Precedence and Sequence of Business / Private Members’ Business

April 25 and May 9, 1986

Debates pp. 12673, 13146-7

On April 24, 1986, the House took up consideration of Private Member's Business for the first time since the adoption of provisional Standing Orders which changed the way in which Private Members' Business would be conducted.

Mr. Gauthier (Ottawa—Vanier) rose on a point of order to ask that the Speaker outline what procedure would be followed in instances where a Member whose item of Private Members' Business is scheduled to be dealt with is unable to be present that day. Other Members spoke to the matter, raising other concerns related to the conduct of Private Members’ Business. Mr. Ouellet (Papineau) asked what would happen to items of Private Members' Business which had been scheduled to be dealt with opposition days. The Deputy Speaker reserved his ruling on the matter. The following day, April 25, the House was scheduled to deal with the item of Private Members’ Business standing in the name of Mr. Isabelle (Hull—Aylmer). Mr. lsabelle was not, however, able to be present. Mr. Lewis (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council) rose to add further comments to the discussion which had begun the day before. He asked first what would happen to an item of Private Members' Business and the Order of Precedence in the event of the absence of the sponsoring Member, and secondly, under those same circumstances, what would be done with the time allotted to Private Members' Business. Following the comments of other Members, the Deputy Speaker gave an interim ruling without prejudice to future rulings. Again on May 9, 1986, the Member whose item of Private Members' Business was scheduled to be dealt with was unable to be in the house. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Paproski) offered an interim ruling on the situation in accordance with the Chair's previous ruling, and also outlined the procedure to be followed by the House the following Monday, which had been designated an allotted day.

Issue

(1)          When a Member is unable to be present in the House on the day which has been set aside for dealing with his or her item of Private Members' Business, what effect is there on the Order of Precedence in respect to that Member's item and subsequent items?

(2)          When the House is unable to take up an item of Private Members' Business because of the absence of the sponsoring Member, what proceeding should then be before the House?

(3)          On an allotted day or other day when Private Members' Business is suspended because of some other proceeding of the House, what effect is there on the Order of Precedence?

Decision

(1)          The scheduled item of Private Members' Business is dropped to the bottom of the Order of Precedence, leaving subsequent items unaffected.

(2)          If the 24 hours' notice required by Standing Order 39(1) has been provided, Standing Order 39(2), which provides for the House to continue with or revert to the business before it, does not apply. Since there is thus no business before the House, the House should adjourn.

(3)          The item affected by the suspension of Private Members' Business is dropped to the bottom of the Order of Precedence, leaving the scheduling of subsequent items unchanged.

Reasons given by the Deputy Speaker

There will be difficulties such as these to be resolved during the experimental period from now until the end of December. There are consultations taking place between the interested parties, but these are not yet complete. However, the Table Officers require instructions by which to prepare the Order Paper and Notices. This decision is therefore without prejudice in the expectation that the House will pronounce itself upon the subject in the near future.