Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Third Reading

Recommittal; infringing on financial initiative of the Crown

Journals p. 308

Debates pp. 2371-2

Background

During debate on the motion for third reading of Bill C-207, an Act to amend the Old Age Security Act, Mr. Fortin (Lotbiniere) proposed that the bill be not now read a third time but that it be referred back to the Standing Committee on Health, Welfare and Social Affairs to consider the possibility of making certain changes related to the lowering of the eligibility age and to the amount of the basic pension; these changes were not linked to any specific clauses in the bill. The Speaker expressed initial doubts as to the acceptability of the proposed amendment, and invited comments from Members before rendering a decision.

Issue

Can an amendment propose that a committee examine certain issues of a bill without indicating any specific clauses? Can the House authorize a committee to change the financial provisions of a bill?

Decision

No. The amendment is unacceptable.

Reasons given by the Speaker

The proposed amendment, while calling for specific changes to the bill, does not refer to a specific clause. If an amendment were to the effect that a particular clause of the bill be reconsidered, it could be moved. Moreover, at third reading stage, an amendment to refer the bill back to committee must not change the principle approved on second reading. Finally, it is not possible to instruct the committee to do something the House itself cannot undertake, that is, to extend the financial initiative of the Crown.

Sources cited

Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 207, c. 246(3); p. 217, c. 252; pp. 287-8, cc. 415(4), 418.

References

Debates, May 17, 1972, pp. 2368-71.