Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
December 10, 1973
If a vote on the non-confidence motion is taken before 9:45 p.m., the House would then have the opportunity to look at the procedural difficulties mentioned in connection with the notices of...
The Speaker ruled that motions for concurrence in committee reports must be deferred to a future supply day and cannot be considered on a day with a non-confidence vote.
March 16, 1971
The proposed amendment does more than qualify or amend the main motion; it seeks to provide a basis for an entirely different debate. Furthermore, when the opposition parties agree on the choice...
The Speaker ruled an amendment to an opposition day motion out of order because it introduced a new topic beyond the scope of the original motion.
February 23, 1968
"This amendment goes far beyond the very limited scope of the motion now under consideration. It is a substantive motion or proposal which could be discussed only after notice or unanimous consent...
The Speaker ruled an amendment out of order as it was a new substantive motion that exceeded the scope of the original proposal.
January 30, 1967
A motion for the temporary suspension of a rule requires notice under the Standing Orders. In addition, any motion dealing with the business of the House should be introduced, after due notice, by...
The Speaker ruled that motions to suspend rules or manage House business require prior notice and should be introduced by the Government House Leader.
May 6, 1966
While it is the right of Parliament to impose by its vote the type of condition suggested in this amendment, the proper procedure is by way of substantive motion after notice. "The proposed...
The Speaker ruled an amendment out of order because it introduced a new principle to a resolution, which must instead be done via a substantive motion.
May 3, 1966
The subamendment is not relevant to the amendment; it raises a distinct question which can be considered only on a motion after notice.
A 1966 ruling established that a subamendment is out of order if it is not relevant to the main amendment and introduces a new, distinct question.