Precedence and Sequence / Superseding Motion

Superseding motion (adjournment)

Journals p. 271

Debates pp. 2495-6

Background

While discussion on the question of privilege respecting the conduct of Mr. Cardin (Minister of Justice) was still going on, and after the Speaker had refused to put a motion proposed by Mr. Lewis (York South), to adjourn the House, Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre) was recognized on a point of order. He attempted to explain why the motion of Mr. Lewis was actually in order. The Speaker then replied that since Mr. Lewis had placed a condition on the adjournment ("until 6 o'clock"), the motion had become substantive, requiring notice. In consequence, Mr. Knowles proposed to move "That this House do now adjourn".

Issue

Can a motion be proposed by a Member who had been recognized on a point of order?

Decision

No, the motion cannot be accepted.

Reasons given by the Speaker

Since the Member could only be recognized at this time on a point of order, it is clear that he is not entitled to move a motion.

Sources cited

Bourinot, 4th ed., p. 353.