Précédent.ai

Mr. Speaker: The honourable Member for Beaver River has applied under Standing Order 52 for an emergency debate on a matter which I am sure all Members of this House agree is a very important one. However I must point out that the matter is being raised on a daily basis. The honourable Member has another course to follow by which she could debate the matter. As a consequence, today I am not inclined to grant her application. It has nothing to do with whether or not the matter is serious. We all know it is serious. At this time, and I say at this time, I think it would be inappropriate. I thank the honourable Member for giving me notice, and I thank her for her intervention. [...] Order. I must interrupt the honourable Member for Calgary Northeast. It is not appropriate to argue with the Speaker's ruling. At the time the reform committee considered the whole question of applications for emergency debate, it was recommended that the Speaker give no reasons at all. All that the Speaker did in this case is remind honourable Members that the matter has been raised continually, which of course it has been, and that there is for the honourable Member another approach to the matter. I have great respect for the honourable Member, but he is not in order in arguing with the Speaker on an application for an emergency debate. F0808-e 34-2 1990-05-29. [1] Debates, May 29, 1990, p. 11980.

Guidelines: Speaker not bound to give reasons for his decision; not in order for Members to reflect on decision; leave not granted

Ruling Text

AI Summary

AI Analysis

AI Keywords

Cited Authorities

Tags & Keywords