Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
May 21, 1970
"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 of recommendation is attached, must...
The Speaker clarifies that a Royal Recommendation definitively sets a bill's financial scope, including its amount, objects, and purposes, which cannot be expanded by amendment.
March 24, 1970
Despite the new rules, the principles in connection with reasoned amendments are the same. "The reasoned amendment must oppose the principle of the bill... It seems that the [proposed]...
The Speaker takes under advisement whether a reasoned amendment is admissible, as it may not directly oppose the principle of the bill.
March 24, 1970
"When a motion for second reading is before the House, [the House] may debate in a general way the principle of the bill but not the clauses in detail." They and the schedules should be debated at...
A ruling clarifying that debate at second reading must address the principle of a bill, not its individual clauses.
March 3, 1970
Reasoned amendments must be strictly relevant to the bill before the House. Although it is not completely clear that the amendment is relevant to the principle of the bill, it will be given the...
The Speaker allowed a reasoned amendment of questionable relevance to proceed, giving Members the benefit of the doubt.
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 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 13, 1970
A Member may "move as an amendment to the question a resolution declaratory of some principle adverse to, or differing from, the principles, policy, or provisions of the bill, or expressing...
A ruling clarifying that reasoned amendments moved at second reading must be adverse to the principle of the underlying bill.
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 11, 1969
The amendment contains a new principle since it would lead the Committee of the Whole to suppress a provision in the bill and substitute a new fiscal arrangement. "... the purport of the...
A ruling finding an amendment inadmissible because shifting a tax burden, even if revenue-neutral, infringes on the financial initiative of the Crown.
June 20, 1969
The Member's motion contravenes the principle that every provision may be isolated and dealt with directly at report stage. A complex motion dealing with several clauses of a bill inevitably leads...
The Speaker ruled that a single motion at report stage cannot address multiple clauses and must be divided for clarity.