Amendment to motion in amendment; substantive

<div class="DecisionMain" role="main"> <p class="decision-chapter">Amendments to the Content of Bills / Report Stage</p> <p class="d-DecisionDate"> <time>June 11, 1973</time> </p> <p class="e-Debates">Journals <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_2901_119_01/358">pp. 397-8</a></p> <p class="e-Debates">Debates <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2901_05/46?r=0&amp;s=1">pp. 4647-8</a></p> <div> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Background</h2> </div> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">During debate on a motion in amendment of Mr. Woolliams (Calgary North) at the report stage of Bill C-133, an Act to amend the Housing Act, Mr. Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby) proposed an amendment. The object of his amendment was to eliminate the administrative charges obtained from CMHC; the motion of Mr. Woolliams would only reduce these charges. In making his proposal, Mr. Broadbent acknowledged that his amendment would have the identical effect of his own motion in amendment which had yet to be considered by the House. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel) expressed reservations about the procedural acceptability of the proposed amendment in light of this admission and heard comments from Members before rendering his decision.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Issue</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Can an amendment be moved that results in the duplication of another motion in amendment for which notice has already been given?</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Decision</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">No. The amendment cannot be moved; it is substantive in nature and requires notice.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Reasons given by the Acting Speaker</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">The fact that Mr. Broadbent gave notice for his own motion in amendment indicates that it is substantive in nature; consequently, an amendment seeking to obtain an objective identical to that of another motion in amendment cannot be accepted. To allow it would be tantamount to attaching one motion to another.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Sources cited</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Standing Order 75(5).</p> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 169, c. 202(1).</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">References</h2> <p class="MsoNormal">Debates, June 11, 1973, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2901_05/42">pp. 4643-7</a>.</p> </div>