Questions Related to Content of Bills / Omnibus

Omnibus - Accepted

Debates pp. 26537-8

Background

On June 16, when debate resumed on the motion for second reading of Bill C-155, An Act to facilitate the transportation, shipping and handling of western grain and to amend certain Acts in consequence thereof, Mr. Deans (Hamilton Mountain) rose on a point of order to argue that the bill was a complicated question because it contained three distinct principles which ought to be dealt with separately. After hearing Members' comments, the Acting Speaker (Mr. Corbin) reserved his decision. The Speaker ruled a few days later.

Issue

Should a bill which contains separate legislative proposals be considered a complicated question which should be divided?

Decision

No. The bill is acceptable in its present form.

Reasons given by the Speaker

The problem of a complicated question refers to motions not bills; there is no procedural reason to divide the bill. Although some occupants of the Chair have expressed concern about the practice of incorporating several distinct principles in a single bill, they have consistently found that such bills are procedurally in order and properly before the House.

Sources cited

Journals, January 23, 1969, pp. 616-8; January 26, 1971, pp. 285-6; May 6, 1971, pp. 531-2; May 11, 1977, pp. 778-9.

Debates, March 2, 1982, p. 15532.

May, 19th ed., p. 380.

References

Debates, June 16, 1983, pp. 26415-9.