December 4, 1973
"It is well-established practice that committee proceedings cannot be brought into consideration or debate in the House except by way of a report from the committee." It is also well established...
The Speaker ruled that committee proceedings and member conduct cannot be raised in the House via a question of privilege and must be presented through a formal committee report.
November 28, 1973
At report stage, motions in amendment require notice, and are thus placed in the category of substantive motions subject to amendment and subamendment. As this is the first time an interpretation...
The Speaker ruled that a Member cannot move a subamendment to their own motion; another Member must propose it.
November 5, 1973
The proposed motion is beyond the scope of the bill. Furthermore, if the motion were accepted, nothing in the bill could give effect to it as additional legislation and amendments would be...
The Speaker ruled a motion inadmissible because it was beyond the scope of the bill under consideration.
November 1, 1973
The House has concurred in a committee report recommending "that changes suggested by Members be confined strictly to correction of errors and essential minor alterations". The accepted practice...
This ruling clarifies that Members can only make minor corrections to the official record (Hansard), with substantial changes requiring a formal motion.
October 24, 1973
A petition must relate to a matter over which Parliament has control. In a recent precedent, a matter which had, by statute, been allocated to a public corporation was judged to be beyond the...
The Speaker ruled a petition inadmissible because its subject matter was under the jurisdiction of the CRTC, a body to which Parliament has delegated authority.
September 20, 1973
In interpreting the rule of anticipation, the Chair "should have regard to the probability of the matter being brought before the House within a reasonable time... [T]he probability of resuming...
The Chair rules that the rule of anticipation does not apply to an interrupted Government Order because its potential return for debate is controlled by the government and thus remains probable.
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.
September 17, 1973
Routine Proceedings / Motions September 17, 1973 Journals p. 558 Debates pp. 6641-2 Background During debate on the motion of Mr. McGrath (St. John’s East) to concur in the second report of the...
The provided text is a heading related to a committee report and an amendment, not a Speaker's Ruling.
September 17, 1973
The purpose of the Standing Order under which this document has been tabled is to allow a government Member to table information relating to the administrative responsibilities of the Government...
The Speaker ruled that Ministers, not the Chair, are responsible for ensuring that documents they table comply with the Standing Orders.
September 14, 1973
"It is long-established practice, going back at least 100 years, that there can be more than one motion on the same subject appearing on the Order Paper." When the House takes a decision on or...
The Speaker clarifies the long-standing practice allowing multiple similar motions on the Order Paper, governed by the rule of anticipation and House consent.