In happier times, the Speaker of the House Geoff Regan, centre, jokingly resists as he's escorted to the speakers chair by then-Conservative interim leader Rona Ambrose, left, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in the House of Commons. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick

Given the circumstances, it was somehow fitting that before House Speaker Geoff Regan could deliver his ruling on the privilege complaint lodged against him by New Democrat MP Daniel Blaikie in the wake of the now legendary May 25 Commons meltdown, he first had to oversee nearly four hours of Conservative-driven protest votes.

For those who haven’t been following the controversy over Team Trudeau’s request for $7 billion in interim funding for various unspecified budget initiatives, Blaikie had initially brought his concerns to the Commons in hopes of persuading Regan to intervene and declare the omnibus vote a breach of parliamentary rules.

Instead, Regan reminded him that the vote in question was before committee and dismissed his complaint. When Blaikie attempted to get him to reconsider by raising a second point of order, Regan unilaterally moved on to the next item of business on the Commons agenda: the government’s bid to extend sitting hours until midnight until the summer recess.

A brief but spectacular standoff ensued — as ably chronicled by iPolitics’ own Tim Naumetz — and although the inimitable sound of Commons desktops being banged in protest has died down, the cross-aisle tensions are still on a rolling boil, as evidenced by the opposition’s campaign to hobble the government’s priority bills moving through the House.

Indeed, it was just such a procedural manoeuvre by the Conservatives that triggered Monday’s marathon, although it was the New Democrats who wound up hardest hit by the delay, as it took up more than half of their last designated supply day of the sitting.

In his ruling, Regan defended his decision to shut down debate on Blaikie’s point of order.

“It is well established that when making a case on either questions of privilege or points of order, members are expected to make brief presentations on the issue being raised,” he noted.

“The chair, once satisfied that sufficient information has been given, may inform the member accordingly,” at which point he “may then rule immediately or take the matter under advisement.”

Members, he reminded the House “do not have unlimited time to speak,” and the speaker does have the right to “terminate the discussion.”

It is, he added, “not in keeping with our practices that members use new points of order” to raise objections about the initial ruling, “for it can be perceived as undermining and questioning the authority of the chair.”

Regan also offered his thoughts on “the events of May 25,” during which House proceedings were, he noted, “disorderly to a degree rarely seen.”

“As the speaker, I am called upon to be the guardian of the rights and privileges of all members and of the House,” and “with this comes a responsibility to preserve order and decorum,” he reflected.

“It is in the interest of the House as an institution that members behave in a way that ensures that its deliberations are carried out properly and respectfully,” and “incumbent on all of us to protect the reputation of the House of Commons and to conduct ourselves in such a way that we do not diminish it in the eyes of our fellow citizens.”

He admitted he has found that “what is necessary to do is not always easy, predictable, or straightforward” — it “is not an exact science” but “an imperfect one,” he observed — which is “equally true of what members must face, given the context in which we work.”

“As your Speaker, I am your servant, and I preside over the proceedings based upon the rules that you have given me.” he concluded.

“We are used to robust and heated debate,” and while he has “every confidence that …. in this case there is no prima facie question of privilege,” he nevertheless believes that “we have found a productive and respective [sic] way to continue our important work.”

A few minutes later, Conservative MP Pierre Paul-Hus moved that the House public safety committee travel across the country to consult Canadians on the government’s proposed new rules for gun sales and licencing.

Debate, as the official record puts it, “arose thereon,” and lasted until the mandatory lights out at midnight, allowing the Conservatives to quietly take credit for successfully thwarting the Liberals’ legislative agenda for another day.

As for the standoff over the $7 billion vote, that, too, continues — this time, at the House government operations committee, where Blaikie has vowed to table more than 200 amendments to protest the lack of transparency, which, much like the stacks of amendments that Conservatives have been adding to the notice paper every might, may be doomed to failure, but may at least make life more difficult for the Liberals, if only momentarily.

Meanwhile, Regan is undoubtedly hoping that he can at least avoid being dragged from the sidelines into the centre ring as the countdown to the summer shutdown continues.