Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
June 11, 2012
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on June [4], by the hon. Member for Saanich—Gulf Islands regarding the form of Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions...
The Speaker denied a point of order that an omnibus budget bill was procedurally improper, ruling that the Chair cannot set aside a bill for its complexity as long as it meets the formal requirements for introduction.
December 6, 2011
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on two points of order raised concerning disturbances in the Chamber. The first is the point of order raised on November 24, 2011, by the hon. Parliamentary...
The Speaker rules that disturbances in the gallery and on the floor, including applause during votes, are out of order and admonishes Members for encouraging such behaviour.
September 28, 2011
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on September 19, 2011, by the Member for Malpeque concerning a notice of proposed procurement in respect of the Canadian...
The Speaker ruled that a government procurement notice regarding the Canadian Wheat Board was a hypothetical planning document and not a contempt of Parliament for anticipating a legislative decision.
October 5, 2010
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on September 22, 2010, by the hon. Member for Portage–Lisgar concerning an e-mailed media release issued by the Press...
The Speaker ruled that a media release critical of a Member did not breach privilege as the comments were made outside the House and did not impede her parliamentary duties.
March 5, 2010
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on March 18, 2010, by the hon. Member for Scarborough–Rouge River, the hon. Member for St. John's East and the hon....
Speaker rules the government's refusal to provide uncensored documents on Afghan detainees as ordered by the House is a prima facie question of privilege, affirming Parliament's absolute power to demand information.
May 6, 2008
The Speaker: Order, please. I am now ready to rule on the point of order raised by the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and for the Canadian Wheat Board regarding...
The Speaker rules that several report stage motions to delete clauses from Bill C-5 are admissible as they do not infringe on the royal recommendation.
March 6, 2008
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on Monday, March 3 by the hon. Member for Malpeque concerning the admissibility of Bill C-46, An Act to amend the Canadian Wheat...
The Speaker ruled that a bill seeking to repeal a section of an Act is not bound by the procedural requirements contained within that same section.
November 7, 2006
The Speaker: The Chair is now prepared to rule on a point of order raised by the hon. Member for Scarborough–Rouge River on November 1, 2006, concerning Bill C-257, standing in the name of the...
The Speaker ruled that two similar Private Members' Bills could not proceed concurrently and created a novel solution by dropping the second bill to the bottom of the order of precedence pending a committee review.
March 21, 2005
The Speaker: I am now ready to rule with regard to issues affecting two private Members' bills, Bill C-331, the Ukrainian Canadian Restitution Act, and Bill C-333, the Chinese Canadian Recognition...
The Speaker ruled that a private member's bill mandating the creation of a museum requires a royal recommendation, while bills mandating negotiations for financial restitution do not, as negotiation does not constitute a direct appropriation of funds.
February 15, 2005
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on February 17 by the hon. Opposition House Leader concerning remarks made by the Hon. Minister of International Trade in...
The Speaker denied a question of privilege, ruling that a Minister's statement to proceed with a departmental reorganization despite a defeated bill was not contempt because the government was acting under separate, pre-existing statutory authority.