Ruling
September 13, 1971
Relevance; expanded negative
Hon. Lucien Lamoureux
Speaker of the House
Ruling Text
In many respects the proposed amendment seems to meet some of the requirements for a reasoned amendment. "The most important of those, of course, is that the principle of relevance should govern every such motion." It is difficult to propose an acceptable reasoned amendment because it must be within the scope of the bill in order to be relevant and, at the same time, it must not be an expanded negative. In this case, the amendment will be accepted because it seems to be borderline. The problem of reasoned amendments is a difficult one; Members are resorting to this kind of amendment more and more, but it is difficult for the Chair to determine which should be accepted or refused. The Chair is being lenient in this case but the House should be aware that this does not establish a precedent for all possible reasoned amendments.
Edit Metadata
Holding
"The proposed reasoned amendment is accepted because it is borderline, but this lenient decision does not set a precedent for future cases."
AI Summary
The Speaker accepts a borderline reasoned amendment, cautioning that the leniency shown does not set a future precedent.
AI Analysis
- Outcome
- Other
- Tone
- Educational
- Procedural Stage
- Government Orders
- Significance
Low
High