House of Commons Procedure and Practice
Edited by Robert Marleau and Camille Montpetit
2000 Edition — More information …

4. The House of Commons and Its Members

[51] 
Until 1986, the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act contained provisions which allowed Members to discuss their objections to a report of an Electoral Boundaries Commission on the floor of the House. Four debates—in 1966, 1973, 1976 and 1983—were held under the Act’s provisions (S.C. 1964-65, c. 31, s. 20). Within 30 days of the tabling in the House of such a report, a motion for consideration of an objection to the report signed by not less than 10 Members could be filed with the Speaker. The motion would detail the provisions of the report objected to and the reasons for the objection. Within 15 days of the filing of the motion, time would be set aside under Government Orders for Members to voice their concerns about the report. Upon the conclusion of consideration of the objections, the Speaker was required to refer the objections and the relevant Debates pages back to the Commission. In 1986, the Act was amended to provide for the current procedure (Representation Act, 1985, S.C. 1986, c. 8, ss. 9-10).
[52] 
Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3, s. 23(1).
[53] 
Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3, s. 23(2). See, for example, Journals, March 4, 1996, p. 36.
[54] 
Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3, s. 24 as amended by c. 6 (2nd supp.), s. 7.
[55] 
Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3, s. 25(1).
[56] 
Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3, s. 25(1).
[57] 
Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3, s. 28.
[58] 
Representation Act, 1974, S.C. 1974-75-76, c. 13; Representation Act, 1985, S.C. 1986, c. 8.
[59] 
See Debates, May 1, 1992, pp. 9995-8. Bill C-67, the Electoral Boundaries Suspension Act was subsequently granted Royal Assent on June 18, 1992.
[60] 
See Debates, March 21, 1994, pp. 2518-20.
[61] 
Initially, when the House passed Bill C-18, the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994, at the third reading stage, the legislation stipulated that the electoral boundaries commissions would cease to exist and the operation of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act would be suspended for 24 months on the day the Actwas assented to. However, the Senate amended the legislation to allow the commissions to hold public hearings on their proposals and fixed February 6, 1995, as the date on which the suspension would end (Journals, May 25, 1994, p. 478). The House concurred in the amendments proposed by the Senate with the exception of the February 6, 1995 date. The date was pushed back to June 22, 1995 and the legislation was eventually adopted by both Houses and assented to on June 15, 1994. See Journals, June 3, 1994, p. 528; June 9, 1994, p. 557; June 14, 1994, p. 585. See also Debates, June 3, 1994, pp. 4811-2.
[62] 
Journals, April 19, 1994, pp. 368-70.
[63] 
Journals, November 25, 1994, p. 939; Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence, November 25, 1994, Issue No. 33, pp. 5-40.
[64] 
Journals, February 16, 1995, p. 1141.
[65] 
Journals, June 8, 1995, pp. 1600-1; June 14, 1995, pp. 1748-9; June 19, 1995, pp. 1786-8; June 20, 1995, pp. 1817-21. See also Debates, June 14, 1995, pp. 13854-5. The Senate objected to the provision whereby a commission would not be established in a province where there had not been a significant change in population, the reduction of the maximum deviation from the electoral quotient to 15% from 25%, parliamentary oversight of appointments to electoral boundaries commissions and the proposed definition for “community of interests”. The Senate also opposed the next election being held on the basis of electoral boundaries drawn after the 1981 census and not on the basis of electoral boundaries required to be redrawn after the 1991 census. See also Minutes of the Proceedings of the Senate, June 8, 1995, pp. 998-1001; Senate Debates, June 8, 1995, pp. 1725-7, 1730-5.
[66] 
Journals, June 22, 1995, p. 1867.
[67] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 40. See also Schedules 1 through 4.
[68] 
See, for example, Debates, June 27, 1989, pp. 3730-3.
[69] 
See, for example, Journals, June 27, 1989, pp. 468-70; September 16, 1992, pp. 2000-1. See also Journals,November 8, 1996, p. 856, and December 12, 1996, pp. 1007, 1010, where one bill altered the names of 22 electoral districts (An Act to change the names of certain electoral districts, S.C. 1996, c. 36). In 1998, a private Member introduced a similar bill to alter the names of a number of electoral districts. By unanimous consent, the bill was deemed introduced, read a first time and printed, deemed read the second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole, deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in at report stage and deemed read the third time and passed without debate or amendment. See Journals, May 28, 1998, p. 902; Debates, May 28, 1998, pp. 7317-8.
[70] 
R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, ss. 76.1-78 as amended by S.C. 1989, c. 28, s. 1; and S.C. 1993, c. 19, ss. 34-5.
[71] 
R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, ss. 21-4.
[72] 
R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 44, s. 3.
[73] 
Constitution Act, 1982, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 44, s. 3.
[74] 
Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, s. 76.1 as amended by S.C. 1989, c. 28, s. 1(1). See also s. 50.
[75]
This usually occurs when a seat must be found for a party leader who is not a Member of Parliament. In these instances, the incumbent Member resigns his or her seat and a by-election takes place. For example, in 1983, Brian Mulroney was named leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada. Later that year, Elmer McKay resigned his Central Nova seat and Mr. Mulroney won a by-election in the riding. In 1990, Jean Chrétien was elected to the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada. Fernand Robichaud resigned his Beauséjour seat shortly thereafter and Mr. Chrétien won the seat in a by-election.
[76] 
Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 21. Until 1919, candidates were permitted to contest more than one seat in a general election (An Act to amend the House of Commons Act, S.C. 1920, c. 18. s. 1). If a Member was returned for two constituencies, he had to formally resign one of the seats. It was the practice of party leaders routinely to seek two seats in an election. In the general election of 1878, at a time when the polls were not confined to one day exclusively due to geographic and other factors, Sir John A. Macdonald contested three seats. He was defeated in Kingston, Ontario, on September 17, yet was elected two days later in Marquette, Manitoba. Pursuant to the law at that time, upon his acceptance of the office of Prime Minister, he vacated that seat and was subsequently elected to represent Victoria, British Columbia, on October 21. In 1896, Sir Wilfrid Laurier won his own safe seat in Quebec East and also captured Saskatchewan (NWT) from the Opposition. He resigned the latter seat. In 1908, Sir Robert Borden won a safe seat in Carleton and a doubtful one in Halifax. He relinquished Carleton. In only 6 of the 14 instances where party leaders were candidates in more than one riding did the Member resign one of the seats immediately. See Ward, The Canadian House of Commons: Representation, pp. 81-2. However, if one of the elections was contested, the Member could not resign from either. This happened to Sir John A. Macdonald in 1882 and to Sir Wilfrid Laurier who held two seats from 1911 to 1917. In the case of a double return, when returning officers were unable to determine which of two or more candidates had been elected, each of the Members-elect was entitled to be sworn in, but neither could sit in the House nor vote until the matter had been resolved. See Bourinot, 4th ed., pp. 135-40, where special and double returns are described. See also Journals, March 27, 1871, p. 152; April 19, 1872, p. 27; April 25, 1872, pp. 44-6; May 13, 1872, p. 104; May 18, 1872, pp. 124-5.
[77] 
Between 1867 and 1885, five federal general elections were held with the electorate varying from province to province under the provincial election laws then in force. In all provinces, there were nonetheless three basic conditions: electors had to be male, 21 years of age and a British subject either by birth or naturalization (see A History of the Vote in Canada, Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services for the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, 1997, p. 45). In 1885, control of the federal franchise was shifted to the federal level (Electoral Franchise Act, S.C. 1885, c. 40) and then back to the provinces in 1898 (The Franchise Act, 1898, S.C. 1898, c. 14). It was only in 1920 that Parliament regained control (see p. 40).
[78] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 41. See Confederation Debates, February 6, 1865, p. 39, where Sir John A. Macdonald said: “Insuperable difficulties would have presented themselves if we had attempted to settle now the qualification for the elective franchise.”
[79] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 41. Property qualifications in terms of real estate ranged at Confederation from $100 in New Brunswick to $150 in Nova Scotia to $300 in Ontario and Quebec. Citizens were allowed to vote in each area in which they owned property. See Ward, The Canadian House of Commons: Representation, pp. 63-5.
[80] 
See Bourinot, 1st ed., pp. 124-8. Twenty-five Members from Ontario and Quebec also sat in their provincial legislatures and, in both provinces, a majority of the Cabinet held federal seats.
[81] 
An Act to render Members of the Legislative Councils and Legislative Assemblies of the Provinces now included, or which may hereafter be included within the Dominion of Canada, ineligible for sitting or voting in the House of Commons of Canada, S.C. 1873, c. 2. Two Members of Prince Edward Island’s legislative assembly were elected to the House after dual representation was abolished: S.F. Perry in 1874 and J. E. Robertson in 1883. Mr. Perry was allowed to maintain his seat in the House while the House rejected Mr. Robertson’s election. For a historical perspective, refer to Ward, The Canadian House of Commons: Representation, pp. 65-9.
[82] 
Dominion Elections Act, S.C. 1873-74, c. 9, s. 20. These provisions were so widely accepted that they were only included in the statute when the Senate insisted on an amendment to the legislation stipulating that candidates be British subjects by birth or naturalization.
[83] 
Dominion By-Election Act, S.C. 1919, c. 48, s. D. See also Dominion Elections Act, S.C. 1920, c. 46, s. 38, which provided universal access to the vote without reference to property ownership. In 1917, when Parliament passed the Military Voters Act (S.C. 1917, c. 34), some 2000 military nurses received the right to vote. The War-time Elections Act (S.C. 1917, c. 39) conferred the right to vote on spouses, widows, mothers, sisters, and daughters of any persons who had served or were serving in the Canadian forces provided they met the age, nationality and residence requirements for electors in their respective provinces or the Yukon. Women received the franchise to vote in provincial elections in the following sequence: Manitoba (January 28, 1916); Saskatchewan (March 14, 1916); Alberta (April 19, 1916); British Columbia (April 5, 1917); Nova Scotia (April 26, 1918); Ontario (April 24, 1919); Prince Edward Island (May 3, 1922); Newfoundland (May 13, 1925); New Brunswick (March 9, 1934); Quebec (April 24, 1940). The general election of 1921 was the first one open to all Canadians, men and women, over the age of 21. Four women ran but only one was elected. Agnes Campbell MacPhail became the first woman elected to the House of Commons when she won a seat as an Independent for the rding of Grey South East in Ontario. She was re-elected four times. Between 1920 and 1945, only five women sat in the House (see Fraser, p. 67). Ellen Louks Fairclough became the first female Cabinet Minister on June 21, 1957, when she was appointed Secretary of State. For additional information on women and the franchise, see A History of the Vote in Canada, pp. 58-9, 61-8.
[84] 
Dominion Elections Act, S.C. 1948, c. 46, ss. 6, 12. For additional information on racial exclusions, see A History of the Vote in Canada, pp. 80-3. The residency requirement had long been a matter of concern in the House. See, for example, Debates, April 11, 1890, cols. 3197-8, where a Member explained to the House that although he had moved his residence to England, he did not intend to resign his seat in the House.
[85] 
An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act, S.C. 1955, c. 44, s. 4(1). For additional information on religious exclusions, see A History of the Vote in Canada, pp. 83-5.
[86] 
An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act, S.C. 1960, c. 7, s. 1. The first Aboriginal person to be elected to the House of Commons was Leonard S. Marchand (Kamloops–Caribou) on June 25, 1968. Peter Ittinuar (Nunatsiaq) was the first Inuit elected to the House in the general election of May 22, 1979. For additional information on aboriginals and the vote, see A History of the Vote in Canada, pp. 85-9.
[87] 
Canada Elections Act, S.C. 1969-70, c. 49, s. 14.
[88] 
Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, s. 77 as amended by S.C. 1993, c. 19, s. 34(5)(j).
[89] 
Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, ss. 51(f), 77(h) as amended by S.C. 1993, c. 19, s. 23(3).
[90] 
Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, s. 77(e).
[91] 
Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, ss. 51(d), 77(h) as amended by S.C 1993, c. 19, ss. 23(1), 34(5).
[92] 
Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, s. 77(d), (g). This prohibition can also be found in the Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 22.
[93] 
Constitution Act, 1867, s. 39. As an example, Robert de Cotret was appointed to the Senate on June 5, 1979. He resigned from the Senate on January 14, 1980, to run, unsuccessfully, as a candidate in the February 18, 1980 general election.
[94] 
Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, s. 269. See also s. 77 as amended by S.C. 1993, c. 19, s. 34. A person found guilty of any corrupt practice is also disqualified from voting or holding office in the nomination of the Crown or of the Governor in Council.
[95] 
Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, s. 269. See also s. 77 as amended by S.C. 1993, c. 19, s. 34. If found guilty, the person cannot sit in the House of Commons, hold office in the nomination of the Crown or of the Governor in Council or vote in a federal election for five years.
[96] 
Ward, The Canadian House of Commons: Representation, p. 83.
[97] 
An Act further securing the independence of Parliament, S.C. 1867, c. 25. In 1871, the words “permanent or temporary” were added after the phrase “office, commission or employment” (Independence of Parliament Act, S.C. 1871, c. 19).
[98] 
An Act further securing the Independence of Parliament, S.C. 1878, c. 5. For a historical perspective, see Bourinot, 1st ed., pp. 128-37.
[99] 
Senate and House of Commons Act, S.C. 1931, c. 52.
[100] 
Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2, s. 77(c), (f).

Please note —

As the rules and practices of the House of Commons are subject to change, users should remember that this edition of Procedure and Practice was published in January 2000. Standing Order changes adopted since then, as well as other changes in practice, are not reflected in the text. The Appendices to the book, however, have been updated and now include information up to the end of the 38th Parliament in November 2005.

To confirm current rules and practice, please consult the latest version of the Standing Orders on the Parliament of Canada Web site.

For further information about the procedures of the House of Commons, please contact the Table Research Branch at (613) 996-3611 or by e-mail at trbdrb@parl.gc.ca.