Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
May 16, 1966
The amendment is out of order because "it covers more than the terms of reference of the committee in question".
A ruling that an amendment to a committee report was out of order for exceeding the committee's terms of reference.
May 13, 1966
The motion is out of order because it proposes the committal of a bill before second reading, contrary to the Standing Orders. The practice is very clear: "every public bill must be read twice in...
The Speaker ruled a motion out of order for attempting to commit a bill to committee before its second reading, contrary to the Standing Orders.
May 10, 1966
"... this would be a very unusual, indeed unique, practice", since the Standing Orders provide that all private bills be automatically referred to certain committees. The Standing Orders are being...
The Speaker clarifies that referring a private bill to the Committee of the Whole is a unique practice requiring the suspension of Standing Orders.
April 22, 1966
Rules of Debate / Miscellaneous April 22, 1966 Journals p. 431 Debates p. 4210 Background During debate on the motion that the House resolve itself into Committee of Ways and Means, Mr. Sharp...
Analysis not possible as the provided text 'Right of reply' is a procedural term, not a complete Speaker's Ruling.
March 15, 1966
The motion is similar to three previous motions on privilege ruled out of order last week. The motion before the House is not one of privilege: it proposes the establishment of a special...
The Speaker denied a motion presented as a question of privilege, ruling it was a substantive motion requiring notice.
March 15, 1966
Rules and practices require that a committee be appointed by means of a substantive motion with notice. The Chair has no authority to waive such a rule nor can it alter the substance of a motion...
The Speaker ruled a motion to appoint a committee out of order because it was not a substantive motion with proper notice as required by procedure.
March 11, 1966
Despite the fact that the Chair has declared there is a prima facie case of privilege, none of the three motions is in order. "... the motions assume as a conclusion that an actual breach of...
The Speaker ruled that motions following a prima facie privilege finding must refer the matter to a committee and cannot be substantive motions that presume guilt.
February 22, 1966
''A motion opposing second reading of a bill must not anticipate amendments which may be moved in committee." A Member may move an amendment relating to the principle of a bill before the House,...
A ruling clarifying that amendments at second reading must address the bill's principle, not specific clauses which are reserved for committee.
Date Unknown
The Speaker: I am quite familiar with the argument the hon. Member is making. I recall making a similar one myself at one time or another. I am very sympathetic to the plight he describes, but...
The Speaker ruled that the government's failure to answer written questions in a timely manner is not a valid question of privilege because the Chair lacks the power to compel an answer.