Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
March 24, 1970
"No principle is more surely provided for by our constitution and our Standing Orders than that which provides that the Crown alone initiates financial proposals... It is not competent... for the...
A ruling affirming the constitutional principle that only the Crown can initiate financial proposals, thereby preventing committees from substituting financial provisions in estimates.
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.
January 21, 1970
Despite the reservations as to whether or not this case involves a question of privilege, the Member's remarks were not followed by a motion, and thus no further action can be taken. The Standing...
The Speaker ruled that no action could be taken on a member's concern because it was not followed by a motion, clarifying the rules for tabling documents.
November 10, 1969
Although the Standing Orders provide for the introduction of bills during Routine Proceedings, they do not allow for a motion to empower a committee to draw up a bill, nor is there any precedent...
The Speaker ruled a private member's motion to have a committee draft a bill out of order as it was procedurally unprecedented and exceeded the member's notice limit.
July 24, 1969
It is acknowledged that "the report is not the report of the majority". At the same time, the parliamentary system does not recognize minority and majority reports, but only the report of a...
The Chair ruled that parliamentary procedure only recognizes a single committee report, not majority or minority reports, and the Speaker cannot substitute their judgment for the committee's.
July 24, 1969
While the closure rule as it now stands is not without "uncertainty and pitfalls..., all precedents support the view that any amendment or other motion that may be proposed to a main motion comes...
This ruling confirms that a single closure motion applies to a main motion and all of its related amendments.
July 23, 1969
Although a motion may not be moved on a point of order, the Standing Orders stipulate that a motion that a Member be now heard may be made at any time. "It would be very difficult... to say that...
A ruling confirming that the superseding motion 'that a Member be now heard' is in order as it can be moved at any time, even during a point of order.
July 11, 1969
The amendment is restricted exclusively to a reconsideration of Standing Order 75C and is thus very limited. The proposed subamendment goes beyond this by seeking "to do many things, one of them...
A 1969 ruling found a subamendment inadmissible because it went beyond the scope of the original amendment, violating the rule of relevance.
July 8, 1969
The point of order raised is not so much a point of order as a point of debate. "... it is not the responsibility of the Chair to rule on questions of law or on constitutional questions." If the...
The Speaker ruled that a point of order concerning a constitutional question was a matter for debate, not a procedural ruling for the Chair.
July 7, 1969
The rule of anticipation becomes operative only when one of two similar motions on the Order Paper is actually proceeded with. If the motion respecting the committee report had been moved, it...
The Speaker ruled that a Minister's motion could proceed because the rule of anticipation only applies if a similar, preceding motion on the Order Paper has actually been moved.