Adjournment Motion Proposed Under Standing Order 26 / Application Not Accepted

Other opportunities for debate

Debates pp. 2424-5

Background

Mr. Chatterton (Esquimalt-Saanich) sought leave to move the adjournment of the House, under the provisions of Standing Order 26, in order to discuss "the deepening... crisis in the house construction industry, ...  the Government's persistent failure to establish priorities, ...   the...   serious lack of housing accommodation, ... the alarming increase in the cost of housing... and the resultant disruptive effects ... in the building industry". Before hearing Members, the Speaker indicated that what was before the House was the question of urgency of debate, not urgency of subject-matter.

Issue

Does the application meet the requirements of Standing Order 26?

Decision

No. The application is not accepted.

Reasons given by the Speaker

An opportunity to debate the matter is available to the House; an amendment to the Budget motion is now before the House and there are three supply motions to be considered, one of them very soon. Moreover, as indicated by some Members themselves, this is not a sudden emergency, but a continuing one. This is not the type of motion that can be or ought to be entertained under Standing Order 26.

Sources cited

Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 90, c. 100(3); p. 91, c. 100(8).

References

Debates, September 25, 1967, pp. 2420-4.