Ruling
November 7, 1986
Motion that a Member be now heard: receivability; motion moved to allow Member to explain how he would have voted
Hon. John Fraser
Speaker of the House
Ruling Text
Mr. Speaker:
Order. The honourable Member for Burnaby has moved a motion. He argues that the motion that an honourable Member be recognized in the place of the honourable Member who has been recognized ought to be accepted by the Chair and that there should be a division, if necessary, in the House. The Chair has considered this practice very carefully. It originated because there were cases in which some Members felt that a particular Member who was recognized ought not to be heard or because a particular Member was not getting a fair chance to rise in his or her place and enter into the debate. These practices go back many years and the time frame in which these rules were made is of great interest to many Members and all historians....
In the case this afternoon there has been no suggestion that honourable Members rising to explain how they would have voted had they been in the Chamber were being precluded from doing so. In fact, it was quite clear that the Chair was recognizing, and properly so, those who wished to give some explanation. However, it is the Chair's view that this practice, historic as it is, originated to protect a Member who might be unpopular or was, for whatever reason, being precluded from speaking. In my opinion, that practice does not apply to the situation before us this afternoon. As a consequence, I rule that the motion moved by the honourable Member for Burnaby is not applicable in these circumstances.
F0701-e 33-2 1986-11-07.
[1]
Debates, November 7, 1986, pp. 1198-9.
Edit Metadata
Holding
"The motion 'that a Member be now heard' is not applicable in circumstances where Members are being recognized to explain how they would have voted, as the original purpose of the motion was to protect a Member who was being unfairly precluded from speaking."
AI Summary
The Speaker ruled that the historic motion 'that a Member be now heard' is not applicable during the period for explaining votes, as its purpose is to protect Members being unfairly silenced.
AI Analysis
- Outcome
- Denied
- Tone
- Educational
- Procedural Stage
- Post-Division Proceedings
- Significance
Low
High