Monfwi MLA Jackson Lafferty did in fact “cross the line” when he alleged Premier Caroline Cochrane broke the law last month, speaker of the legislative assembly Frederick Blake Jr. said on Tuesday.
At the same time, Blake said it wasn’t his place to determine whether a law was broken, and that it was nearly “impossible” to determine if an MLA deliberately misled their colleagues, effectively dismissing Lafferty’s allegations against Cochrane.
It was a response to a tense debate last month, when Lafferty alleged Cochrane misled the house and broke the law when she fired Aurora College President Tom Weegar.
Nick Pearce/NNSL photo
Instead, Blake agreed with government house leader RJ Simpson’s Feb. 27 assertion that these comments went too far. Rapping Lafferty over his comments, he implied the Monfwi MLA's statements lacked respect.
“Respect has to be exercised by both sides of the house,” Blake said. “Unkind or inflammatory comments made by a member when addressing another member are not necessary, and do not encourage a respectful, balanced discussion.”
When Blake called for an apology and retraction, however, Lafferty delayed and called for the assembly to adjourn until tomorrow.
He said because there was no Tlicho interpreter available, he couldn’t appropriately address his fellow MLAs in his language.
“It is my right to do so, and to speak my language, as I’ve done over the last 15 years, and I'll continue to do so,” he continued. “But I cannot continue today with the limited resources I have.”
Blake left the discussion to be continued Wednesday, but didn't shut the house down.
In response, Lafferty said he'd been "muzzled" in an interview Tuesday as he left the assembly building during a break. A former speaker, he "totally disagree(d)" with assembly continuing with business as usual, he said.
Without an interpreter, none of his colleagues would be able to understand him, he said, adding he wouldn't be able to fully represent his constituents.
Asked if he would apologize as requested, Lafferty said he held government accountable and that questions still remain over the Weegar firing.
"I still have questions but they want me to apologize in the house for that," he said. "I'm in a position as an elected official to hold government to account."
One firing, two answers
In a dispute stretching over months, the debate revolves around two contending explanations of the former Aurora College president’s firing.
The basic disagreement between Lafferty and cabinet is rooted in the two positions Weegar held at once: first, as Aurora College president, and second, as associate deputy minister of post-secondary education renewal.
Lafferty obtained a legal opinion from Yellowknife firm Lawson Lundell that Cochrane could only fire Weegar as an associate deputy minister, but not from his role as president of Aurora College. Lafferty argued the law stated only the education minister can make such a decision.
Last month, Lafferty called for sanctions on the premier during a heated debate. His comments during this exchange are what led to Simpson's demand for an apology.
“(Lafferty) went well beyond trying merely holding the premier to account,” Simpson said on Feb. 27.