Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Third Reading

Beyond scope of bill

Journals p. 197

Debates pp. 907-8

Background

During debate on the motion for third reading of Bill C-8, an Act to authorize the making of certain fiscal payments to provinces ..., Mr. McCleave (Halifax-East Hants) proposed an amendment seeking that the bill be not now read a third time but that it be resolved that the action of the Government was contrary to established practice and was without constitutional authority. Mr. McCleave conceded that the amendment might present some procedural difficulties, but he was prepared to argue on at least one aspect of the procedural matter. The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel) explained that he had reservations concerning the acceptability of the amendment. After hearing Mr. McCleave's argument, he gave his decision.

Issue

Is an amendment acceptable if it would defer third reading until the adoption of a resolution on a subject not included in the bill?

Decision

No. The amendment is not acceptable.

Reasons given by the Acting Speaker

At the third reading, "an amendment must relate to the content of the bill. It can either refute the bill or must relate to something that is found in the provisions of the bill". Reasoned amendments at third reading that raise matters not included in the provisions of the bill are not acceptable. The terms of the present amendment appear only to criticize the actions of the Government. The Chair cannot postpone its decision on the acceptability of the amendment because one Member thinks it is an important question.

Sources cited

Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 288, c. 418.

May, 17th ed., p. 572.

References

Debates, March 16, 1972, pp. 904-7.