Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
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.
July 7, 1969
The proposed amendment does not suggest that the bill be set aside on the basis of a proposition omitted from the bill; it simply indicates why the bill should not be proceeded with further. The...
The Speaker rules that a proposed amendment is a valid reasoned amendment as it explains why a bill should not proceed.
April 25, 1969
These motions are reasoned amendments which are of a kind normally considered at second reading, and certainly cannot be moved at this stage.
The Speaker ruled reasoned amendments out of order as they were moved at an improper procedural stage, noting they are only acceptable at second reading.
April 16, 1969
Both motions in amendment are reasoned amendments since they provide that the bill be not now read. Such amendments, while appropriate at the second or third reading stage, cannot be put at the...
The Speaker ruled that reasoned amendments are procedurally inadmissible during the report stage of a bill.
April 14, 1969
A reasoned amendment would have to be declaratory of a principle in opposition to or differing from the principle, policy or provisions of the bill. The proposed amendment is not declaratory of a...
A proposed amendment was ruled out of order because it constituted a substantive motion proposing an alternative scheme, not a reasoned amendment opposing the bill's principle.
January 23, 1969
A bill must be read twice and referred to a committee before being amended, although a Member may move a reasoned amendment to the motion for second reading of a bill. The proposed amendment is...
A ruling clarifying that an instruction to a committee cannot be moved as an amendment at second reading but must wait until after the bill is referred.
October 21, 1968
The proposed amendment does not oppose the principle of the bill but merely postpones consideration of the bill until a certain condition is met. Further, there is a substantial difference between...
This ruling clarifies that an amendment is procedurally acceptable if it postpones a bill's consideration based on a condition, rather than opposing its core principle.
October 13, 1966
Although the amendment does not present a policy contrary to the bill, it fulfils other conditions of an acceptable reasoned amendment. Where relevance is concerned, the fact that the amendment...
The Speaker ruled a reasoned amendment acceptable by giving the benefit of the doubt on its relevance to the bill.
August 30, 1966
Opposition to the principle of a bill is only one criterion required for an acceptable reasoned amendment. A reasoned amendment can also express opinions on any circumstances connected with the...
The Speaker ruled that a reasoned amendment was acceptable because it met the necessary criteria and did not go into excessive detail about the bill's provisions.