The Legislative Process / Miscellaneous

December 9, 1992

Debates, p. 14922

On December 9, 1992, Mr. Nelson Riis (Kamloops) rose on a point of order asking the Speaker to refuse the motion for time allocation at report stage and third reading of Bill C-91 respecting the Patent Act. Mr. Riis argued that while the motion might be procedurally correct, the Speaker had “the authority and the responsibility to prohibit a motion of time allocation, if […] it is being used abusively.” He requested that the motion be refused until the House had further opportunity to debate the Bill or until the motion itself was amended to allow for additional debate. After hearing representations from Mr. Riis and other Members,^[1] the Speaker rendered his decision which is reproduced in its entirety below.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: I know that the House would want me to respond to the honourable Member for Kamloops and the honourable Member for Cape Breton—East Richmond (Mr. David Dingwall) and the honourable member for Annapolis Valley—Hants (Mr. Pat Nowlan) who have raised an issue here which is, to put it simply, that it is inappropriate for the government to move now for time allocation. Some comments that I have made in the past have been quoted and I have listened very carefully to what I once said.

The difficulty it seems to me that those proponents of the motion are in is that, as the [Government House Leader the Hon. Harvie Andre] points out, there have been changes in the rules and the government has followed exactly the course it must follow under the present rules which govern us.

There has been some suggestion that when the present rules were [passed] it was without the full consent of all the Members in the House and that may well have been the case. The Speaker’s area of manoeuvre in acting on discretion is always somewhat circumscribed and in this case it clearly is very much constrained.

I have to advise the House that in my view the government has followed exactly what the rules of the House are. As a consequence, while I have listened with great interest and some sympathy to the points made by Members of the opposition, nonetheless I must rule that the matter can go forward.

At the conclusion of his ruling, the Speaker put the question on the time allocation motion and it was agreed to following a recorded division.

F0505-e

34-3

1992-12-09