Reference of subject-matter to non-existent body

<div class="DecisionMain" role="main"> <p class="decision-chapter">Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Second Reading</p> <p class="d-DecisionDate"> <time>January 21, 1971</time> </p> <p class="e-Debates">Journals <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_2803_117_01/251?r=0&amp;s=1">pp. 273-4</a></p> <p class="e-Debates">Debates <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2803_03/378?r=0&amp;s=1">pp. 2622-3</a></p> <div> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Background</h2> </div> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">On January 20, during debate on the motion for second reading of Bill C-193, an Act to amend the Northern Canada Power Commission Act, Mr. Nielsen (Yukon) proposed an amendment that the bill be not now read a second time, but that the subject-matter of the bill be referred to a task force appointed under the Inquiries Act. The Deputy Speaker noted that this amendment was drafted in the same terms as the one moved by Mr. Woolliams (Calgary North) on January 13. [On that occasion the Chair expressed reservations about the procedural acceptability of the amendment, which was accepted only by the unanimous consent of the House.] The Deputy Speaker expressed the same reservations in this case and heard comments on the acceptability of the amendment after the House refused unanimous consent to accept it. He ruled the following day.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Issue</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Is an amendment acceptable if it proposes to refer the subject-matter of a bill to a non-existent body?</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Decision</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">No. The amendment is out of order.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Reasons given by the Deputy Speaker</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">"... there are precedents and authorities which, in proper circumstances, would permit the Chair to accept a ...    motion [referring the subject-matter of a bill] to an existing entity constituted or empowered to accept [this] kind of undertaking or study ... " There is, however, a well-established form of amendment on second reading which can refer the subject-matter of a bill to a standing committee. "This procedure must be preserved ... because the law and practice of Canada and this House have recognized effective methods of dealing with legislation." By referring legislation to an outside body a new aspect is being added to the legislative machinery. In so doing, the amendment fails to meet the requirement of a reasoned amendment. The proposed amendment is a substantive proposition and not acceptable as an amendment.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Sources cited</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 277, c. 382; p. 278, c. 386(1), (2).</p> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Journals, January 13, 1971, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_2803_117_01/237">p. 257</a>.</p> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Debates, January 13, 1971, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2803_03/134">pp. 2378-81</a>.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">References</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Journals, January 20, 1971, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_2803_117_01/250">p. 271</a>.</p> <p class="MsoNormal">Debates, January 20, 1971, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2803_03/365">pp. 2609-11</a>.</p> </div>