Skip to content
Ruling March 24, 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>March 24, 1969</time> </p> <p class="e-Debates">Journals <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_2801_115_01/774?r=0&amp;s=1">p. 829</a></p> <p class="e-Debates">Debates <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2801_07/175?r=0&amp;s=1">p. 7055</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-173, an Act respecting the organization of the Government of Canada and matters relating or incidental thereto, Mr. Gilbert (Broadview) proposed that the bill be not now read a third time, but be referred back to Committee of the Whole to be amended to provide for the creation of a Department of Housing and Urban Affairs. Having doubts about the acceptability of the amendment, the Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard) invited comments from Members before ruling.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Issue</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Is an amendment recommending that a committee add a specific proposition acceptable at third reading?</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Decision</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">In this case, 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 exceeds the scope of the bill. Amendments moved at third reading may not include matters not contained in the bill.           ·</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Sources cited</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 288, c. 418.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">References</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Debates, March 24, 1969, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2801_07/174">pp. 7054-5</a>. </p> </div>
Edit Metadata

AI Summary

A ruling confirming that a motion to recommit a bill is out of order if its instructions propose amendments beyond the bill's original scope.

AI Analysis

Holding
"A motion to recommit a bill with instructions is out of order if the instructions seek to introduce amendments that are beyond the scope of the bill as agreed to at second reading."
Outcome
Sustained
Tone
Educational
Procedural Stage
Consideration of a Bill
Significance
Low High

Cited Authorities

Tags & Keywords