Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Second Reading

Failure to oppose principle of bill; beyond scope of bill

Journals p. 354

Debates pp. 2853-4

Background

During debate on the motion for second reading of Bill C-201, an Act to provide for the review and assessment of acquisitions of control of Canadian business enterprises by certain persons, Mr. Saltsman (Waterloo) proposed an amendment that the bill "be not now read a second time but that the Government should give consideration to the introduction of a measure providing for an independent review body answerable to Parliament with power to limit and control new foreign investment in Canada and the expansion of foreign-owned corporations . . . as well as the take-over of existing Canadian corporations". The Deputy Speaker expressed doubts about the amendment, suggesting that it may not be an acceptable reasoned amendment. He invited comments from Members before ruling.

Issue

Should this amendment be accepted as a reasoned amendment?

Decision

No. The amendment is out of order.

Reasons given by the Deputy Speaker

" ... this amendment does [not] meet the tests required to make a reasoned amendment acceptable to the Chair ... [A] reasoned amendment must be declaratory of a proposition that opposes the principle of the bill." In this case, the amendment merely puts forward a different way of achieving the same objectives. Moreover, the amendment seems to go beyond the scope of the bill in that it recommends that the independent review body deal with the expansion of foreign-owned corporations already existing in this country in addition to those mentioned in the bill.

References

Debates, June 5, 1972, pp. 2848-53.