Rules of Debate

Introduction

One of the fundamental principles of parliamentary procedure is that debate and other proceedings in the House of Commons be conducted in terms of a free and civil discourse. Accordingly, the House has adopted rules of order and decorum governing the conduct of Members towards each other and towards the institution as a whole. Members are expected to show respect for one another and for viewpoints differing from their own; offensive or rude behaviour or language is not tolerated; and opinions are to be expressed with civility.

The Speaker is charged with maintaining order in the Chamber by ensuring that the House’s rules and practices are respected. It is the duty of the Speaker to safeguard the orderly conduct of debate by curbing disorder when it arises either on the floor of the Chamber or in the galleries, and by ruling on points of order raised by Members. The Speaker’s disciplinary powers are intended to ensure that debate remains focused and that order and decorum are maintained.

The rules of debate cover proper attire, the citing of documents and their tabling, the application of the sub judice convention, and any critical remarks directed towards both Houses, Members and Senators, representatives of the Crown, judges and courts.

Another fundamental principle of parliamentary procedure is that debate must lead to a decision within a reasonable period of time. Few parliamentarians contest the idea that, at some point, debate must end. While House business is often concluded without recourse to special procedures intended to limit or end debate, certain rules exist to curtail debate. When asked to determine the acceptability of a motion to limit debate, the Speaker does not judge the importance of the issue in question or whether a reasonable time has been allowed for debate but addresses strictly the acceptability of the procedure followed.

During his tenure, Speaker Scheer made a number of decisions to help guide the flow of debate in the House. With respect to order and decorum in the House and in the galleries, he made several rulings, notably one on December 6, 2011, in response to a point of order in which a disturbance in the galleries was alleged to have been sponsored and supported by a Member of Parliament.

The Speaker also addressed with several points of order raised on the process of debate. For example, on May 12, 2014, Speaker Scheer ruled on a point of order regarding a grouping of motions in amendment at report stage which prevented Members from voting in accordance with their views. On June 11, 2014, Speaker Scheer assessed the admissibility of a motion that the Government House Leader claimed offended the rule of anticipation. He also ruled on measures intended to limit debate. For example, on June 18, 2012, the Speaker ruled on a point of order regarding a time allocation motion that a Member argued was in violation of the Standing Order that governed such motions.

At times, the Acting Speakers were tasked with responding to points of order on the rule of relevance. The requirement that speeches remain relevant to the question protects the right of the House to reach decisions without undue obstruction and to exclude from debate any discussion not conducive to that end. The enforcement of the rule of relevance must also respect the freedom of debate enjoyed by all Members. The Chair had to use its discretion to ensure that rules were applied without curtailing debate or allowing the loss of debating time, which may have prevented other Members from participating.

This chapter contains decisions that touch on various rules of debate and reflect Speaker Scheer’s respect for the traditions and practices of the House of Commons. As he worked in an at times emotionally intense environment, his decisions demonstrate his commitment to maintaining order and decorum in the House and to enforcing the rules of debate while respecting the rights and privileges of Members.