Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
March 10, 2020
The Speaker: I am ready to rule on the questions of privilege raised on February 25 by the member for Fundy Royal and on February 27 by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government...
The Speaker found a prima facie breach of privilege due to the deliberate premature disclosure of a government bill to the media before its introduction in the House.
October 7, 2005
Skip to main content Parliament of Canada Visit Parliament Visit Français FR Share Email Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Menu Parliamentary Business Parliamentary Business - Home The House Sitting...
On October 7, 2005, the Speaker issued a statement clarifying the rules of admissibility for questions concerning the transfer of election campaign funds during Oral Questions.
February 11, 1985
Rules of Debate - Order and Decorum / Right of Reply February 11, 1985 Debates pp. 2219-20 Background On February 11, 1985, the House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-20 (Act to...
The provided text is not a Speaker's Ruling and is insufficient for analysis.
May 16, 1978
Standing Order 69 very clearly states that "No bill may be introduced either in blank or in an imperfect shape".
A statement affirming that Standing Order 69 prohibits the introduction of bills that are in a blank or imperfect form.
May 11, 1977
The practice in respect of dividing substantive motions has never been extended to bills. The Speaker agrees that a Member ought to have the right to compel the House to vote on each separate...
The Speaker rules that bills cannot be divided for voting, but Members can use a motion to delete under S.O. 75(5) to achieve separate votes on specific clauses.
May 14, 1973
Rules of Debate / Miscellaneous May 14, 1973 Debates p. 3726 Background During second reading debate on Bill C-2, an Act to amend the Criminal Code, Mr. Reynolds (Burnaby-Richmond-Delta) sought to...
The provided text 'Quoting documents' is a topic, not a Speaker's Ruling, and cannot be analyzed.
January 25, 1973
In applying the rule of anticipation, recognition must be given to what can be considered a descending scale of values; that is, bills, motions and amendments. The estimate has not really come...
Speaker clarifies that the rule of anticipation does not block debate on a bill when a related, but less effective, estimate is in committee.
March 20, 1972
Questions Related to Content of Bills / Royal Consent December 14, 1970 Journals pp. 201-2 Debates pp. 2039-40 Background During debate on the motion for third reading of Bill C-175, an Act...
The provided text is a fragment and cannot be analyzed as a Speaker's Ruling.
September 13, 1971
In many respects the proposed amendment seems to meet some of the requirements for a reasoned amendment. "The most important of those, of course, is that the principle of relevance should govern...
The Speaker accepts a borderline reasoned amendment, cautioning that the leniency shown does not set a future precedent.
September 7, 1971
An amendment moved in the form of a declaratory resolution must respect the principle of relevance. This amendment goes beyond the scope of the bill; accepting it would replace the government bill...
The Speaker ruled an amendment inadmissible because it was not relevant and went beyond the scope of the parent bill.