Ruling
May 4, 1970
Non-confidence
Hon. Lucien Lamoureux
Speaker of the House
Ruling Text
"... the only way in which the Standing Order can be operated so as to work and make sense is to have agreement between... representatives of the parties in the House." In this instance, there has been no agreement and a motion has been presented under the terms of the rules as a non-confidence motion. The only role assigned to the Speaker in the application of rules governing supply day proceedings concerns the determination of precedence when there is one motion sponsored by the Official Opposition and another by a second opposition party. While the Chair has some sympathy for the objection that the motion to be debated does not indicate an expression of non-confidence in the Government, it would be difficult to rule "that this is not properly a non-confidence motion and to treat it as an ordinary motion". The problem deserves to be examined more closely. "... perhaps the next time the Chair is presented with a motion which purports to be a non-confidence motion there will be an indication on the part of the Chair that it should clearly be a non-confidence motion rather than an expression of feeling or opinion in the form of a substantive motion or a private Member's resolution such as this one appears to be."
Edit Metadata
Holding
"A motion presented as a non-confidence motion on a supply day will be treated as such, even if its wording is ambiguous, but future motions may be required to more clearly express a lack of confidence."
AI Summary
The Speaker permitted a vaguely worded supply day motion to proceed as a non-confidence vote but warned that future motions must more clearly express non-confidence.
AI Analysis
- Outcome
- Denied
- Tone
- Conciliatory
- Procedural Stage
- Government Orders
- Significance
Low
High