Recommittal; specific clause to be studied

<div class="DecisionMain" role="main"> <p class="decision-chapter">Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Third Reading</p> <p class="d-DecisionDate"> <time>December 20, 1966</time> </p> <p class="e-Debates">Journals <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.HOC_2701_113_01/1082?r=0&amp;s=1">pp. 1166-7</a></p> <p class="e-Debates">Debates <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2701_11/319?r=0&amp;s=1">p. 11427</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-251, an Act to amend the Old Age Security Act, Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre) proposed that the bill be not now read a third time, but be referred back to the Committee of the Whole for reconsideration of the income test, provided in a specific clause. After hearing comments from Members, the Deputy Speaker made his decision.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Issue</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Is an amendment to refer a bill back to Committee of the Whole for reconsideration of a particular clause acceptable at third reading?</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Decision</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Yes. The amendment is acceptable.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Reasons given by the Deputy Speaker</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">The purpose of the amendment is to recommit the bill to Committee of the Whole for reconsideration of a specific clause. This is not out of order.</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">Sources cited</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 287, c. 415(2).</p> <h2 class="f-ContextResoEdNotePostscriptTitle">References</h2> <p class="g-contextResoEdNotePostscript">Debates, December 20, 1966, <a href="https://parl.canadiana.ca/view/oop.debates_HOC2701_11/298">pp. 11406-9</a>.</p> </div>