B.C.’s legislature looks into changes as MLA avoids censure after using Nazi slogan

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Bluesky
• Share on X
• Copy Link

Parliamentary procedure orders don’t allow legislators to censure one of their own, because that has never been part of B.C.’s political traditions.

Support for the unhoused

Sleeping outside for a cause: Vernon pair backs homeless outreach

15h ago

Youth Mental Health Care

VJH Foundation commits $500K for Foundry North Okanagan

18h ago

Theft of Tools, Merchandise

Police searching for suspects in theft investigation

18h ago

He says this is why staff are scanning the standing orders of other parliaments to see how they deal with “vile comments” like Armstrong’s.

She first made her statement on April 23, then withdrew them on the same day, following a ruling by Speaker Raj Chouhan, after Independent MLA Elenore Sturko and B.C. Finance Minister Brenda Bailey flagged them.

Green house leader Rob Botterell then tried to introduce a motion this week that would have forced her to apologize, saying Armstrong had crossed the line that separates free speech from “hateful, racist and discriminatory speech.”

But the legislature could not take up the motion, because Armstrong and Independent MLA Jordan Kealy denied the unanimous consent that was needed for Botterell’s motion.

Kealy says he has never heard the Nazi term before, but Armstrong should not have to apologize for it regardless of its meaning because she had already retracted her statement, which also accused First Nations of “cannibalism” prior to the arrival of Europeans.

Kealy says that if the censure motion had made it to a vote, it would have opened the door to a majority of MLAs forcing other MLAs to apologize for “anything that somebody in the house might be offended about.”

“One of the most important things about this house, is that you have a free speech,” Kealy says.

While Armstrong withdrew her comments inside the legislature, they continue to circulate outside of it on social media.

Farnworth says the survey of standing orders elsewhere will also look into what can be done to deal with such comments, when they continue to exist outside parliamentary chambers.

“Today, you have social media, and you can you put something out,” he says. “So, does the legislature require the ability, for example, to be able to tell somebody to take down offending remarks they may have posted?”

Farnworth says if Armstrong had not withdrawn the comments, the legislature’s sergeant-at-arms would have removed her from the chamber until the offending remarks were retracted.

He says he could have also moved a motion to suspend Armstrong from the legislature, until she had done what the Speaker had asked of her.

Farnworth says the “jurisdictional scan” now underway will look into “additional changes, if they are needed” to be able to deal with what happened in the days following Armstrong’s comments.

“I will also remark, that at the end of the day, there are other things here that can be done outside of the house,” he said. “One, is recall, and then of course, there is the ultimate one, which is at election time.”

Recall campaigns require signatures from more than 40 per cent of registered voters the member’s riding, and none of the 31 previous recalls campaign have yet been successful.

Armstrong declined to comment, saying she did not have time to answer questions.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 1, 2026.

Wolfgang Depner, The Canadian Press