Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
November 20, 1984
In Canadian and British precedent there is no clear answer to the admissibility of a petition signed by both Canadian citizens and non-Canadians not resident in Canada. In October 1983 a petition...
The Speaker allowed a petition signed by both Canadians and foreigners to be received by unanimous consent, referring the general procedural issue to a committee.
June 13, 1984
Beauchesne and precedents of the House dictate that a committee of the House, whose order of reference is a bill, has no authority to report anything to the House except the bill itself.. Sources...
This ruling establishes that a committee studying a bill is only permitted to report the bill itself back to the House.
May 31, 1984
The selection of Mr. Beatty's motion is based on fair play and impartiality. The three Supply periods provide for twenty-five allotted days, six of which can end in a vote of non-confidence. In...
The Speaker rules that the selection of non-confidence motions during Supply is based on fairness to all opposition parties, not the exclusive right of the Official Opposition.
May 14, 1984
The nature of the bill in question is that of a Bill of Attainder, a type of bill which was at one time employed in the British Parliament as "the highest form of parliamentary jurisprudence." It...
The Speaker explains that a Bill of Attainder is an obsolete British parliamentary procedure with no precedent in Canadian practice.
March 30, 1984
The problem has been with the House since the bell-ringing incident of March 1982. The rules and practices of the House do not provide the Speaker with specific guidelines for the handling of...
The Speaker addresses the procedural gap regarding division bell duration, stemming from a 1982 incident, and recommends the House adopt a Standing Order to resolve it.
March 20, 1984
In situations such as this, there are informal and imperfect channels of communication available to the Speaker, the House leaders and others involved. The Chair's decision to suspend the sitting...
The Speaker justified suspending a sitting based on information from the Opposition House Leader and its consistency with a 1983 precedent.
February 3, 1984
Both motions seek to debate further a matter which has already been decided by the House. Precedent dictates that the House cannot accept a motion to reverse a decision of the House nor a motion...
The Speaker ruled that motions are out of order if they seek to reverse or reflect upon a matter already decided by the House.
June 29, 1983
In accordance with a precedent, there is no authority that a committee of the House, when considering a bill, should report anything to the House but the bill itself. "A Committee is bound by, and...
A ruling clarifying that a committee studying a bill is bound by its order of reference and can only report the bill itself back to the House.
April 26, 1983
Various precedents indicate that charges of this kind cannot be made by way of a question of privilege, but only on a substantive motion making clear and specific accusations. While there may have...
Speaker rules that serious accusations must be made via a substantive motion, not a question of privilege, and finds no procedural error in the tabling of budget documents.
March 22, 1983
Not only do defamatory allegations about Members place the entire institution of Parliament under a cloud, they also prevent Members from performing their duties as long as the matter remains...
A Speaker's ruling confirms that defamatory allegations against a Member can be referred to a committee despite the sub judice convention to protect the Member's ability to function.