Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
December 19, 1978
Of the five motions, three of them (Motions 11, 27 and 30) "clearly seek to amend the parent Act in a way that was not envisaged by the amending bill." Another motion (No. 12) "is defective in...
A Speaker's ruling declares five motions out of order for procedural defects related to amending a parent act, combining clauses, and specifying a coming-into-force date.
November 13, 1978
The matter must be more than simply urgency of consideration: there must be an element of genuine emergency. "[A] transaction which... appears to be within the normal orbit of the purpose for...
The Speaker denied a request for an emergency debate, ruling the issue was not a genuine emergency and other opportunities for debate were available.
November 9, 1978
Content of Bills / Infringing on Financial Initiative of the Crown November 9, 1978 Journals pp. 130-3 Debates pp. 975-7 Background As the House was about to proceed to the second reading...
The Speaker ruled a private Member's bill out of order for infringing on the financial initiative of the Crown by proposing spending without a Royal Recommendation.
May 19, 1978
A ways and means motion which forms the basis of a tax bill is an expression of the financial prerogative of the Crown. Standing Order 60(11) requires that the bill or bills introduced pursuant to...
The Speaker ruled that a clause in a tax bill was out of order because it was not based on the preceding ways and means motion as required by the Standing Orders.
March 21, 1978
A Minister is not obliged to answer a question. It is futile for the Chair to attempt to determine the validity of the reasons why a Minister in any individual case might refuse to answer a question.
The Speaker rules that ministers are not obligated to answer questions and the Chair cannot compel them to do so.
February 22, 1978
Despite some doubt as to the application of the specific word "emergency", the Chair decided to give the benefit of doubt to the applicants and to allow the House to debate the matter. If one...
The Speaker granted an emergency debate by applying a lenient interpretation of the requirements under Standing Order 26.
February 13, 1978
Standing Order 26 ought not to be used to bring before the House matters which are considered crises of individual constituencies or industries. To do so would only invite the same kind of...
The Speaker denied an emergency debate application, ruling that the issue was a regional matter, not a national crisis.
October 31, 1977
A key concept in considering a motion moved under Standing Order 26 is that of emergency which can apply to a sudden occurrence or an unexpected event. It can apply also to "the sudden and...
The Speaker rules that the sub judice convention does not apply to an investigatory commission, thus permitting an emergency debate on the matter.
July 21, 1977
Two of the motions (2 and 9) introduce a new concept into the bill and the clauses of the bill which they seek to amend. Five of the remaining motions (34, 35, 36, 43 and 45) which relate to a...
The Speaker ruled several amendments inadmissible as they were beyond the scope of the bill and lacked a Royal Recommendation.
July 15, 1977
The motion introduces an element that is completely foreign to the clause it seeks to amend by adding provisions relating to public hearings. In so doing, it goes beyond the scope of that clause.
The Speaker ruled an amendment inadmissible because it introduced a new subject (public hearings) that was beyond the scope of the original clause.