Skip to content
Other June 26, 1973

Royal Recommendation

Hon. Lucien Lamoureux

Hon. Lucien Lamoureux

Speaker of the House

Ruling Text

<div class="DecisionMain" role="main"> <p class="decision-chapter">Questions Related to Content of Bills / Discrepancy</p> <p class="d-DecisionDate"> <time>June 26, 1973</time> </p> <p class="e-Debates">Journals <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_2901_119_01/394?r=0&amp;s=1">pp. 436-7</a></p> <p class="e-Debates">Debates <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2901_05/487?r=0&amp;s=1">pp. 5094-5</a></p> <div> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Background</h2> </div> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">On the last allotted day of the supply period ending on June 30, Mr. Nielsen (Yukon) rose on a point of order to argue that certain votes in the Estimates appropriated money not only for the current fiscal year but also for subsequent fiscal years. He claimed that as the Royal Recommendation is valid only for the current fiscal year, these votes were out of order. Mr. Drury (President of the treasury Board) rose on the same point of order to state that the Royal Recommendation covered the votes in question and that appropriating money for future fiscal years was "in accordance with long-standing parliamentary tradition". After hearing another Member, the Deputy Speaker ruled.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Issue</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Can items in the Estimates provide funding for future fiscal years?</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Decision</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Yes.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Reasons given by the Deputy Speaker</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">There is no requirement in the Standing Orders that money recommended by the Governor General in that session be spent "within a particular fiscal year or session". Indeed, for some capital works projects or certain loans and investments, it would be impossible to do so.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Sources cited</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">British North America Act, 1867, s. 54.</p> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Financial Administration Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. F-10, s. 20. </p> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Standing Order 62(1).</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">References</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Debates, June 26, 1973, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2901_05/483">pp. 5090-4</a>. </p> </div>
Edit Metadata

AI Summary

Analysis of the procedural concept of a Royal Recommendation, which is required for any bill involving the expenditure of public funds.

AI Analysis

Holding
"No ruling was provided. The input text 'Royal Recommendation' is a procedural concept, not a decision by the Speaker."
Outcome
Other
Tone
Neutral
Significance
Low High

Cited Authorities

Tags & Keywords