Search thousands of Speaker's rulings with AI-powered precision.
February 20, 1979
Content of Bills / Infringing on Financial Initiative of the Crown February 20, 1979 Journals pp. 393-5 Debates pp. 3423-5 Background The Chair, having authorized presentation of a number of bills...
The Speaker ruled a private Member's bill out of order for violating the financial initiative of the Crown by proposing a new public expenditure without a royal recommendation.
December 7, 1977
The first item sought to exceed and extend the sum of money to be paid to a particular Crown corporation according to the provisions of a statute. The second item sought an exception from a...
A Speaker's ruling found that items in the Estimates were out of order because they attempted to amend existing legislation, which requires a separate bill.
May 13, 1977
Amendments and Subamendments to Motions / Amendment Beyond Scope of Motion May 13, 1977 Journals pp. 794-6 Debates pp. 5650-1 Background During debate on a Supply Day motion proposed by Mr....
The Speaker ruled an amendment out of order because it was not relevant to and went beyond the scope of the original motion.
March 18, 1977
"The role of the organization spelled out in every clause in the bill is so fundamental to the operation of the statute that it is more than simply an incidental aspect of the machinery of the...
The Speaker ruled an amendment inadmissible because it sought to remove a core element of the bill, thereby introducing a new principle beyond the bill's scope.
January 24, 1977
"If the motion is amended and adopted by the House, it leaves the matter of implementation open, and that is inconsistent with the initial proposition. It is... a new proposition." Because of the...
A ruling that an amendment is inadmissible if it removes the implementation details of a motion, thereby creating a new and inconsistent proposition.
July 9, 1976
They are out of order because they are consequential to an issue which is no longer part of the bill. Thus, they have become irrelevant to the specific legislative measure presently before the House.
The Speaker ruled amendments out of order as they were consequential to a part of the bill that had been removed, making them irrelevant.
June 29, 1976
"In the final analysis the question reduces itself to whether, when the House pronounced itself upon second reading of the bill, it pronounced itself on a question of principle, and if so, what...
The Speaker ruled that amendments proposed after second reading cannot contradict the fundamental principle of a bill, which in this case was the abolition of capital punishment.
June 22, 1976
The legislative authority which allows the government to establish a corporation such as Loto Canada already exists and is separate from the item in the estimates. Consequently, the government is...
The Speaker ruled that using the estimates to fund a corporation is procedurally acceptable if the legislative authority already exists, even if a bill is preferable for matters of principle.
May 10, 1976
Amendments and Subamendments to Motions / Amendment Beyond Scope of Motion May 10, 1976 Journals p. 1278 Debates p. 13359 Background When, during private Members' hour on February 3, the House was...
The Speaker ruled an amendment inadmissible because it introduced a new principle beyond the scope of the original motion.
March 5, 1976
Amendments to the Content of Bills / Report Stage March 5, 1976 Journals p.1090 Debates p. 11556 Background During consideration of the report stage of Bill C-61, an Act to provide a maritime code...
A ruling on the procedural admissibility of a legislative amendment based on whether it is within the established scope of the parent bill.