Adjournment Motion Proposed Under Standing Order 26 / Application Not Accepted

Censure motion

Debates pp. 4589-90

Background

Mr. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition) sought leave to move the adjournment of the House, under the provisions of Standing Order 26, in order to discuss the constitutional and legal aspects of the publication by the Secretary of State (Mr. Pelletier) of a book purporting to state certain facts upon which he had based his advice to the Crown to invoke the War Measures Act. Mr. Stanfield maintained that it was improper for a Minister to have published his personal views as distinct from those of the Privy Council, of which he was a member, and that the matter, involving both resolutions of the House and charges currently before the courts, required urgent consideration.

Issue

Does the application meet the requirements of Standing Order 26?

Decision

No. The application is not accepted.

Reasons given by the Speaker

"...   to a certain extent the form of the statement submitted to the Chair and the presentation of his motion to the House are out of order." By practice, Members should keep to a general statement of the matter for the proposed adjournment motion, without presenting substantial arguments. "The motion relates to the conduct of a Minister and... is excluded from the operation of Standing Order 26." In addition, "the motion raises a substantive matter which can only be debated on a distinct motion under notice; ... it cannot be put and considered under the provisions of Standing Order 26".