Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
December 20, 1973
The Standing Orders provide for a substantive proposition to be considered by the House. This cannot be done, however, by way of a recommendation from a committee studying a bill. "... there is no...
This ruling establishes that a committee studying a bill can only report the bill itself, with any changes being formal amendments, not separate recommendations.
September 18, 1973
Questions Related to Content of Bills / Infringing on Financial Initiative of the Crown September 18, 1973 Journals pp. 561-2 Debates p. 6690 Background On January 18, the Speaker proposed to...
The provided text is a procedural phrase, not a complete ruling, and cannot be analyzed.
April 17, 1973
The proposed amendment suggests that the committee report not be concurred in but that the committee be instructed to consider a number of alternative policies that were not referred to in the...
The Speaker ruled an amendment to a committee report concurrence motion out of order because it introduced a new question beyond the committee's mandate.
January 11, 1973
The subamendment raises an entirely new matter. It does not explain the substance of the amendment but, rather, substitutes an entirely new proposal. The motion would have been acceptable as a...
The Speaker ruled a subamendment out of order because it introduced a new proposal beyond the scope of the main amendment.
March 24, 1972
Although the House should not be asked to decide twice on the same question in the same session, "... no decision has been taken by this House in the current session, which began a few days ago,...
The Speaker clarifies that while multiple similar bills can be introduced in a session, a decision on one precludes debate on the others.
September 15, 1971
The motion is essentially one of censure and, as such, cannot be introduced under the terms of Standing Order 26. However, should Members wish to pursue the matter, they may do so either by...
The Speaker ruled that a censure motion is a substantive motion and cannot be moved under the Standing Order for emergency debates.
September 7, 1971
Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Second Reading September 7, 1971 Journals pp. 778-9 Debates pp. 7572-3 Background During debate on the motion for second reading of Bill C-262, an Act...
The Speaker sustained a point of order, ruling an amendment inadmissible because it introduced a subject foreign to the principle of the bill.
June 29, 1971
The proposed motion is out of order because it asks the House to proceed to the point it has already reached. Furthermore, a motion that the Orders of the Day be read is obsolete as a substantive...
The Speaker ruled a motion to proceed to the Orders of the Day out of order as it was redundant and procedurally obsolete as a substantive motion.
March 16, 1971
The proposed amendment does more than qualify or amend the main motion; it seeks to provide a basis for an entirely different debate. Furthermore, when the opposition parties agree on the choice...
The Speaker ruled an amendment to an opposition day motion out of order because it introduced a new topic beyond the scope of the original motion.
January 26, 1971
The Government has followed a practice that has been accepted rightly or wrongly, in the past. The bill will be allowed to proceed despite the possible difficulties presented by omnibus...
The Speaker denied a point of order against an omnibus bill, ruling it procedurally acceptable despite legitimate grievances.