Point of Order
June 2, 1970
Relevance; beyond scope of bill
Hon. Lucien Lamoureux
Speaker of the House
Ruling Text
<div class="DecisionMain" role="main">
<p class="decision-chapter">Amendments to the Content of Bills / Report Stage</p>
<p class="d-DecisionDate">
<time>June 2, 1970</time>
</p>
<p class="e-Debates">Journals <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_2802_116_01/848">pp. 910-1</a></p>
<p class="e-Debates">Debates <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2802_07/995?r=0&s=3">pp. 7613-4</a></p>
<div>
<h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Background</h2>
</div>
<p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">During report stage consideration of Bill C-144, an Act to provide for the management of the water resources of Canada ..., the Deputy Speaker expressed some reservations about the motion in amendment in the name of Mr. Harding (Kootenay West) which would give the Minister wide authority over the physical construction or extension of any plant or works when these actions might result in the deposit of prohibited waste in waters. The Chair stressed the fact that this motion presented a related and comprehensive proposal that appeared to be independent of any provision of the bill, and invited Members' comments before ruling.</p>
<h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Issue</h2>
<p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Is a motion in amendment in order if it is not related to any particular clause of the bill?</p>
<h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Decision</h2>
<p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">No. The motion in amendment is out of order.</p>
<h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Reasons given by the Deputy Speaker</h2>
<p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">A motion in amendment is out of order if it is irrelevant to the subject-matter or beyond the scope of the bill. The very completeness of the proposal constitutes the procedural weakness. The Member has presented not a motion to amend but a substantive legislative proposal that seems to be independent and beyond the scope of the bill.</p>
<h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Sources cited</h2>
<p class="MsoNormal">Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 285, c. 406. May, 17th ed., p. 549.</p>
</div>
Edit Metadata
Holding
"Debate and amendments must be relevant to and contained within the scope of the bill as agreed to at second reading."
AI Summary
A ruling was issued on a point of order concerning whether debate or an amendment was irrelevant by going beyond the scope of a bill.
AI Analysis
- Outcome
- Other
- Tone
- Neutral
- Procedural Stage
- Government Orders
- Significance
Low
High