Rule of Debate / Process of Debate

Report stage: admissibility of motions in amendment

December 7, 2018

Debates, p. 24576

On December 7, 2018, Matthew Dubé (Beloeil—Chambly) rose on a point of order regarding the admissibility of Motion No. 17 at report stage of Bill C-83, an act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another act. Mr Dubé called attention to inconsistencies in the English and French versions of the motion as published on the Order Paper. He averred that provisions missing in the French translation impeded bilingual members of Parliament in their consideration of both English and French versions of the motion. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) indicated that the government planned to introduce a subamendment to address the concerns of the House. The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Carol Hughes) advised the House that she would review the point of order and come back to the House shortly. In the interim, the House would proceed to the consideration of Motions Nos. 1 to 27.^[1]

Tom Lukiwski (Moose Jaw—Lake Centre—Lanigan) and Diane Finley (Haldimand—Norfolk) rose on points of order, arguing that the debate could not proceed until the matter regarding Motion No. 17 was resolved. The Assistant Deputy Speaker stated that in advance of a ruling the House would consider all motions in amendment except Motion No. 17, and then by unanimous consent the House agreed to suspend the sitting until a ruling could be delivered, suspending until 11:00 a.m., the time scheduled for Statements by Members.^[2]

Resolution

The Assistant Deputy Speaker delivered her ruling later that day. She affirmed that the French translation of the amendment submitted by Pam Damoff (Oakville North—Burlington) and published in the Order Paper was incomplete. While members have the right to present motions and amendments in either official language, the Assistant Deputy Speaker noted that it is also important for all members to be able to work in the language of their choice. The Chair directed that the French version of Motion No. 17 be corrected and republished in the Notice Paper before the next sitting of the House.

Decision of the Chair

The Assistant Deputy Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order concerning the admissibility of Motion No. 17 to amend Bill C-83, an act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another act.

I would like to thank the hon. member for Beloeil—Chambly for raising this matter and all of the other members who made interventions.

The question before us is whether the House can proceed to the consideration of a motion when the French and English versions published on the Order Paper are not the same.

In this case, the English version of the motion contains some provisions that are not included in the French version.

The sponsor of the motion, the hon. member for Oakville North—Burlington, submitted the text of her motion in English. Unfortunately, the French translation that was provided along with the royal recommendation for this motion was incomplete. It is this incomplete French version of the motion that appears in the Notice Paper.

Although members have the right to present motions and amendments in either official language, the Chair understands that it is important for all members to be able to understand the wording of motions and amendments in the language of their choice.

House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states, at page 565:

If the Chair finds the form of the motion to be irregular, he or she has the authority to modify it in order to ensure that it conforms to the usage of the House.

I am therefore directing that the French version of Motion No. 17 be corrected and republished in the Notice Paper before the next sitting of the House.

I thank all hon. members for their attention.