Ruling
January 16, 1986
Reinstating the parent Act after one year, indirect negative of the bill
Hon. John Bosley
Speaker of the House
Ruling Text
On the one hand, the amendment appears to reinstate the parent Act after one year, apparently contradicting the principle of the bill at second reading. However, the argument that the amendment is a sunset clause, and therefore not a true negative of the bill, is a strong one. The Chair concluded that the amendment is not a true negative, but neither does it qualify as a true sunset clause. It appears to be a sunset clause to which future provisions are attached. Having expressed reservations, the Chair decided to give the Member the benefit of a debate and to allow the House to decide on the merits of such an amendment..
References Debates, December 11, 1985, pp. 9390-1; December 16, 1985, pp. 9493-4.
Edit Metadata
Holding
"An amendment that functions as a sunset clause with future provisions attached, while not a true sunset clause and potentially a negative of the bill, is admissible for debate by the House."
AI Summary
The Chair ruled that an amendment resembling a sunset clause, despite appearing to negate the bill's principle, was admissible for debate by the House.
AI Analysis
- Outcome
- Other
- Tone
- Neutral
- Procedural Stage
- Legislative Process (Bill Amendment Stage)
- Significance
Low
High