Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne
Designating a Day for Consideration
Traditionally at the beginning of a
session, when the House returns from the Senate after the Speech from the
Throne, a day is designated for the consideration of that Speech. The Prime
Minister moves a motion to consider the Throne Speech either later that day or
at the next sitting of the
House. [1]
This motion
does not require notice and, though generally moved and adopted without debate,
is debatable and amendable. [2]
Initiating Debate
On the day specified in the motion for the
consideration of the Speech from the Throne, a government backbencher moves that
an Address be presented to the Governor General (or, depending on who delivered
the speech, to the Sovereign or to the Administrator of the Government of
Canada) “to offer our humble thanks… for the gracious speech which Your
Excellency has addressed…”. This allows for wide-ranging debate on the
government policies announced in the Throne Speech, thus providing a rare
opportunity for Members to address topics of their choice.
From 1867 to 1893, the motion for the
Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne typically consisted of several
paragraphs, each of which received separate consideration. The paragraphs
collectively formed a resolution which was adopted and referred to a select
committee. The committee would then report the Address in Reply to the House
where it would be agreed to, engrossed (that is, transcribed upon parchment) and
presented to the Governor General. This cumbersome procedure was changed in
1893, when a new practice was adopted whereby the House itself considered the
Address in the form of a presentation to the Governor
General. [3]
It was not
until 1903 that the motion for an Address in Reply became one brief paragraph of
thanks for the Speech from the
Throne. [4]
Following the mover’s speech, a
second government backbencher (traditionally one who speaks the official
language that is not that of the mover) is recognized to speak to and second the
motion. Both the mover and seconder are typically chosen from the ranks of those
Members most recently
elected. [5]
Their
speeches have not been followed by the usual 10-minute period for questions and
comments and, at the conclusion of the seconder’s speech, the debate is
normally adjourned by the Leader of the
Opposition. [6]
The
usual practice is for the Prime Minister or a Minister, often the Government
House Leader or President of the Privy Council, to subsequently move the
adjournment of the House. [7]
Resuming Debate on the Address
The Standing Orders provide for six
additional days of debate on the motion and on any amendments proposed
thereto. [8]
These days
are designated by a Minister, usually the Government House Leader, and are not
necessarily consecutive. Since 1955, the Standing Orders have provided that when
the Order of the Day is called to resume debate on the motion for an Address in
Reply, the Order takes precedence over all other business of the House, with the
exception of the daily routine of business — that is, Routine Proceedings,
Statements by Members and Oral
Questions. [9]
Private
Members’ Business is also suspended on these
days. [10]
Rules of Debate on the Address
Leaders’ Day
The first day of resumed debate is known as
“Leaders’ Day”. It is traditional for the Leader of the
Opposition to speak first and to move an amendment to the main motion. Normally,
the Prime Minister speaks next and that speech is followed by that of the leader
of the second largest party in opposition, who may propose an amendment to the
amendment. Then other leaders of parties which have official status in the House
are recognized in
turn. [11]
Leaders of
parties holding fewer than 12 seats are not automatically recognized for debate
on Leaders’ Day. [12]
While this has been the customary speaking
order, there is no specific rule stating the order in which party leaders are
recognized during the debate on the Address in Reply. During the Address in
Reply proceedings in 1989, the leader of the second largest party in opposition
spoke after the Leader of the Opposition; the Prime Minister delivered his
speech the following
day. [13]
In 1991, when
again the Prime Minister did not rise to speak after the speech of the Leader of
the Opposition, a complaint was lodged with the Chair by the Opposition House
Leader. The Speaker ruled that in the absence of any Standing Order to this
effect, Members were not bound to any particular speaking
order. [14]
The Prime
Minister subsequently addressed the House the next day, and the leader of the
second largest party in opposition delivered her speech immediately
thereafter.
Duration of Debate on the Address
Until 1955, there was no prescribed limit
on the length of the debate on the Address in Reply, and debates lasted anywhere
from one to a record length of 28
days. [15]
In 1955,
further to the recommendations of a special committee on procedure, the House
first instituted a limit on the length of debate on the Address in Reply when it
agreed to a maximum of 10 days of debate and to morning sittings (not then a
feature of the regular sitting day) for the duration of the
debate. [16]
This was
further reduced to eight days in
1960, [17]
and in 1991
the Standing Orders were again amended to provide for a maximum of six days of
debate. [18]
There have been, however, a number of
instances where the debate lasted for less than the maximum number of days
provided for in the Standing Orders and the House voted on the
motion. [19]
There have
also been instances where the debate was not completed because of either a
prorogation or dissolution: in 1988, only the mover and seconder of the motion
spoke, no further debate occurred on the Address in Reply and the session was
ended by prorogation after only 11 sittings; in 1997, the session ended when
Parliament was dissolved for a general election after 164 sittings and only five
of the six days provided for the Address debate having been completed. [20]
As indicated in the Standing Orders, any
unused days may be added, if the House so agrees, to the number of allotted days
for the Supply period in which they occur, although this rule has never been
applied since coming into effect in
1968. [21]
Length of Speeches on the Address Debate
Members may speak for a maximum of 20
minutes, followed by a 10-minute period for questions and comments with the
exception of the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition (who have unlimited
time for debate with no period for questions and
comments). [22]
The
House has sometimes extended to othe party leaders the opportunity to speak
longer than 20 minutes with no period for questions and comments following their
speeches. [23]
Any
Member may be recognized to speak in this debate, though the speaking order
follows the general rotation reflecting party standings in the House. There has
also been a tendency to either reduce the length of speeches, including the
period for questions and comments, or to discontinue the questions and comments
period altogether, at times during the debate in order to allow as many Members
as possible to speak to the
motion. [24]
Disposal of Amendments and Termination of the Debate on the Address
In the early years of Confederation, one
view held that attempts to amend the Address in Reply motion ought not to be
made. [25]
In 1873, the
first amendments were moved to the Address in Reply motion when a motion of
censure was made against the government for its conduct in the “Pacific
Scandal”. Although a sub-amendment subsequently proposed an expression of
confidence in the
government, [26]
Parliament was prorogued following a change in government before the amendments
were put to a vote. Amendments were moved again in 1893 and
1899. [27]
Over the
course of the next 40 years, amendments were commonly moved, although not
systematically. It was not until World War II that the practice of moving
amendments to the Address in Reply motion became more
entrenched.
Until 1955, there were no provisions in the
Standing Orders dealing with the moving of amendments or when to put the
question thereon. As with an amendment to any motion, the question was put when
no Member rose to speak to it. In 1955, a new Standing Order was adopted which
established a framework for deciding
amendments. [28]
While there are no rules governing when
amendments are to be moved or if they have to be moved at all, the Standing
Orders do set out provisions for the disposal of all amendments proposed before
the main motion is put to the House: on the second day of the resumed debate,
any sub-amendment before the House is disposed of and on the fourth day of
debate any amendment and sub-amendment are disposed of. Amendments are
prohibited on the last two days of the debate.
Recent practice has been that the Leader of
the Opposition moves an amendment on the first day of resumed debate. A
sub-amendment is then normally proposed by the leader of the second largest
opposition party. It is not unusual, however, for another Member from that party
to do so. [29]
The first sub-amendment must be disposed of
on the second appointed day when the Speaker interrupts the debate 15 minutes
before the ordinary hour of daily adjournment to put the
question. [30]
Sub-amendments may again be proposed on the third or fourth day. On the fourth
day, the Speaker interrupts the debate 30 minutes before the ordinary hour of
daily adjournment to dispose of any amendment or sub-amendment before the
House. [31]
No further
amendments are permitted to the main motion on the fifth and sixth
days. [32]
Finally on
the sixth day, unless the debate has previously concluded, the Speaker
interrupts the debate 15 minutes before the ordinary hour of daily adjournment
to put all the questions necessary to dispose of the main
motion. [33]
Since the
Standing Orders were amended in 1991 to limit the Throne Speech Debate to six
days, there have been three instances of a sub-amendment being disposed of on
the second day and a sub-amendment and an amendment being disposed of on the
fourth day. [34]
Given the general nature of the motion, the
rule of relevance is not strictly applied to the proposed amendment (as opposed
to the sub-amendments). However, precedents indicate that an amendment should
add some distinct element of its own, whereas a sub-amendment must be relevant
to the amendment and cannot raise a new
issue. [35]
A
sub-amendment adding words with the effect of making the amendment a motion of
non-confidence in the official opposition has been ruled inadmissible since
“votes of want of confidence are only directed against the Government of
the day”. [36]
The Speaker has ruled out of order amendments which were not deemed to challenge
directly the government’s
policies [37]
or which
sought to increase expenditures, a motion which requires a Royal
Recommendation. [38]
An
amendment similar to one on which the House had already expressed a judgement
earlier in the debate has also been
disallowed. [39]
On only two occasions has the Address in
Reply been adopted with an amendment. In each instance an amendment moved by a
Member of the Opposition had itself been amended by a sub-amendment moved by a
Member of the government
party. [40]
Engrossing of Address
Immediately after the adoption of the
motion for the Address in Reply, the House adopts a motion without debate or
amendment that the Address be engrossed, that is, transcribed upon parchment,
and presented to the Governor General in person by the Speakers of the House of
Commons and the
Senate. [41]
It is
customary for the Speakers to be accompanied by a few invited Members (including
the mover and seconder of the Address, as well as the House Leaders and the
party Whips) and the Clerks of both Houses.