Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
December 10, 1969
The only precedent discovered that is relevant to this case is useful in some respects, but is ultimately unsatisfactory because on that occasion no motion was raised and, consequently, the...
The Speaker denied a question of privilege against the Minister of Finance, ruling the matter was an administrative grievance, not an obstruction of a Member's duties.
July 21, 1969
The Chair refused similar proposals in the last week because there had been debate which in some ways related closely to the subject-matter of the motions. This motion, however, refers to a very...
The Speaker grants a request for an emergency debate due to the introduction of a new and important factor.
July 16, 1969
"There has been a pattern of changing interest rates in recent months" which consequently makes this a "problem of continuing concern". In addition, this very matter was recently referred by the...
A request for an emergency debate was denied because the issue was a continuing problem already under study by a committee.
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 3, 1969
Arguments raised against the Government's motion are founded largely on the rule of anticipation. Unfortunately, Canadian precedents concerning this rule are not sufficiently clear and British...
The Speaker ruled that the rule of anticipation applies to the debate of a matter, not its placement on the Order Paper, thus allowing a government motion to proceed.
May 15, 1969
There are two points to be made in declining the request for an emergency debate. First, the notice which a Member is required to submit to the Chair and which he reads to the House as his...
The Speaker denied a request for an emergency debate, citing improper notice and the high procedural bar for interrupting an opposition Supply day.
May 15, 1969
The requested document appears to have been tabled in the House as a return to a notice of motion for the production of papers. The problem seems to involve the description of the document. "It is...
The Speaker ruled that a dispute over the adequacy of a document tabled in response to a motion for production of papers is a matter for debate, not a point of order for the Chair to decide.
May 12, 1969
Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Third Reading May 12, 1969 Journals p. 1024 Debates p. 8595 Background During debate on the motion for third reading of Bill C-150, an Act to amend the...
Analysis could not be completed as the provided text is a procedural heading, not a Speaker's Ruling.
April 24, 1969
Despite misgivings as to whether the matter should or might be raised in another form (that is, a motion of confidence), the motion will be allowed. Taken separately, neither the question of...
The Speaker granted an emergency debate, ruling that a minister's resignation combined with their policy portfolio created sufficient urgency.
March 28, 1969
Amendments to the Content of Bills / Report Stage March 28, 1969 Journals pp. 863-4 Debates p. 7265 Background During report stage consideration of Bill C-102, an Act to amend the Patent Act, the...
The Speaker ruled an amendment inadmissible as it was beyond the bill's scope and infringed on the Crown's financial initiative.