Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
December 6, 2012
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on November 22, 2012, by the hon. Member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie regarding the need for a royal recommendation for Bill...
The Speaker ruled that Bill C-377 did not require a royal recommendation as the new costs were administrative and covered by the Canada Revenue Agency's existing mandate.
April 9, 2008
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on a point of order raised on April 9, 2008 by the hon. Member for Scarborough–Rouge River concerning Bill C-505, An Act to amend the Canadian...
The Speaker denied a point of order against a private member's bill, ruling that the Chair cannot decide on matters of constitutionality and the bill was in the correct procedural form.
February 23, 2004
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on two points of order: the first one was raised on Friday, February 13 by the hon. Member for Pictou–Antigonish–Guysborough regarding an alleged discrepancy...
The Speaker ruled that an administrative correction of a clerical error in a bill by the Law Clerks before prorogation was valid, meaning the subsequently reinstated bill was in the correct form.
February 6, 2004
The Speaker: The motion before the House, as I read earlier, and I will read it again, states:... if the Speaker is satisfied that the said bill is in the same form as the House of Commons had...
The Speaker confirms that a government motion to reinstate bills from a previous session is procedurally valid, citing precedent and advising Members to use amendments to force votes.
April 10, 2003
The Speaker: I wish now to indicate to the House that I am ready to rule on a point of order raised on Monday, April 7, by the hon. Member for West Vancouver–Sunshine Coast concerning the motion...
The Speaker ruled that a motion to concur in a Senate message to divide a bill is an intrinsic part of the legislative process, allowing the government to apply time allocation to limit debate.
December 4, 2002
The Speaker: I am ready to rule on the point of order raised yesterday by the hon. Member for Winnipeg–Transcona and again today by the hon. Member for Saskatoon–Rosetown–Biggar, and then the...
The Speaker ruled that the Senate did not breach the House's privilege by dividing a bill because it properly sought the Commons' concurrence, leaving the final decision to the House.
February 4, 2002
The Speaker: I appreciate the fact that hon. Members have raised this matter once again. It is perhaps an indication that it is a serious one. I hope the comments made by the hon. Deputy Speaker...
The Speaker ruled that the Chair has no authority to intervene regarding the procedural regularity of Senate amendments, including alleged discrepancies between language versions.
June 12, 2001
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised by the hon. Leader of the Government in the House on May 30, 2001, concerning the procedural acceptability of Bill S-15, An Act...
The Speaker ruled that Bill S-15, originating in the Senate, imposed a tax rather than a levy, violating the House of Commons' constitutional primacy on financial matters, and was therefore withdrawn.
November 19, 1996
The Speaker: I thank the honourable member for St. Albert for bringing this specific point of order to the House. I listened with interest to what the parliamentary secretary had to say, both...
The Speaker ruled that he cannot judge the procedural acceptability of Senate amendments, as that decision belongs to the House of Commons itself.
April 28, 1992
The Speaker: This morning the Chair heard from the honourable Member for Mackenzie on the admissibility of certain amendments made in committee on Bill C-54, An Act to amend the Farm Products...
The Speaker sustained a Point of Order, ruling that three amendments adopted by the Standing Committee on Agriculture to Bill C-54 were inadmissible because they exceeded the scope of the bill and attempted to amend sections of the parent act not under consideration.