Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
October 19, 2006
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on October 3, 2006, by the hon. Member for Windsor–Tecumseh concerning funding cuts to the Law Commission of Canada. I...
The Speaker ruled that the government's defunding of the Law Commission of Canada was an exercise of its executive financial prerogative and not a breach of parliamentary privilege.
May 4, 2004
The Speaker: Before moving to Government Orders, I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on April 1, 2004 by the hon. Member for Roberval concerning the release by the hon....
The Speaker denied a question of privilege concerning the release of in camera committee testimony, ruling that the Chair will not interfere in a committee's internal decision not to report a matter to the House.
April 1, 2004
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on a point of order raised by the hon. Opposition House Leader earlier today concerning proceedings in the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. I would...
The Speaker ruled that he cannot intervene in a committee's decision-making process, including the release of in camera testimony, as committees are masters of their own proceedings until they report to the House.
October 24, 2003
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on October 2, 2003, by the hon. Member for St. Albert, concerning his claim that the Office of the Privacy Commissioner had...
The Speaker denied a point of order concerning departmental overspending, ruling that no procedural breach occurred as the matter would be handled by established financial reporting laws.
October 7, 2003
The Speaker: On Wednesday, September 24, the hon. Member for Yorkton–Melville rose on a question of privilege arising out of the previous day's Question Period, charging that the Solicitor General...
The Speaker denied a question of privilege, ruling that a minister's statement about a $10 million 'carry forward' in the Estimates not being 'new money' was not misleading.
June 12, 2003
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on June 5, 2003, by the hon. Member for St. Albert concerning multi-year funding of the heating fuel rebate. I would like to...
The Speaker denied a point of order, ruling that multi-year heating fuel rebates were properly funded as ex gratia payments from an agency's operating budget, but criticized the lack of transparency in the estimates documents provided to Parliament.
February 17, 2003
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on February 12, 2003, by the hon. Member for Sarnia–Lambton concerning management of the Canadian Firearms Program. I...
The Speaker ruled that withdrawing supplementary estimates for the firearms program did not cancel its original funding, so no privilege was breached by the Minister's continued spending.
December 12, 2002
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the matter raised by the hon. Member for West Vancouver–Sunshine Coast on December 9 concerning the alleged failure of the Government to report on cases...
The Speaker denied a contempt claim regarding the government's failure to report GST fraud, but criticized the government for not informing Parliament of the change in reporting, thus hindering accountability.
November 22, 2001
The Speaker: I am now ready to rule on a point of order raised by the hon. Member for St. Albert on Thursday, November 1, 2001, relating to two items in the Supplementary Estimates: Vote 10 for...
The Speaker ruled that the government spent funds without proper parliamentary supply authority but allowed the related Supplementary Estimates to proceed, urging corrective action.
October 29, 1998
The Speaker: I am now ready to rule on the question of privilege raised by the House leader of the official opposition on October 19, 1998, concerning the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation....
The Speaker ruled that the government's allocation of funds before legislative approval was not a prima facie contempt of Parliament as it did not impede the functions of the House.