Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
June 13, 1995
The Speaker: I am now ready to rule on the question of privilege raised by the honourable member for Saint John on May 30, 1995. For providing me with the relevant facts and documents related to...
The Speaker ruled that the unauthorized use of a member's photo in a government report was not a contempt of the House as there was no malicious intent and her duties were not impeded.
April 6, 1995
The Speaker: Colleagues, on March 31, the member for Crowfoot raised a point of order concerning answers given by the Minister of Justice in response to questions posed during question periods on...
The Speaker ruled that a minister's statement of disagreement with a court decision and intent to appeal does not violate the sub judice convention.
May 28, 1991
May 28, 1991 The Speaker: As honourable Members are aware, we have had a series of comments concerning a problem in the House. Unfortunately, it was impossible to produce a judgment with all the...
The Speaker allowed an unprecedented motion to reinstate multiple bills after prorogation but required separate votes on each bill to protect the rights of Members.
April 9, 1991
Mr. Speaker: On Tuesday, March 26, 1991, when Government Motion No. 30 to amend the Standing Orders was first before the House, the honourable Member for Kamloops rose on a point of order to ask...
The Speaker denied a Point of Order challenging amendments to Standing Orders regarding Supply days, ruling that the Chair lacks jurisdiction to interpret constitutional or statutory limits and affirming the House's fundamental privilege to regulate its own procedure.
April 9, 1991
The Speaker: On Tuesday, March 26, 1991, when Government Motion No. 30 to amend the Standing Orders was first before the House, the honourable Member for Kamloops rose on a point of order to ask...
The Speaker denied a Point of Order challenging a proposed Standing Order that allowed ministerial routine motions to proceed despite denied unanimous consent unless 25 members objected, asserting that the House must retain the privilege to debate and establish its own rules.
December 13, 1990
The Speaker: On Tuesday, November 27, 1990, the honourable Member for Shefford raised a question of privilege related to a request he had submitted to the Board of lnternal Economy to fund...
The Speaker denied a question of privilege, affirming the Board of Internal Economy's decision to refuse extra funding for the Bloc Québécois, stating that existing resources for all MPs are sufficient.
May 17, 1990
The Speaker: On Monday, April 23, 1990, the honourable Member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell rose on a question of privilege to draw our attention to a letter circulating in the United States...
The Speaker denies a prima facie question of privilege concerning the misuse of House of Commons stationery by a foreign group, ruling the matter was not important enough to interrupt House business.
April 26, 1990
Mr. Speaker: On April 3, 1990, the honourable Government House Leader rose to contest the acceptability of certain amendments set out in the Senate message respecting Bill C-21, An Act to amend...
The Speaker ruled that he could not unilaterally declare Senate amendments to a money bill out of order, affirming it is the House of Commons' responsibility to defend its own financial privileges.
March 26, 1990
Mr. Speaker: On March 21, 1990, the Chair received several notices of questions of privilege relating to an action of the Chairman of the Standing Committee on Finance on March 20, 1990. The...
The Speaker denies a question of privilege against a committee chair, affirming that committees are masters of their own proceedings and the Speaker will not intervene unless the committee reports the matter to the House.
March 8, 1990
Mr. Speaker: On Monday, March 5, 1990, the honourable Member for Kamloops rose on a point of order to suggest that the debate on the budget be suspended and that the Chair review the Government...
The Speaker rules that the sub judice convention does not apply to bills, thereby allowing debate on government legislation to proceed despite a related matter being before the courts.