Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
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 24, 1970
Although the propositions that the principle of the bill be reconsidered and the second reading be deferred six months are both separately acceptable, they cannot be combined. There is no...
The Speaker ruled that a reasoned amendment and a six months' hoist motion cannot be combined into a single proposition.
February 18, 1970
Members had been previously advised to wait until negotiations in the postal dispute were completed before introducing a motion to adjourn to discuss the matter. As these talks have proven...
The Speaker permits a motion for an emergency debate on the postal dispute following the failure of negotiations.
February 17, 1970
The proposed amendment does not oppose the principle of the bill, but rather attaches a condition to the motion for second reading of the bill. It is therefore not essentially a reasoned amendment.
The Speaker ruled an amendment inadmissible because it attached a condition to a bill's second reading instead of opposing its principle, failing the test for a reasoned amendment.
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 19, 1970
Rules of Debate / Repetition January 19, 1970 Debates p. 2547 Background During Private Members' Business (Notices of Motions), Mr. Orlikow (Winnipeg North) proposed a motion to create a special...
The provided text is too short to be analyzed as a Speaker's Ruling.
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.