The Legislative Process / Stages
Report stage: power of the Speaker to select amendments; amendments not presented in committee
Debates, p. 6053
Context
Hedy Fry (Vancouver Centre), in a written submission to the Speaker, described the efforts she had made to propose an amendment to Bill C-314, An Act respecting the awareness of screening among women with dense breast tissue, during its study by the Standing Committee on Health. Ms. Fry explained that, since her amendment was based on witnesses’ testimony and since the Committee proceeded with the clause-by-clause study of the Bill immediately after hearing from the witnesses, she had not been able to avail herself of the drafting services of the parliamentary counsel. In addition, the Chair of the Committee raised concerns over the amendment’s admissibility and, lacking time to provide a definitive ruling, advised Ms. Fry to submit her amendment at report stage instead.
Resolution
On March 12, 2012, the Speaker delivered his ruling on the selection of the motion in amendment at report stage. He ruled that, due to the exceptional circumstances in committee and given that the amendment was admissible, he would select it for debate.
Decision of the Chair
The Speaker: There is one motion in amendment standing on the Notice Paper for the report stage of Bill C-314, standing in the name of the hon. Member for Vancouver Centre. At first glance, it appears that this motion could have been presented in Committee.
However, in submitting her motion for consideration at report stage, the Member for Vancouver Centre provided the Chair with a written explanation in which she outlined her efforts to propose a similar amendment during the clause-by-clause study of the Bill, and where she explained that her amendment was based on the testimony of witnesses who had appeared earlier in the meeting. As the Committee desired to proceed with the clause-by-clause study of the Bill immediately after hearing from the Bill’s sponsor and other witnesses, she did not have time to avail herself of the drafting services of the parliamentary counsel assigned to the Bill.
Upon presentation of her amendment, the Member was cautioned by the Chair of the Committee that there was some concern over certain legal terminology her amendment contained that might have had the undesired effect of infringing on the financial initiative of the Crown. In this case, there was not sufficient time for the Chair of the Committee to carry out the necessary consultations and provide a definitive ruling on admissibility. As a potential remedy to this unusual situation, the Chair of the Committee suggested to the Member that she might wish to submit her amendment at the report stage instead.
Having received the Committee’s consent to withdraw the amendment, the Member for Vancouver Centre explained that she was able to consult with parliamentary counsel and the legislative clerk assigned to the Bill. She was thus able to prepare a motion for the report stage which she feels, and I agree, does not appear to infringe on the financial initiative of the Crown. Therefore, due to the exceptional circumstances outlined above, the Chair has selected for debate the motion submitted by the Member for Vancouver Centre.
I shall now propose Motion No. 1 to the House.