Routine Proceedings / Motions

Committee reports; concurrence moved in the absence of the mover

Debates pp. 28078-9

Background

Motions having been called, Mr. McGrath (St John's East) moved, on behalf of Mr. Baker (Nepean—Carleton), concurrence in the sixth report of the Special Committee on Standing Orders and Procedure, presented to the House on September 30, 1983. The Speaker then requested the unanimous consent of the House, which was refused. Mr. Nielsen rose on a point of order to allege that unanimous consent was not required, because Mr. McGrath had informed the Chair that Mr. Baker, knowing he could not be in the House, had specifically asked Mr. McGrath to move the motion on his behalf. After hearing Members' comments, the Speaker ruled.

Issue

Can a motion for concurrence in a committee report be moved in the absence of the mover?

Decision

No. Unanimous consent of the House is required.

Reasons given by the Speaker

The practice of the House is that if someone else but the one who has given notice of such a motion moves a motion, he must obtain the unanimous consent of the House. Furthermore, the authorities state that a merely formal motion for concurrence in reports may be moved by any Member but that a motion that may involve objection or debate must be moved by the Member in whose name it appears on the Order Paper.

Sources cited

Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 163, c. 188(4); 5th ed., p. 145, c. 402.

Bourinot, 4th ed., p. 299.

References

Debates, October 17, 1983, pp. 28076-9.