Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
April 24, 1970
By considering this motion in amendment, the House would be considering an entirely new bill which should have been introduced like any other bill. The only thing left of the original bill is its...
The Speaker ruled an amendment out of order for being beyond the scope of the original bill, as it effectively created entirely new legislation.
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 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 25, 1970
Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Third Reading February 25, 1970 Journals p. 492 Debates pp. 4100-1 Background During debate on the motion for third reading of Bill C-134, an Act to...
A motion to recommit a bill is out of order if its instructions propose amendments beyond the bill's original scope.
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 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 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.