Point of Order
April 21, 2021
Point of order concerning the alleged premature disclosure of bill C-288
Hon. Anthony Rota
Speaker of the House
Ruling Text
The Speaker:
I want to thank the member for his intervention. As the member for Elgin—Middlesex—London mentioned, the practice concerning the confidentiality of all bills on notice exists so that the House is the first to learn of new legislative measures.
In fact, I want to remind the members once again that, although they are allowed to conduct consultations during the development of a bill or to announce their intention to table a bill on a specific issue, they must not disclose the specific provisions contained in a bill when it is put on notice. Only the title is made public when the Notice Paper is published and remains so until the first reading of the bill.
[English]
In my ruling on March 10, 2020, on a similar matter, the Chair accepted the explanation of the member for Markham—Unionville, where he also apologized.
Under the circumstances, I am prepared to do the same for the member for Sudbury. Thus, in light of what has been presented, the precedence in the matter and the apologies from the member for Sudbury, the Chair considers the matter closed.
Because this is not the first time this has happened, I would like to remind members of the importance of respecting confidentiality when they are preparing bills or having them put on the Notice Paper.
I want to thank the hon. members for their attention.
[Translation]
The hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue on a point of order.
Edit Metadata
Holding
"The premature disclosure of a bill's contents is a breach of practice, but the matter is considered closed following the member's apology and in light of precedent."
AI Summary
The Speaker ruled that a point of order concerning the premature disclosure of a bill was resolved by the member's apology, closing the matter.
AI Analysis
- Outcome
- Other
- Tone
- Educational
- Procedural Stage
- Routine Proceedings
- Significance
Low
High