Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
March 1, 2018
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on February 27, 2018, by the hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé concerning the second reading of Bill C-69, an act to enact the...
The Speaker partially sustained a point of order, agreeing to divide the vote on the omnibus Bill C-69 under Standing Order 69.1 because one of its parts was sufficiently distinct from the others.
November 20, 2017
The Speaker: I will ask the member to be patient for a moment while I provide a quick ruling on a point of order raised a bit earlier, and then there will be three minutes remaining in questions...
The Speaker ruled that Standing Order 69.1, allowing for the division of questions on a bill, can only be applied at the second and third reading stages, not on a motion to refer a bill to committee before second reading.
November 8, 2017
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on November 3, by the hon. member for Carleton concerning the applicability of Standing Order 69.1 to Bill C-63, a second act to...
The Speaker sustained a point of order by dividing the vote on a budget implementation bill (C-63) after finding it contained measures unrelated to the budget, thereby setting a precedent for the new omnibus bill rule (S.O. 69.1).
May 21, 2013
The Speaker: Before moving on to questions and comments, I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on April 25 by the hon. Member for Toronto Centre regarding the Eighth Report of the...
The Speaker ruled that a standing committee can, via a report, ask the House for permission to expand the scope of a Private Member's Bill.
June 11, 2012
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on June [4], by the hon. Member for Saanich—Gulf Islands regarding the form of Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions...
The Speaker denied a point of order that an omnibus budget bill was procedurally improper, ruling that the Chair cannot set aside a bill for its complexity as long as it meets the formal requirements for introduction.
May 3, 2007
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised by the hon. Member for Scarborough–Rouge River on April 17, 2007, concerning the procedural admissibility of Bill C-52, An Act...
The Speaker denied a point of order against a budget bill, ruling it was properly based on a Ways and Means motion and that concerns about delegated legislation were matters of substance for debate, not procedure.
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.
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.
December 6, 1999
The Speaker: I am now ready to rule on a point of order raised by the House Leader for the Official Opposition on Thursday, December 2, 1999, concerning the acceptability of report stage motions...
The Speaker allowed report stage motions to append the Nisga'a Final Agreement to Bill C-9, despite procedural arguments that they were unnecessary, provided the motions were corrected to reference the official Sessional Papers.
March 13, 1995
The Deputy Speaker: Colleagues, on February 27 the honourable member for Yorkton—Melville sought to move an amendment to the motion for second reading of Bill C-68, An Act respecting firearms and...
The Speaker ruled a reasoned amendment admissible, clarifying that such amendments can express opinions on a bill's provisions and do not need to be strictly opposed to its core principles.