Skip to content
Ruling June 11, 2014

Motions: admissibility; rule of anticipation

Hon. Andrew Scheer

Hon. Andrew Scheer

Speaker of the House

Ruling Text

The Speaker: I appreciate the points raised by both the Government House Leader and the Opposition House Leader. Upon examination of the section of O'Brien and Bosc upon which both House leaders have relied extensively for their arguments, it seems to the Chair that the key concept is the question of whether or not the motions are substantially the same. Upon examination of both motions on the Notice Paper, it does seem that the motions are substantially the same and that the principles cited by the Government House Leader as to the practice of the House are persuasive to the Chair. Accordingly, we will not be proceeding with the motion at this time.. [1] Debates, May 26, 2014, pp. 5590–600.
Edit Metadata

AI Summary

The Speaker ruled a motion inadmissible by applying the rule of anticipation, as it was substantially the same as another motion already on the Notice Paper.

AI Analysis

Holding
"A motion will not be proceeded with if it is found to be substantially the same as another motion already on the Notice Paper."
Outcome
Sustained
Tone
Neutral
Procedural Stage
Government Orders
Significance
Low High

Cited Authorities