Private Members’ Business / Miscellaneous

November 5, 1998

Debates, p. 9923

On Wednesday, November 4, 1998, the 13th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs was concurred in by unanimous consent.^[1]

The report, which had been presented to the House on November 26, 1997, contained eight recommendations relating to Private Members’ Business.^[2] Four of the recommendations explicitly called for amendments to the Standing Orders. Recommendation No. 1 changed the maximum number of votable items in the order of precedence from five bills and five motions to a total of 10 items, whether bills or motions. The second recommendation established an alternative procedure for placing a private member’s bill or motion in the order of precedence. Instead of the existing requirement that the member’s name be selected in a random draw, the member’s bill or motion could be added to the order of precedence if it had obtained the support of at least 100 members from at least two of the recognized parties in the House. The fourth recommendation set a deadline for a committee on a private member’s bill to report to the House. Finally, recommendation No. 6 provided a procedure for private members’ bills to be reinstated after a prorogation at the same stage they had reached in the legislative process prior to prorogation.

The other four recommendations did not explicitly require that changes be made to the Standing Orders. Recommendation No. 3 proposed that, for the purposes of the draw and the selection of votable items, a private member’s bill or motion would no longer be counted among the items in the order of precedence once debate had concluded and a recorded division had been demanded and deferred, provided that the item was one which would disappear from the order of precedence after the vote. Recommendation No. 5 changed the procedure for holding a recorded division on an item of Private Members’ Business. Voting would continue to be conducted row by row, but starting with the back row on each side of the House instead of the front row. Recommendations Nos. 7 and 8 both dealt with the drafting of private members’ bills: the seventh recommendation called for the appointment of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel to be responsible for legislative drafting for private members; the eighth recommendation proposed that priority for drafting bills be accorded to those members who had not previously had a bill drafted during that session.

On November 5, immediately after the Weekly Statement, Gurmant Grewal (Surrey Central) rose on a point of order to ask the Speaker to have the Clerk draft the amendments to the Standing Orders called for by recommendations Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 6 and consult with private members, instead of the party leadership, on the draft amendments.^[3] He also argued that because recommendations Nos. 3, 5, 7 and 8 did not require amendments to the Standing Orders, they should be implemented immediately. Don Boudria (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons) objected that Mr. Grewal was seeking to have the Speaker change the Standing Orders unilaterally now that he had realized that concurrence in the report did not accomplish what he had initially thought it did. While agreeing that two of the recommendations dealt with matters either under the purview of the Speaker or concerning the administration of the House, and could thus be implemented immediately, he maintained that draft amendments to the Standing Orders would have to be submitted to the House for adoption before the other six recommendations could come into effect. After hearing from other members, the Speaker promised to return with a decision before the House adjourned that day.

When he returned to the House later that day, the Speaker ruled that recommendations No. 5 and No. 8 would come into effect immediately because they dealt with, respectively, a matter of practice and an administrative matter, while recommendation No. 7 lay within the purview of the Board of Internal Economy and would have to be considered by that body. The Speaker stated further that since recommendations Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 entailed substantive amendments to the Standing Orders and required technical interpretations, he had asked the Clerk to draft proposed amendments and to submit them to the House leaders. Until the House had pronounced itself on the specific texts required to implement those recommendations, the Chair would be guided by the existing Standing Orders.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: After Question Period this afternoon the honourable member for Surrey Central raised a point of order concerning the events of yesterday evening when, by unanimous consent, a motion for concurrence in the 13th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs was presented and adopted in the House.

As honourable members know, the report comprises eight recommendations on the way the House handles Private Members’ Business.

I thank the honourable member for Surrey Central, the honourable government House leader, the honourable whip of the New Democratic Party and the member for Elk Island for their contributions. I am now prepared to explain how the Chair will proceed on this matter.

Recommendation No. 5 concerning how recorded divisions on Private Members’ Business are taken will be implemented immediately since it is a matter of practice.

Recommendation 8 on the priority for drafting private members’ bills will be implemented immediately, because this is an administrative matter.

Recommendation No. 7 lies within the purview of the Board of Internal Economy. That will be taken up there.

With regard to the other recommendations, Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6, these in the opinion of the Chair call for substantive amendments to the Standing Orders and require various technical interpretations. I have therefore asked the Clerk to draft proposed amendments to the Standing Orders which would implement recommendations Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 and to submit that draft to the House leaders.

As soon as the House has pronounced itself on the specific text of new Standing Orders to give effect to the recommendations it adopted last night, the Chair will be governed accordingly. In the meantime, however, because the Chair has no mandate to unilaterally change the text of the Standing Orders, the Chair will continue to be guided by the existent Standing Orders.

In drafting amendments to the Standing Orders, it was realized that recommendation No. 3 did not necessitate a change in the written rules, but could in fact be implemented through a simple change in the way an order for the taking of a deferred recorded division on a private members’ bill or motion was indicated on the Order Paper. On November 30, 1998, during Routine Proceedings, the government House leader moved a motion to make specific amendments to the Standing Orders to implement the key provisions of recommendations Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 6.^[4] The motion was adopted without debate.

P1006-e

36-1

1998-11-05