House of Commons Procedure and Practice
Edited by Robert Marleau and Camille Montpetit
2000 EditionMore information …
Previous PageNext Page

12. The Process of Debate

See, for example, Debates, May 23, 1985, p. 4992. See also Bourinot, 4th ed., p. 324.
See, for example, Debates, February 21, 1979, p. 3457; December 7, 1979, pp. 2132-4.
See, for example, Debates, March 14, 1985, pp. 3029-30.
See, for example, Debates, December 20, 1978, p. 2320.
See, for example, Debates, June 21, 1994, p. 5698.
Standing Order 2(3).
See Standing Orders 38 and 52.
Standing Order 81(17) and (18). On June 5, 1984, which was the final allotted day for the Supply period, the Speaker did not accept a motion to adjourn the House (Debates, p. 4381).
Standing Order 57.
Standing Order 25. On one occasion, the Chair ruled a motion to adjourn out of order because the House had agreed to the presentation of the Budget later in the sitting (Debates, May 23, 1985, p. 4984). In other instances, an order having been adopted to extend the sitting, the Speaker refused to put the motion to adjourn (Debates, December 7, 1990, p. 16470; October 20, 1997, p. 866).
Standing Order 53(3)(d).
Standing Order 60. “Intermediate proceeding” is defined as a “proceeding that can properly be entered on the journals” (Bourinot, 4th ed., pp. 322-3). See, for example, Journals, March 10, 1966, pp. 274-6.
See Bourinot, 4th ed., p. 323.
In a Committee of the Whole, the motion that the committee rise and report progress is the equivalent of the motion to adjourn debate. See Chapter 19, “Committees of the Whole House”.
See, for example, Journals, June 21, 1994, pp. 633-4, 637-8, when a motion to adjourn the debate was moved during report stage of a bill which had been time allocated under Standing Order 78; March 12, 1996, pp. 79-80, and March 9, 1998, p. 540, when it was moved during debate on a motion in relation to a matter of privilege; March 26, 1998, pp. 633-4, when, in Routine Proceedings, it was moved during debate on a motion to concur in a committee report.
See section above, “Motion to Adjourn the House”.
Notice requirements have been part of the Standing Orders since Confederation. For a description of the operation of notice in the British House, as it developed rules and principles to organize and arrange the “introduction, treatment and disposal” of the large amount of business before it, see Redlich, Vol. III, pp. 8-26.
Standing Order 54. For further information on the Notice Paper, see Chapter 24, “The Parliamentary Record”.
For example, notices of motions for closure (Standing Order 57) and notices of motions for time allocation where there is not agreement among party representatives (Standing Order 78(3)).
For example, no notice is required for a motion to adjourn a debate or to amend a motion.
See section below, “Specific Notice Requirements”.
The Speaker has the discretionary power (Standing Order 86(5)) to refuse the most recent notice, to so inform the sponsoring Member and to return the item to the sponsor (see Debates, November 2, 1989, pp. 5474-5); see also Chapter 21, “Private Members’ Business”.
See Speaker Lamoureux’s ruling, Debates, September 14, 1973, pp. 6589-90.
Standing Order 54.
Standing Order 54.
Standing Order 123(4).
Standing Order 81(14)(a).
Standing Order 81(14)(a).
Standing Order 81(14)(a).
Standing Orders 76(2), 76.1(2).
Standing Order 77(1).
Standing Order 94(1)(a).
Bourinot, 4th ed., pp. 300-1.
See Standing Order 54(1). The Order Paper and Notice Paper is published daily when the House sits. The Notice Paper lists all notices of bills, motions and questions which Members may wish to bring before the House. The Order Paper is the official House agenda and lists all items of business which may be brought forward on a given day. Until 1971, the Notice Paper was appended to the then Votes and Proceedings (now the daily Journals), so that each notice given by a Member was printed with the Votes and Proceedings of the sitting at which the notice was given. See Chapter 24, “The Parliamentary Record”.
Standing Order 54(2). Adjournment periods are defined by reference to Standing Order 28(2).
In 1993, a Member’s notice of a motion (to amend a bill at report stage) was refused for inclusion on the next day’s Notice Paper because it had been faxed. A point of order was raised and, in his ruling, the Speaker advised that, in addition to having been received after the 6:00 p.m. deadline, the notice was inadmissible because notices submitted for the Notice Paper are not considered official until an original document with the Member’s signature is received (Debates, February 15, 1993, pp. 15899-900).
This procedure has been followed since Confederation (see Bourinot, 1st ed., pp. 308-9).
See, for example, Journals, January 14, 1953, p. 127.
See Debates, March 22, 1990, pp. 9613-24, 9628-9.
Debates, March 26, 1990, pp. 9758-61.
See, for example, Debates, May 24, 1988, pp. 15697-703.
See, for example, Debates, June 19, 1990, pp. 12963-7; May 28, 1991, pp. 702-3.
See Speaker Fraser’s ruling, Debates, December 7, 1989, p. 6584.
See, for example, Debates, February 12, 1993, p. 15851.
Standing Order 42(1).
For example, notices sponsored by Jean-Claude Malépart (Laurier–Sainte-Marie) (died November 16, 1989), Catherine Callbeck (Malpeque) (resigned January 25, 1993) and Stephen Harper (Calgary West) (resigned January 14, 1997) were withdrawn. They included notices of motions for Private Members’ Business, notices of written questions and notices of motions for the production of papers. Private Members’ bills awaiting introduction and notices of motions under Routine Proceedings would also be withdrawn in such circumstances.
Standing Order 87. See Chapter 21, “Private Members’ Business”.
Standing Order 56(1).
Standing Order 83(2).
Bourinot, 4th ed., pp. 296-7. See also Standing Order 64. See, for example, Debates, March 12, 1993, pp. 16925-6; May 11, 1994, p. 4211.

Top of documentPrevious PageNext Page