Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
April 23, 2018
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised earlier today by the hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby concerning the applicability of Standing Order 69.1to Bill C-74, an...
The Speaker ruled that a budget implementation bill is exempt from omnibus bill rules requiring separate votes as long as its provisions were mentioned in the budget, regardless of their length or detail in the bill.
March 29, 2018
The Deputy Speaker: The Chair is now prepared to rule on a point of order raised on March 21 by the hon. member for Carleton concerning information provided to the House by the Minister of...
The Speaker denied a point of order concerning a minister allegedly misleading the House about an infrastructure plan, affirming that the Chair cannot rule on factual disputes arising during debate.
March 1, 2018
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on February 27, 2018, by the hon. member for Berthier—Maskinongé concerning the second reading of Bill C-69, an act to enact the...
The Speaker partially sustained a point of order, agreeing to divide the vote on the omnibus Bill C-69 under Standing Order 69.1 because one of its parts was sufficiently distinct from the others.
January 30, 2018
The Speaker: On December 5, 2017, the hon. member for Calgary Rocky Ridge raised a question of privilege concerning allegedly misleading statements made by the Minister of National Revenue. I...
The Speaker denied a prima facie question of privilege alleging a minister deliberately misled the House, ruling that the high threshold for proving intent was not met and the Chair cannot assess the veracity of statements based on external documents.
November 30, 2017
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on November 22, 2017, by the member for Montcalm regarding the participation of the Minister of Finance in the vote on Motion...
The Speaker ruled that the Chair cannot determine conflicts of interest or disallow a vote based on the Conflict of Interest Code, as that authority belongs exclusively to the Ethics Commissioner.
November 8, 2017
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on November 3, by the hon. member for Carleton concerning the applicability of Standing Order 69.1 to Bill C-63, a second act to...
The Speaker sustained a point of order by dividing the vote on a budget implementation bill (C-63) after finding it contained measures unrelated to the budget, thereby setting a precedent for the new omnibus bill rule (S.O. 69.1).
November 7, 2017
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on October 31, 2017 by the hon. opposition House leader concerning the applicability of the new Standing Order 69.1 to Bill...
The Speaker denies a request to divide Bill C-56 under S.O. 69.1, ruling its parts are sufficiently related as they both concern inmate treatment under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.
May 29, 2017
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on May 10, 2017, by the hon. member for Victoria concerning the government's advertisement of job opportunities at the...
The Speaker denied a question of privilege alleging government contempt for advertising jobs for the proposed Canada Infrastructure Bank (Bill C-44) before Royal Assent, finding no prima facie evidence of obstruction or disrespect of Parliament's authority.
May 8, 2017
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the admissibility of the amendment moved on Friday, May 5, 2017 by the hon. member for Carleton to the motion respecting the Senate amendments to Bill...
The Speaker denied an amendment to a motion regarding Senate amendments to Bill C-4 because it was completely contrary to the main motion, citing House of Commons Procedure and Practice.
April 13, 2017
The Deputy Speaker: I thank the hon. member for Sherwood Park for his point of order. I refer to page 690 of O'Brien and Bosc, under initiating debate, pertaining to emergency debates. It states:...
The Deputy Speaker denied an emergency debate request because the written notice failed to meet the one-hour deadline requirement relative to the current consideration of Routine Proceedings.