Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
November 20, 2025
[ Table of Contents ] The Speaker : I am now ready to rule on the question of privilege raised on November 5 by the member for Joliette—Manawan concerning budget documents distributed to members....
The Speaker ruled that different versions of a budget document do not constitute a breach of privilege as long as the official version is properly tabled in the House.
April 18, 2024
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on April 9, 2024, by the member for La Prairie concerning the premature disclosure of financial initiatives prior to the...
The Speaker denied a question of privilege regarding pre-budget announcements, ruling that budget secrecy is a matter of convention, not a procedural breach for the Chair to enforce.
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.
April 6, 2017
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on March 22, 2017, by the hon. member for Louis-Saint-Laurent concerning the advance distribution in the House of the...
The Speaker denied a Question of Privilege regarding the premature distribution of budget documents, ruling that budget secrecy is a parliamentary convention, not a matter of privilege, as no member was obstructed from performing their duties.
April 6, 2017
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on March 22, 2017, by the member for Milton regarding delayed access to the parliamentary precinct. I would like to thank...
The Speaker found a prima facie question of privilege when security delays prevented members from accessing the precinct to attend a vote, emphasizing that unfettered access must always be prioritized over security logistics.
March 3, 2014
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on February 6, 2014, by the Member for Sherbrooke regarding a technical briefing offered by the Minister of State in...
The Speaker ruled that inadequate interpretation at a government technical briefing is not a breach of privilege as the event is not a formal parliamentary proceeding.
October 5, 2010
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on September 22, 2010, by the hon. Member for Portage–Lisgar concerning an e-mailed media release issued by the Press...
The Speaker ruled that a media release critical of a Member did not breach privilege as the comments were made outside the House and did not impede her parliamentary duties.
May 29, 2008
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised by the hon. Member for Scarborough–Agincourt and the hon. Member for Trinity–Spadina on May 15, 2008, concerning the...
The Speaker ruled that government advertisements for a bill still before Parliament did not constitute a contempt as they did not presume the bill's passage.
February 15, 2005
The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised on February 17 by the hon. Opposition House Leader concerning remarks made by the Hon. Minister of International Trade in...
The Speaker denied a question of privilege, ruling that a Minister's statement to proceed with a departmental reorganization despite a defeated bill was not contempt because the government was acting under separate, pre-existing statutory authority.
October 7, 2003
The Speaker: On Wednesday, September 24, the hon. Member for Yorkton–Melville rose on a question of privilege arising out of the previous day's Question Period, charging that the Solicitor General...
The Speaker denied a question of privilege, ruling that a minister's statement about a $10 million 'carry forward' in the Estimates not being 'new money' was not misleading.