Ruling
July 9, 1980
Debate not urgent; other opportunities for debate
Hon. Jeanne Sauvé
Speaker of the House
Ruling Text
"Under almost no circumstances can a review of the law be regarded as an emergency provision rather than a continuing... concern of this House." In addition, since the matter was first raised there have been two opposition days dealing with energy policy, as well as meetings of the Standing Committee on Northern Pipelines to which all reports and agreements mentioned in the Northern Pipeline Act are permanently referred. Furthermore, a precedent regarding Bell Canada and the Canadian Transport Commission indicates that asking for a review of the statutory powers of an entity to which Parliament has given certain powers may not be debated under Standing Order 26.
Edit Metadata
Holding
"The request for an emergency debate is denied because the matter is an ongoing concern, not a sudden emergency, and other parliamentary opportunities for debate exist."
AI Summary
A request for an emergency debate was denied as the issue was deemed an ongoing concern with other available avenues for debate, not a sudden crisis.
AI Analysis
- Outcome
- Denied
- Tone
- Neutral
- Procedural Stage
- Routine Proceedings
- Significance
Low
High