Chapter XV — Private Bills

Notes on Standing Order 129 to 147:

[1]

There are two classes of bills, namely public and private. A bill affecting private interests may be introduced as a public bill, if it touches upon a matter of public policy. Canadian authorities refer to this kind of public bill which affects private or third party rights as a hybrid bill (Bourinot, 4^th ed., pp. 573-5; Beauchesne, 4^th ed., pp. 274-5) and indicate the passage of such a bill would follow private bill procedure where applicable. Speaker Lamoureux, however, has indicated that in his opinion hybrid bills do not, in fact, exist in Canadian parliamentary practice (Journals, February 22, 1971, pp. 351-2).

[2]

Bourinot, 4^th ed., pp. 558-9. For an example of a committee acting in this quasi-judicial function, see Issue No. 1 of the Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Legislative Committee on Bill S-10, An Act respecting the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, May 20 and May 30, 1990.

[3]

Various Speakers have been called upon to rule whether particular bills met the criteria of public or private legislation. See for example, Speakers’ rulings in Journals, March 12, 1875, p. 213; October 23, 1975, pp. 795-6; and in Debates, February 2, 1911, cols. 2883-4; April 15, 1985, pp. 3699-700; November 19, 1996, pp. 6409-11.

[4]

In the First Session of the Twelfth Parliament (1911-12) for example, 38 private bills were introduced in the Senate and 66 in the House; in the Second Session of the Twenty-Second Parliament (1955), 28 private bills were introduced in the Senate and none in the House; and in the First Session of the Twenty-Ninth Parliament (1973-74), two private bills were introduced in the Senate and none in the House. It should be noted also that the passage of the Dissolution and Annulment of Marriages Act in August 1963 relieved the House of a great deal of private legislation. The passage of Bill S-14, An Act respecting the laws prohibiting marriage between related persons in December 1990 also decreased the number of private bills brought forward.

[5]

The original Rules pertaining to private bills (Nos. 49 to 74), adopted by the House in December 1867, were modified in 1876, 1883, 1887, 1893, 1903, 1906, 1927, 1934 and 1955. For 35 years after that (1955 to 1990), amendments to the text were of a technical nature. In March 1990, however, the Standing Orders were revised with respect to the publication of the rules in the Canada Gazette. In June 1994, the House removed the requirement for petitions for private bills to be filed within the first six weeks of a session and for private bills to be presented within two weeks of a favourable report on the petition. The Standing Orders pertaining to the proceedings for the passage of public bills were greatly modified in 1968, 1982, 1985, 1991 and 1994 and these changes, as well as recent modifications to the manner of dealing with items under Private Members’ Business, have affected the way that private bills proceed through the House. As well, pursuant to present Standing Order 108(3)(a), the consideration of business relating to private bills now falls under the mandate of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

[6]

Bourinot, 4^th ed., p. 559.

[7]

For an example of the original publication in a new session and, later, notice of the publication of this Standing Order, see Canada Gazette, Part 1, dated January 31, 2004, pp. 171-2; February 7, 2004, p. 219.

[8]

Bourinot, 4^th ed., p. 581. It is contrary to the law of Parliament for Members to engage in the promotion of private bills in Parliament for pecuniary reward; nor is any officer of the House allowed to transact private business before the House for profit (Bourinot, 4^th ed., pp. 581-2).

[9]

See for example, Bill C-259, An Act to extend the term of a patent relating to a certain food additive (Journals, June 17, 1987, p. 1184) and Bill S-25, An Act respecting Hudson’s Bay Company (Journals, June 17, 1970, p. 1026).

[10]

Prior to June 1994, petitions for private bills were to be filed within the first six weeks of each session, and private bills originating in the Commons were to be presented within two weeks after the petition had been reported upon favourably. Through concurrence in the Twenty-Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs on June 10, 1994 (Journals, p. 563), the relevant Standing Order (S.O.132) was deleted, and these time limits were thus no longer imposed.

[11]

It has happened that the Clerk of Petitions and the Examiner have reported the same day. See for example, Journals, April 1, 2004, p. 258; May 13, 2005, p. 752. For an example of a report by the Examiner of Petitions for Private Bills indicating insufficiency of notice, see Journals, February 7, 2000, p. 849.

[12]

For an example of this committee studying “insufficiency of notice” and making a subsequent report, see the proceedings with respect to Bill S-14, An Act to amend the Act of incorporation of the Board of Elders of the Canadian District of the Moravian Church in America in the Second Session of the Thirty-Sixth Parliament and, more specifically, the Eighteenth Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, tabled on March 1, 2000 (Journals, p. 1052) and concurred in on March 15, 2000 (Journals, p. 1397).

[13]

By agreeing to the second reading of a private bill, the House affirms the principle of the bill conditionally, subject to proof of the allegations of fact before the committee. The expediency of the measure is usually left for the consideration of a committee (Beauchesne, 6^th ed., p. 291).

[14]

The Law Clerk may be called upon to advise the committee of any provisions in a private bill at variance with general laws and of any unusual provisions deserving special attention. Until June 1994, this responsibility formed part of a specific Standing Order (Standing Order 156) which was deleted through adoption of the Twenty-Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs (Journals, June 10, 1994, p. 563).

[15]

See Speaker’s ruling in Journals, February 26, 1976, p. 1070.

[16]

Bourinot, 4^th ed., p. 622. Examples can be found in the Journals of private bills originating in the Senate for which petitions were not tabled in the House.

[17]

From the First Session of the Twenty-First Parliament (1949) to June 2005 of the First Session of the Thirty-Eighth Parliament inclusive, only 20 of the 545 private bills considered in Parliament were introduced in the House.

[18]

For procedures relative to passage of a private bill originating in the Senate, see the entry in the Index to the Journals of the House for Bill S-11, British Columbia Telephone Company Act, in the First Session of the Thirtieth Parliament (1974-76). For procedures relative to passage of a private bill originating in the House of Commons, see the entry in the Index to the Journals for Bill C-1001, Bell Canada Act, in the Third Session of the Thirtieth Parliament (1977-78). For procedures relative to committee proceedings when a petition against a private bill has been received by the legislative committee, see text of committee evidence on Bill S-10, An Act respecting the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, in the Second Session of the Thirty-Fourth Parliament (1989-91).