Skip to content
Point of Order May 12, 1969

Recommittal; beyond scope of bill

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_08/572?r=0&amp;s=1">pp. 8602</a>, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2801_08/575?r=0&amp;s=1">8605</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. Caouette (Témiscamingue) proposed an amendment to refer the bill back to committee with instructions to add a clause deferring the enactment of a specific clause in the bill until it had been approved by the Canadian people by a referendum. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard) declared the amendment out of order. A point of order having been raised, the Acting Speaker heard the views of Members. The Speaker subsequently upheld the decision made by the Acting Speaker.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Issue</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Is the amendment imposing a condition on the passage of the bill acceptable?</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 Acting Speaker</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">The proposed amendment is not relevant to the motion for third reading. In addition, it proposes a referendum that would involve the expenditure of public funds, which can only be done by a Minister of the Crown.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">References</h2> <p class="MsoNormal">Debates, May 12, 1969, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2801_08/566">pp. 8596-605</a>.</p> </div>
Edit Metadata

AI Summary

A ruling on the procedural admissibility of a motion to recommit a bill, focusing on whether the instructions to the committee exceeded the bill's scope.

AI Analysis

Holding
"A motion to recommit a bill with instructions is out of order if those instructions seek to introduce principles or provisions that are outside the scope of the bill as established at second reading."
Outcome
Other
Tone
Neutral
Procedural Stage
Government Orders
Significance
Low High

Cited Authorities

Tags & Keywords