the day. MLAs spent the bulk of the rest of the afternoon debating the motion respecting committees about ministerial statements before voting on the matter. The motion was put forward by Yukon Party MLA for Lake Laberge Brad Cathers.

In a scrum with reporters in the lobby of the Yukon legislative building, prior to the vote, Yukon Party Leader Currie Dixon said the premier and his government have “more ability to communicate with Yukoners than any other person in the territory” which includes issuing press releases, posting on social media, buying ads, striking up press conferences and setting house business on most days.

“This is a minor tweak to the order of business that requires the government to consult with other parties about ministerial statements. For the premier to suggest that this is a dark day for democracy, I think, is way over the top. But if he genuinely believes that he should just call an election,” Dixon said.

Yukon NDP Leader Kate White said there’s a finite amount of time in the legislative assembly and a substantial portion of that time has been used for “propaganda” or “verbal government press releases” in the form of ministerial statements.

“I look forward to a new day,” she said.

It’s unclear what criteria will be used or what threshold will have to be met for house leaders to determine the worthiness of a ministerial statement.

Per the rules, ministers can use ministerial statements to make an “announcement or statement on government policy or a matter of public interest.” One ministerial statement or cabinet commission statement is allowed each sitting day. Copies of the statement must be provided to the speaker and the house leader of each party at least two hours before the opening of the sitting. Basically, the same rules to apply to cabinet commissioners, who can make an “announcement or statement related to his or her commission.”

Legislative assemblies in Alberta, Northwest Territories, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Québec, Nunavut, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador all allow for ministerial statements in their standing orders, according to the premier. He didn’t get into the specifics of them all.

The clerk of the Yukon Legislative Assembly provided data on the use of ministerial statements in the territory over the years.

From 2011 to 2015, there were none, and in 2016, there was one ministerial statement given in the spring under the Yukon Party. The number of statements steadily went up over the next few years, with a bit of a blip in the 2021 territorial election year, to 58 in 2022 under the Liberal government. There are a maximum of 60 sitting days a year.

The ministerial statement now set for Oct. 26 will be delivered by Health and Services Minister Tracy-Anne McPhee about COVID-19 and flu vaccinations.

During the debate, members of the Yukon Liberal Party leaned on a thread posted to X, formerly Twitter, by Floyd McCormick, a retired clerk of the legislative assembly.

McCormick wrote that while it isn’t censorship, the committee’s recommendation is a “bad idea.” He indicated that a historical review shows the legislative assembly has already addressed ministerial statement issues related to content and time consumption.

“Over time, it reached a workable, if imperfect, solution. [Ministerial statements] aren’t broken and don’t need to be fixed,” he wrote.

To McCormick, preventing the government from giving a ministerial statement amounts to obstruction.

“Members are rightly concerned about using the assembly’s limited sitting time more efficiently,” he wrote.

“But giving the opposition some control over what statements the [government] can and cannot deliver is the wrong way to do this.”

McCormick proposed a slew of alternatives: reducing the time limits on ministerial statements, getting rid of ministerial statements entirely, reducing the time limits on tributes, permitting the tabling of documents only required by law or house order, shortening the length of speeches during debates, eliminating oral notices of motion and stopping “inundating the order paper with hundreds of motions that will never be debated.”

Contact Dana Hatherly at dana.hatherly@yukon-news.com



Dana Hatherly

About the Author: Dana Hatherly

I’m the legislative reporter for the Yukon News.
Read more