The Legislative Process / Form of Bills

Omnibus bills: request under Standing Order 69.1

November 20, 2017

Debates, p. 15322

On November 20, 2017, Matthew Dubé (Beloeil—Chambly) rose on a point of order concerning Bill C-59, an act respecting national security matters, on which the House was considering a motion to refer the bill forthwith to committee before second reading.^[1] Mr. Dubé contended that the various parts of the bill should be put to separate votes, pursuant to Standing Order 69.1, despite the fact that the standing order specifically mentioned only motions for second reading and reference to a committee and motions for third reading and passage of a bill. The member sought to prevent the government from circumventing Standing Order 69.1 by referring the bill forthwith to committee.

Resolution

The Speaker delivered his ruling the same day. He explained that the wording of Standing Order 69.1 was clear and did not apply to a motion to refer a bill forthwith to committee. However, the standing order could apply to a bill at third reading.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: I will ask the member to be patient for a moment while I provide a quick ruling on a point of order raised a bit earlier, and then there will be three minutes remaining in questions and comments. This will not take long.

I thank the hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly for raising a point of order with regard to the application of Standing Order 69.1, a motion under Standing Order 73. As hon. members know, Standing Order 69.1 is new, but its wording is clear. As is often the case, the powers of the Speaker are limited in the Standing Orders and that is case with Standing Order 69.1.

I will read the section that I believe pertains in this case. The Standing Order says, “the Speaker shall have the power to divide the questions, for the purposes of voting, on the motion for second reading and reference to a committee and the motion for third reading and passage of the bill.”

The motion currently before the House, the one requested in the point of order, is not in fact a motion for second reading. Nor is it a motion of course at third reading to adopt the motion. It is instead a motion to refer the bill to committee forthwith.

As the Speaker, I am bound to apply the Standing Order as it is written, and Standing Order 69.1 is not written in a manner that allows me, as the Speaker, to apply it in a motion which is to refer the bill to committee before second reading. Therefore, I cannot, in my view, invoke Standing Order 69.1 in this case.

However, should the motion in fact be adopted to send the bill to committee before second reading and should the bill be concurred in at report stage and at second reading, I could certainly, as the Speaker, apply Standing Order 69.1 at third reading of the bill. At that time, one would anticipate that after it came back from committee, the bounds of the bill and its principles would be more clearly established.

As I mentioned a few days ago, in my previous ruling on a motion concerning Standing Order 69.1, at such time I would encourage members to bring forth their arguments about whether the bill should be divided for the purposes of voting as early as possible.

I thank hon. members for their attention.