Amendments to the Content of Bills / Report Stage

April 30, 1985

Debates p. 4232

When the House proceeded to report stage of Bill C-15 (Investment Canada Act) on April 23, 1985, the Speaker made a preliminary statement regarding the procedural acceptability of several motions, and invited comments from the Members before making a final ruling. In particular, the Speaker suggested that Motions Nos. 42 to 49, standing in the name of Mr. Axworthy (Winnipeg—Fort Garry), introduced into the bill types of investments that would require review, and that this was not foreseen when the bill was agreed to at second reading. Mr. Axworthy argued that "cultural heritage" and "national identity" were not defined in the clause and that the proposed amendments were simply intended to define those two concepts in the bill and not leave them to regulations. He further drew the Speaker's attention to the fact that the Minister had asked for Parliament to help in defining those concepts. Mr. Langdon (Essex—Windsor) also argued that the proposed amendments were consistent with the purposes of the bill and were foreseen at second reading. Mr. Hnatyshyn (President of the Privy Council) responded that the types of investments were entirely new to the bill and completely beyond its scope.

Issue

Can an amendment seek to define concepts in a bill by specifying new items to be covered by the bill?

Decision

No. The proposed amendments are out of order.

Reasons given by the Speaker

The pro pose d amendments are all similar efforts to introduce into the bill types of investments that would require review. Since this was not foreseen when the bill was adopted by the House at second reading, these motions will not be proposed to the House.