Skip to content
Other May 12, 1969

Recommittal; expanded negative

Hon. Lucien Lamoureux

Hon. Lucien Lamoureux

Speaker of the House

Ruling Text

<div class="DecisionMain" role="main"> <p class="decision-chapter">Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Third Reading</p> <p class="d-DecisionDate"> <time>May 12, 1969</time> </p> <p class="e-Debates">Journals <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_2801_115_01/956?r=0&amp;s=1">p. 1024</a></p> <p class="e-Debates">Debates <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2801_08/565?r=0&amp;s=1">p. 8595</a></p> <div> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Background</h2> </div> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">During debate on the motion for third reading of Bill C-150, an Act to amend the Criminal Code ..., Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg  North Centre) moved that the bill be not now read a third time but be referred back to committee for amendment of one clause by deleting "in accordance with regulations made by the Governor in Council" and replacing this with "in accordance with any Jaw enacted by Parliament", thus retaining the procedure set out in the parent Act. Before making his decision, the Deputy Speaker allowed the Members to express their views on the matter.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Issue</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Can an amendment be moved that would have the effect of re-establishing the law as it was previously written?</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">The proposed amendment "is in the nature of an expanded negative". If it were passed, it would "strike at the essence of that proposal and would restore the law to the state it was [in] prior to the legislation now before us".</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Sources cited</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">May, 17th ed., pp. 550-1, para. (6).</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">References</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Debates, May 12, 1969, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2801_08/550">pp. 8580-9</a>.  </p> </div>
Edit Metadata

AI Summary

Analysis could not be completed as the provided text is a procedural heading, not a Speaker's Ruling.

AI Analysis

Holding
"No ruling was provided. The input 'Recommittal; expanded negative' appears to be a procedural topic, not a decision from the Chair."
Outcome
Other
Tone
-
Significance
Low High

Cited Authorities

Tags & Keywords