Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
October 20, 1970
Since the Chair did not have the opportunity to examine each bill in detail, it is suggested that the House follow the procedure agreed upon in several recent sessions: by unanimous consent, all...
The Speaker outlines a process to grant private Members' bills first reading by consent while deferring scrutiny of procedural defects until before second reading.
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.
February 26, 1968
"... the amendment, if carried, would make the motion difficult to understand." In addition, "it would also be contrary to the facts, since the bill was carried on first reading by unanimous...
The Speaker ruled an amendment out of order because it was confusing and factually incorrect.
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.
April 18, 1967
Once an order has been called by the Government, the only way the House could proceed with the Member's motion would be by suspending, with unanimous consent, the provisions of the relevant...
The Speaker rules that during Government Orders, only the Government House Leader can introduce motions on House business unless unanimous consent is given to suspend the rules.
March 15, 1966
The motion is similar to three previous motions on privilege ruled out of order last week. The motion before the House is not one of privilege: it proposes the establishment of a special...
The Speaker denied a motion presented as a question of privilege, ruling it was a substantive motion requiring notice.
March 10, 1966
The rule is designed to cover the type of issue that the Member is seeking to raise at the present time. To suspend the operation of this rule in this instance would require the unanimous consent...
The Speaker rules that unanimous consent is required to suspend the relevant rule for the matter a Member wishes to raise.
January 24, 1966
Since it would be exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, for the Chair to examine each bill at this time, it is suggested that the House follow the procedure agreed upon in each of the past...
The Speaker proposed using unanimous consent to give all Private Members' Bills first reading and deferring the procedural review to a later stage.