Precedence and Sequence of Business / Time Allocation Motion

Duration of proceedings

Debates pp. 28357-8

Background

During the two hours set aside for debate on the motion to allocate time for consideration of Bill C-155, An Act to facilitate the transportation, shipping and handling of western grain and to amend certain Acts in consequence thereof, Mr. Mazankowski (Vegreville) moved, "That the Orders of the Day be now read" and a recorded division was requested. The division bells were still ringing when the two hours set aside for consideration of the motion for time allocation expired, at 5:12 p.m., the Speaker intervened and ordered the bells stopped. Before putting the question on the motion, the Speaker heard Members' comments, including those of Mr. Nielsen (Yukon), who argued that the vote should be taken at 6:00 p.m., once the House had dealt with Mr. Mazankowski's dilatory motion, and then the Chair ruled.

Issue

If a dilatory motion is made during consideration of a time allocation motion, and the division bells are rung for that motion, should they be stopped when the two hours set aside for consideration of the motion to allocate time have elapsed?

Decision

Yes. No later than two hours after proceedings have commenced on a motion to allocate time, every question necessary to dispose of that motion must be put, including any dilatory motions.

Reasons given by the Speaker

According to the Standing Orders, not more than two hours after the commencement of proceedings on a motion to allocate time, the Speaker shall put every question necessary to dispose of the said motion. It would appear that the limit on the two hours of debate hangs on the interpretation given to the word "proceedings". As debate is the principal part of proceedings, it follows that there are other parts, namely all other actions which may he taken by Members, such as voting, presenting amendments, presenting motions, etc. Since the Chair is bound to take all votes necessary to dispose of the motion to allocate time "two hours after the commencement of the proceedings", therefore the House must first dispose of the motion presented by the Member for Vegreville (Mr. Mazankowski).

Sources cited

Standing Order 82.

Beauchesne, 5th ed., p. 85, c. 251.

May, 19th ed., p. 87.

References

Debates, October 26, 1983, pp. 28350-7.