Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Second Reading

Direct negation of bill's principle

Journals p. 638

Debates p. 5412

Background

During debate on the motion for second reading of Bill C-200, an Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service for the financial year ending March 31, 1970, Mr. Baldwin (Peace River) proposed an amendment declaring the principle of the bill "repugnant" because one of its votes subverted the Royal Recommendation and also usurped the legislative function of Parliament by allowing the Government absolute discretion to distribute the funds of that vote as it saw fit. The Speaker expressed doubts about the acceptability of the amendment and invited Members' comments before ruling.

Issue

Does the proposed amendment oppose the principle of the bill?

Decision

Apparently not. The amendment is unacceptable.

Reasons given by the Speaker

Despite the new rules, the principles in connection with reasoned amendments are the same. "The reasoned amendment must oppose the principle of the bill . . . It seems that the [proposed] amendment . . . declares itself in principle, but is not opposing the motion which is before the House in the sense it would be opposing the principle of that motion." The whole issue, however, deserves further thought and additional study.

Sources cited

May, 17th ed., pp. 527-8.

References

Journals, March 24, 1970, p. 637.

Debates, March 24, 1970, pp. 5409-12.