Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
February 25, 1970
Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Third Reading February 25, 1970 Journals p. 492 Debates pp. 4100-1 Background During debate on the motion for third reading of Bill C-134, an Act to...
A motion to recommit a bill is out of order if its instructions propose amendments beyond the bill's original scope.
February 25, 1970
The return presented is obviously not in the conventional or traditional form. If a return is to be of any value to a Member it should be presented in a form that will convey to the Member the...
The Speaker ruled that tabling documents on microfilm is improper as returns must be presented in a form that is immediately interpretable without a mechanical device.
February 11, 1970
As it now stands, any Minister or Parliamentary Secretary to any Minister may answer questions posed during the adjournment proceedings to any Minister. In addition, a Minister may decline to...
The Speaker denied a request for discussion on an unsatisfactory answer during Adjournment Proceedings, citing that Ministers are permitted to decline to answer.
January 29, 1970
According to established practice, "The guiding principle in determining the effect of an amendment upon the financial initiative of the Crown is that the communication, to which the royal demand...
The Speaker ruled an amendment out of order because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown by altering the original purpose of a recommended charge.
January 21, 1970
Despite the reservations as to whether or not this case involves a question of privilege, the Member's remarks were not followed by a motion, and thus no further action can be taken. The Standing...
The Speaker ruled that no action could be taken on a member's concern because it was not followed by a motion, clarifying the rules for tabling documents.
January 19, 1970
It would appear that there is a difference between the two texts of the proposed bill. However, in this particular case it seems that the difference is more of form than of substance. Nonetheless,...
The Speaker rules that a textual discrepancy in a bill is a matter for the committee stage, not for the Chair to resolve at second reading.
January 15, 1970
Although this is a new form of amendment, it is not automatically out of order. Even if the amendment appears to be a statement or declaration of principle, rather than an amendment, it is, in...
A ruling clarifies that amendments at second reading must oppose a bill's principle and cannot simply seek to add new provisions.
December 17, 1969
Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Third Reading December 17, 1969 Journals pp. 220-1 Debates pp. 2099-100 Background During debate on the motion for third reading of Bill C-171, an Act...
A motion to recommit a bill was ruled out of order because its instructions proposed amendments that went beyond the bill's established scope.
November 28, 1969
It is difficult to imagine in order any amendment which might be proposed to "this type of very simple and basic motion to the effect that a certain document be referred to a committee". Certainly...
A 1969 ruling establishes that an amendment to a referral motion is out of order if it tries to instruct the committee on matters beyond the motion's scope.
November 12, 1969
A provision in the bill "cannot be construed in any manner except as an amendment to Appropriation Acts, past and future, and bestows the Governor in Council power to dispose of moneys in a manner...
The Speaker ruled a Senate bill inadmissible for infringing on the House of Commons' financial privileges by attempting to amend Appropriation Acts.