Debate is not a sin, a mistake, an error
or something to be put up with in parliament. Debate is the essence of
parliament.
Stanley Knowles, m.p. (Winnipeg North Centre)
(Debates, December 10, 1968, p. 3763)
F
rom time to time either because of certain
parliamentary events or because of some urgency, the House will put aside its
normal way of conducting debate in the House to consider matters that are
governed by special rules. These rules are found in the Standing Orders in a
chapter entitled “Special Debates”. Included in this chapter are
rules pertaining to the debate on the Address in Reply to the Speech from the
Throne (also known as the Throne Speech Debate), emergency debates, debates to
suspend certain Standing Orders to consider urgent matters, and the debate to
take note of the Standing Orders. These debates and the related Standing Orders
are examined here.
Also examined in this chapter are two other
types of debates which are not specifically provided for in the Standing Orders,
but whose proceedings are sometimes circumscribed by special procedures. On
occasion, the government has initiated debates on a number of issues to allow
Members to express their views prior to a decision being taken by the
government. This has particularly been the case since the beginning of the
Thirty-Fifth Parliament in 1994. These debates have been labelled “take
note” debates. In addition, statutory debates occasionally take place in
the House. A statutory debate occurs when a statute has included provisions for
a debate on the floor of the House with regard to an order, regulation,
declaration, guideline or other instrument of delegated
legislation.
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.
Standing Orders and Procedure
The Standing Orders provide for a one-day
special debate on the Standing Orders and procedures of the House and its
committees early in each
Parliament. [42]
This provision was adopted by the House in 1982 on the
recommendation of a special committee on procedure which believed an opportunity
should be provided for Members to express their views on this
matter. [43]
Initiating Debate
The Standing Order in question provides for
an automatic debate on the motion “That this House takes note of the
Standing Orders and procedures of the House and its committees” on a day
designated by a Minister between the sixtieth and ninetieth sitting day of the
first session of a Parliament. If no day is designated, the debate is held on
the ninetieth sitting day. [44]
This Standing Order was adopted in 1982.
Such a debate on the rules and procedures of the House could have first occurred
in 1984; however, well before the sixtieth day, the House unanimously agreed to
suspend the Standing
Order. [45]
The next
opportunity for the House to hold the debate came in 1988, but the First Session
of the Thirty-Fourth Parliament ended after only 11 sitting days, thereby
pre-empting the operation of the Standing Order. In 1994, during the First
Session of the Thirty-Fifth Parliament, the House agreed to suspend this
Standing Order at the same time as it adopted several amendments to the Standing
Orders and referred a number of procedural matters to the Standing Committee on
Procedure and House
Affairs. [46]
In 1998,
during the First Session of the Thirty-Sixth Parliament, a debate was held
pursuant to this Standing Order for the first
time. [47]
Rules of Debate
Debate on the motion takes precedence over
all other business and lasts a maximum of one sitting day; the proceedings on
the motion expire when the debate has concluded or at the ordinary hour of daily
adjournment, whichever comes
first. [48]
The motion
is deemed to have been
proposed [49]
and, to
encourage participation, no Member may speak more than once or longer than 10
minutes. [50]
Emergency Debates
The Standing Orders provide Members with an
opportunity to give their immediate attention to a pressing matter by moving a
debatable adjournment motion. A Member may request leave from the Speaker
“to make a motion for the adjournment of the House for the purpose of
discussing a specific and important matter requiring urgent
consideration”. [51]
Furthermore, the matter “must relate to a genuine
emergency” [52]
and, if the request is granted by the Speaker, the House is permitted to debate
the topic at an early opportunity, forgoing the usual 48 hours’ notice
period.
Until the turn of the century, any Member,
at virtually any time in the proceedings, could introduce a new matter for
discussion by moving the adjournment of the House. Since the adjournment motion
could be moved at any time and was always subject to debate, the result would be
an interruption of the business then before the House, often leading to the
disruption of the entire day’s program. In 1906, the government of the day
decided to remedy this situation and implemented a new rule, the ancestor to the
present Standing Order, whereby debate would be permitted only on adjournment
motions which dealt with definite matters of urgent public
importance. [53]
From 1906 to 1968, motions under the
emergency debate rule were considered immediately after they had been accepted
for debate. This meant that other business was put aside. In December 1968, the
House amended the rule to have the debate begin at 8:00 p.m., except on Fridays
when it would begin at 3:00 p.m., if proceeded with the same
day. [54]
This still
resulted in a conflict and a displacement of the regular business of the House.
When the regular evening sittings of the House were abolished in
1982, [55]
the conflict
between emergency debates and the regular business of the House was eliminated
except for Fridays.
As one Speaker noted, an emergency debate
should be on a topic “that is immediately relevant and of attention and
concern throughout the
nation”. [56]
Thus, matters of chronic or continuing concern, such as economic conditions,
unemployment rates and constitutional matters, have tended to be set aside
whereas topics deemed to require urgent consideration have included work
stoppages and strikes, natural disasters, and international crises and events.
At various times other topics such as fisheries, forestry, agriculture and the
fur trade industry have been judged acceptable; for example, there have been
several emergency debates on grain-related topics since 1968, and since 1984
four emergency debates have been held in regard to the fishing industry in
Canada. Topics considered highly partisan in nature are not as readily
approved. [57]
Initiating Debate
Any Member, be it a private Member or a
Minister, [58]
who
wishes to move the adjournment of the House to discuss a specific and important
matter requiring urgent consideration must give the Speaker written notice of
the matter he or she wishes to propose for discussion at least one hour prior to
rising in the House to make the formal
request. [59]
At the
conclusion of the ordinary daily routine of
business, [60]
any
Member who has filed an application with the Speaker rises to ask the Speaker
for leave to move the adjournment of the House to debate the issue outlined in
the application. [61]
The Member then makes a brief statement, normally by simply reading the text of
the application filed with the
Speaker. [62]
No
discussion or argument is allowed in the
presentation [63]
because, as one Speaker stressed, a lengthy statement may provoke
debate. [64]
However,
occasionally a Member will be permitted to expand on the application if the
Chair indicates that the additional information could be of assistance in
reaching a decision. [65]
If more than one notice has been forwarded
to the Speaker, Members will be recognized in the order applications were
received. [66]
If the
time set aside in the day’s order of business for hearing the application
is not reached, or if the House decides to proceed to other business, for
example, by adopting a motion to move to the Orders of the Day during Routine
Proceedings, then the Chair cannot hear applications for emergency debates.
These applications must be refiled at the next sitting of the House unless
unanimous consent is granted for the Speaker to hear them at some other time
during the sitting. [67]
The timeliness of an application is very
important. On one occasion, the Speaker advised a Member who had risen to
present his application which had been filed on a previous day to refile
it. [68]
Although the
House may grant a Member unanimous consent to present an application which had
not been filed that
day, [69]
the Chair has
expressed reservations about holding over applications. One Speaker stated that
a matter which requires urgent action one day may not necessarily demand the
same attention the next day, or conversely may be even more critical, a
determination that should be left to the discretion of the Member who filed the
application. [70]
On
one occasion, applications were filed during a lengthy recess of the House and
were heard at the conclusion of the ordinary routine of business the first day
the House resumed sitting. [71]
Discretionary Responsibility of the Speaker
Having heard an application for an
emergency debate, the Speaker decides without debate whether or not the matter
is specific and important enough to warrant urgent consideration by the
House. [72]
In deciding
whether or not to approve a request for an emergency debate, the Chair is guided
by the Standing Orders, the authorities and practice.
The Speaker is not required to give reasons
when granting or refusing a request for an emergency
debate. [73]
Nonetheless, from time to time reasons are offered, although Chair occupants
have tried to refrain from this practice in order to prevent the build-up of
jurisprudence which could itself become a subject of a debate in the
Chamber. [74]
Criteria for Decision
Although the Standing Orders give
considerable discretion to the Speaker in deciding if a matter should be brought
before the House for urgent consideration, certain criteria must be weighed. The
Speaker determines whether a matter is related to a genuine emergency which
could not be brought before the House within a reasonable time by other means,
such as during a Supply
day. [75]
To do this,
consideration is given to the importance and specificity of the
issue [76]
and the
degree to which the matter falls within the administrative responsibilities of
the government or could come within the scope of ministerial
action. [77]
The Speaker then considers whether the
request meets certain other criteria. The matter being raised for discussion
must contain only one
issue. [78]
The motion
to adjourn the House for an emergency debate cannot revive discussion on a
matter previously debated in this way during the
session [79]
nor may it
raise a question of
privilege. [80]
In
addition, the motion cannot deal with a matter normally debatable only by means
of a substantive motion for which notice has been given and which calls for a
decision of the House. [81]
Other conditions which have evolved from
decisions of previous Speakers are also considered. Chair occupants have
established that the subject matter proposed should not normally be of an
exclusively local or regional interest nor be related to only one specific group
or industry, [82]
and
should not involve the administration of a government
department. [83]
Applications to debate ongoing matters have been
rejected [84]
as have
applications to debate matters arising out of the business of the same
session, [85]
Senate
proceedings, [86]
matters before the courts or other administrative
bodies [87]
and
non-confidence or censure
motions. [88]
Furthermore, the Chair has ruled that an emergency debate cannot be held to
debate the interpretation of a Standing
Order [89]
nor may it
be “used as a vehicle for the purpose of airing statements made outside
the House by organizations or people who are not answerable or responsible to
this
chamber.” [90]
In
addition, one Speaker ruled that the emergency debate provisions cannot be used
to debate “items which, in a regular legislative program of the House of
Commons and regular legislative consideration, can come before the House by way
of amendments to existing statutes, or in any case will come before it in other
ways.” [91]
However, in one exceptional circumstance,
an application was approved for an emergency debate on “the sudden and
unexpected revelation of events which [had] taken place in the past, in that
they might precipitate a course of conduct which, if allowed to continue
unchecked, would certainly classify itself as an emergency and a matter of
urgent
consideration.” [92]
Finally, the Speaker may take into account
the general wish of the House to have an emergency debate and grant a request
for an emergency
debate. [93]
Similarly,
the Chair has periodically allowed an emergency debate on an issue which was not
necessarily urgent within the meaning conferred by the rule, but was one on
which the parliamentary timetable prevented any discussion in a timely
manner. [94]
The responsibility of deciding whether or
not an issue is an acceptable topic for an emergency debate is occasionally
taken out of the hands of the Chair. There have been instances when the House
itself has unanimously decided to hold an emergency debate, sometimes by means
of a special
order. [95]
On one
noteworthy occasion, the Speaker was not required to render a decision on a
number of similar applications because later in the sitting unanimous consent
was granted for the introduction of a bill on the same topic, and the House
decided to proceed immediately to debate on the motion for the second reading of
the bill. [96]
Frequently, the Speaker defers the decision
on an application for an emergency debate until later in the day when the
proceedings are interrupted for the purpose of announcing the
decision. [97]
In one
exceptional case, the Speaker did not return to the House with a decision until
the following day. [98]
The Standing Orders specify that not more
than one motion to adjourn the House for an emergency debate may be moved in any
sitting; [99]
however,
more than one application may be made and when this occurs, the Speaker chooses
which one, if any, is acceptable. If more than one request for an emergency
debate on the same topic is made in the same sitting and found acceptable, the
Speaker grants leave to move the adjournment of the House to the Member who
first submitted an acceptable
application. [100]
Timing of Debate
The Standing Orders provide that an
emergency debate must occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 12:00 midnight on
the day a request for one is granted, unless the Speaker directs that the motion
be considered the next sitting day at an hour to be specified
later. [101]
The House
has also periodically adopted special orders setting a time for an emergency
debate. [102]
In one
case, an application for an emergency debate was granted at a time when the
House had extended its sitting hours in
June. [103]
When an emergency debate is scheduled to be
held at 8:00 p.m., the sitting is suspended at the ordinary hour of daily
adjournment; the House meets again at 8:00 p.m. when the Member who was granted
leave moves the motion, “That this House do now
adjourn.” [104]
Practice has been that when an emergency debate is scheduled for 8:00 p.m. on
Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, the normal Adjournment Proceedings do
not take place, given that the motion before the House is the same. However,
such proceedings have been held by unanimous consent; in these cases, following
debate on the Adjournment Proceedings, the motion to adjourn has been deemed
withdrawn and the sitting suspended until 8:00
p.m. [105]
On
occasion, unanimous consent has also been granted for the suspension of the
sitting prior to the ordinary hour of daily adjournment in order to give Members
an opportunity to prepare for an emergency
debate. [106]
Except on Friday, emergency debates usually
take place outside the normal sitting hours. However, on Friday or if the
Speaker sets down a time at the next sitting that is within the normal sitting
hours, the Standing Orders provide that emergency debates take precedence. The
Speaker would then determine when any other business that has been superseded by
an emergency debate should be considered or disposed
of. [107]
Emergency debates on Friday begin as soon
as the Speaker finds the application
acceptable. [108]
If
the application is made and granted immediately following the conclusion of
Routine Proceedings, debate commences at approximately 12:15 p.m. and continues
until 4:00 p.m., at which time the motion “That this House do now
adjourn” is deemed adopted. Approximately two to two-and-a-half hours of
House business are displaced by an emergency debate held on this day because the
ordinary hour of adjournment on Friday is 2:30 p.m. Since this Standing Order
came into effect in
1987, [109]
no
emergency debates have been held on Friday, although on two occasions the
Speaker has deferred such a debate until the following Monday at 8:00
p.m. [110]
Rules of Debate
During an emergency debate, no Member may
speak for more than 20
minutes [111]
and
there is no questions and comments
period. [112]
However,
frequently by unanimous consent the length of speeches has been reduced to 10 or
15 minutes to allow as many Members as possible to
speak. [113]
The
etablished rules of debate apply to these emergency
debates. [114]
As
such, as with all other motions to adjourn, the motion to adjourn the House to
discuss an important and urgent matter is not
amendable. [115]
Interruption and Termination of Debate
As noted above, once underway, an emergency
debate takes precedence over all other business. From Monday to Thursday, no
conflict should arise if the debate takes place after the normal adjournment
hour. In the case of a debate taking place on a Friday, in addition to
approximately 90 minutes scheduled for Government Business, the debate also
displaces one hour of Private Members’ Business. This, however, is dealt
with in the Standing Orders which specifically prohibit an interruption for
Private Members’
Business. [116]
Since the wording of the motion for an
emergency debate is simply, “That this House do now adjourn”, at the
conclusion of the debate, the House is not required to render a decision on the
matter under
discussion. [117]
At
12:00 midnight (4:00 p.m. on Friday) or when no Member rises to speak, the
motion is declared carried by the Speaker and the House adjourns until the next
sitting day. [118]
If
the debate is held during the regular sitting hours of the House and concludes
prior to the ordinary hour of adjournment, the motion is deemed withdrawn and
the House continues with other
business. [119]
The Standing Orders allow a Member to
propose a motion to continue the debate beyond 12:00 midnight (4:00 p.m. on
Friday) if the motion is moved in the hour preceding the time the debate would
normally adjourn, that is, between 11:00 p.m. and midnight (between 3:00 and
4:00 p.m. on
Friday). [120]
If
fewer than 15 Members rise to object to this motion, the motion is deemed
adopted. A handful of debates have been extended past midnight pursuant to the
Standing Orders, [121]
while several have been prolonged by unanimous
consent. [122]
There have been occasions when the House
has wanted to express itself on the topic of an emergency debate by adopting a
motion or resolution. In 1970, the House held an emergency debate on the
Nigerian-Biafran conflict; pursuant to a special order made earlier in the
sitting, the debate was interrupted at 10:30 p.m., the House adopted a motion on
the same subject and then adjourned without question
put. [123]
In 1983,
following an emergency debate regarding the shooting down of a South Korean
civilian aircraft by the Soviet Union, the motion to adjourn the House was
deemed withdrawn, the House adopted a resolution denouncing the actions of the
Soviet government, and then adjourned until the next sitting day by unanimous
consent. [124]
In
1989, an emergency debate on the Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing, China,
was temporarily interrupted to allow the House to adopt a resolution condemning
the massacre. [125]
Motion to Suspend Certain Standing Orders
In relation to any business that the
government considers to be urgent, the House may suspend certain Standing Orders
in connection with that business, but only under well-defined
conditions. [126]
Specifically, a motion may be moved by a Minister, at any time when the Speaker
is in the Chair, to suspend the Standing Orders respecting notice requirements
and the times of sitting. In moving the motion, the Minister gives reasons for
the urgency of the situation. After the motion is seconded, the Speaker
immediately proposes the question. In doing so, the Speaker may allow up to one
hour of uninterrupted debate, in which case the business then before the House
is put aside temporarily and a “special” debate on the motion takes
place. If no Member rises, the Speaker will put the question
immediately. [127]
Initiating Debate
In moving the motion to suspend the
Standing Orders, the Minister must inform the House of the reasons for the
urgency of such a
motion. [128]
Once the
motion is duly moved and seconded, the Speaker proposes the motion to the
House. [129]
Such motions have seldom been proposed. In
1991, a motion was proposed to suspend the Standing Orders related to the hours
of sitting of the House in order for the House to sit three evenings until 10:00
p.m. to complete all stages of an item of back-to-work legislation. After
debate, the motion was withdrawn when more than 10 Members rose to
object. [130]
In 1992,
a motion to waive the 48 hours’ notice requirement for the report stage of
a bill to provide for referendums on the Constitution was
adopted. [131]
In
March 1995, a motion requesting a waiver of the 48 hours’ notice
requirement for introduction of a bill to end a work stoppage and setting the
hours of sitting to debate the bill was put to the House and adopted without
debate. [132]
Later
that same month, a similar motion was debated and deemed withdrawn when more
than 10 Members rose to
object. [133]
In June
1999, a motion proposing that the House continue sitting to consider a bill and
to suspend the notice requirements of a closure motion was debated and deemed
withdrawn when more than 10 Members rose to
object. [134]
Rules of Debate
Debate on such motions lasts not more than
one hour and may not be interrupted or adjourned by any other proceeding or
Order of the
House. [135]
Members may speak only once and for no longer
than 10 minutes. [136]
Amendments are not permitted unless proposed by a Minister other than the
mover. [137]
Termination of Debate
When the debate is completed or after one
hour, as the case may be, the Speaker puts the question on the motion and, in
doing so, must ask those Members opposed to the motion to
rise. [138]
If 10 or
more Members rise to object, the motion is deemed
withdrawn; [139]
otherwise, the motion is
adopted [140]
and
becomes an Order of the House governing only the proceedings specified in the
motion. [141]
“Take Note” Debates
Over the past several years, a number of
“take note” motions have been debated in the House. A Minister moves
a motion, which includes the words “that the House ‘take note’
of”, to solicit the views of Members on some aspect of government policy.
As the Prime Minister noted in the House on January 25, 1994, “take
note” debates allow Members to participate in the development of
government policy, making their views known before the government makes a
decision. [142]
A
“take note” motion will not usually come to a vote.
Since the beginning of the Thirty-Fifth
Parliament in 1994, there have been numerous “take note” debates,
the majority of them dealing with Canada’s peacekeeping commitments in
various trouble spots around the
world [143]
and the
government’s budgetary
policy. [144]
The
topics of other “take note” debates have included cruise missile
testing, NORAD, violence against women, the reform of Canada’s social
security programs, and the war in
Kosovo. [145]
Initiating Debate
A “take note” debate is
initiated by a Minister giving the usual 48 hours’ notice required before
a substantive motion may be moved in the House. After the motion has been
transferred to the Order Paper under Government Business, it is taken up
for debate at a time of the government’s choosing during Government
Orders. On several occasions, however, the 48 hours’ notice requirement
was by-passed when the House unanimously adopted a special order which included
the wording of a “take note” motion and the rules governing the
debate. [146]
In many
cases, the sitting was extended so that the debate could be held after the
ordinary hour of daily
adjournment. [147]
Rules of Debate
Unless otherwise specified in a special
order, [148]
the
normal rules of debate pertaining to length of speeches, duration of the debate,
and amendments [149]
apply. On several occasions, however, the House unanimously agreed to sit beyond
the ordinary hour of daily adjournment to continue the
debate. [150]
In all
of these cases, the special orders stipulated that dilatory motions and quorum
calls were not allowed.
Termination of Debate
It has been the practice that debate on a
“take note” motion lasts one sitting day, either during regular
sitting hours or during extended hours. There have been occasions when a
“take note” debate resumed on a following sitting
day. [151] With one
exception, no decision has been taken on a “take note”
motion. [152]
The
motion remains on the Order Paper under Government
Business. [153]
Statutory Debates
Parliament has seen fit to include in
several statutes, provisions governing special “statutory” debates.
These special debates are a form of parliamentary supervision and review of
specific statutory provisions. In some cases, the statutory provision is
designed to be permissive; in others, it is
mandatory. [154]
Statutory debates can be grouped into two
broad categories, although the procedures pertaining to the debates are similar.
The first category provides for a general review of an Act or a particular
aspect of it. The second and most common category provides for a debate to
confirm, revoke or amend an order, regulation, declaration, proclamation,
guideline or other instrument of delegated legislation issued pursuant to the
statute in question. Some of these statutes make regulations subject to
affirmative resolution of Parliament. This obliges both Houses to adopt the
regulations, ostensibly by holding a debate on them, before they can come into
effect. [155]
Conversely, regulations subject to negative resolution of Parliament are in
effect until revoked by resolution of both Houses, again presumably after a
debate. [156]
Since the 1960s, several statutory debates
have taken place. In 1971, for example, pursuant to the Government
Organization Act, 1970, the House considered and adopted a motion to
establish a Ministry of State for Science and
Technology. [157]
In
1974, the House debated a motion requesting the Minister of Veterans Affairs to
continue provisions of the Veterans’ Land Act scheduled to expire
on March 31,
1975. [158]
One was
held in 1977 in an attempt to advance the expiration date of the
Anti-Inflation
Act. [159]
Two
occurred consecutively in late 1980 when Members sought to revoke two
proclamations tabled by the government in relation to the Petroleum
Administration Act: one proclamation concerned regulations prescribing
maximum prices for various qualities and kinds of crude oil, the other
proclamation involved regulations prescribing prices for natural
gas. [160]
Another
took place in 1985 when Members invoked a provision in the Western Grain
Transportation Act to move a motion to use a parliamentary day to examine a
progress report on the Act and any outstanding issues of interest to western
farmers. [161]
One
statutory debate took place in September 1992 when, pursuant to the
Referendum Act, the House adopted a motion approving the text of a
referendum
question. [162]
The
most recent debate occurred in December 1992 when Members sought to amend the
Special Economic Measures (Haiti) Ships Regulations in accordance with
provisions set down in the Special Economic Measures Act for amending or
revoking orders and regulations regarding economic sanctions
programs. [163]
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. [164]
In
1986, the Act was amended so that these reports are now tabled in the House and
automatically referred to a parliamentary committee established for the purpose
of dealing with electoral
matters. [165]
Objections are filed with and considered by this committee.
Initiating Debate
The manner in which statutory debates are
triggered depends upon the provisions contained in each statute. For statutes
which allow a debate to be held, such a debate may be initiated by a Minister
who, within a specified time, files a notice of motion with the Speaker for the
confirmation of an order, regulation, declaration, proclamation, guideline or
other instrument of delegated legislation issued in accordance with the
law. [166]
The initiation of a debate to revoke such
instruments typically requires that a notice of motion signed by a minimum
number of Members or Senators, as the case may be, be filed with the
Speaker. [167]
Where
statutes require that a debate take place on the use of an instrument of
delegated legislation, the relevant provisions typically specify that a
confirmation motion signed by a Minister must be laid before Parliament within a
specified time. [168]
After notice has been filed in accordance
with House rules and transferred to the Order Paper under the rubric
“Statutory
Order”, [169]
debate must take place within a set number of days as prescribed in the given
statute. For example, in 1974, debate pursuant to the Veterans’ Land
Act had to take place within 15 days, and the House adopted a motion fixing
the dates for the
debate. [170]
In 1977,
debate pursuant to the Anti-Inflation Act was required to take place
within 15 days of the notice being
filed [171]
and, in
1980, pursuant to the Petroleum Administration Act, within four sitting
days. [172]
It appears
that in both cases the dates for the debate were fixed through all-party
consultation. In 1985, pursuant to subsection 62(6) of the Western Grain
Transportation Act, which stipulated that debate had to take place within 60
days of the notice being filed, the Speaker assigned the day for the
debate. [173]
In
September 1992, pursuant to the Referendum Act, the debate on the text of
the referendum question took place 24 hours after the notice was
given. [174]
In
December 1992, after a motion for a debate pursuant to the Special Economic
Measures Act had been placed on the Order Paper, the Chair was asked
to rule on its procedural acceptability. The Speaker ruled that the motion was
acceptable and that pursuant to the Act, the House had to consider the
motion within six sitting
days. [175]
The House
agreed to hold the debate later that
day. [176]
Rules of Debate
Duration of Debate
The duration of a statutory debate is
usually prescribed in the legislation, be it one or more sitting days or only a
few hours. On occasion, the House has also adopted motions setting out
additional
guidelines. [177]
For
example, pursuant to subsection 1(3) of the Veterans’ Land Act, the
debate was to take place over two days, without interruption, in accordance with
the rules of the House; the House subsequently adopted a motion establishing the
days of the debate and suspending Private Members’ Business on the first
day of debate. [178]
The debates held pursuant to the Anti-Inflation Act and the Petroleum
Administration Act lasted four and three days respectively, in accordance
with the
statutes. [179]
Subsection 62(6) of the Western Grain Transportation Act stipulated that
the progress report was to be debated without interruption for “a period
not exceeding the duration of the normal business hours of the House on that
day”. A motion to this effect was adopted by the
House. [180]
The
motion also indicated that the order was to be the first item of business. The
debate held in September 1992 pursuant to the Referendum Act lasted two
sitting days. The Act stipulates that a decision must be taken on the
motion by the end of the third sitting day of the
debate. [181]
The
House passed a motion, by unanimous consent, to dispose of the motion after two
days of debate. [182]
The length of the December 1992 statutory debate was set by subsection 7(4) of
the Special Economic Measures Act which limits debate to not more than
three hours, unless the House fixes a longer period by unanimous consent. In
this instance, the House adopted a special order which had the effect of
terminating debate after only two
hours. [183]
A notable exception to the duration of the
debate being prescribed in the legislation is found in the Emergencies
Act. This statute imposes no time limit on debate on a motion for
confirmation of a declaration, or continuation of a declaration, of an emergency
or for debate on a motion to revoke or amend a regulation or order. The
legislation provides that debate continues uninterrupted until such time as the
House is ready for the
question. [184]
Length of Speeches
Unless otherwise specified in the statute,
the length of speeches during a statutory debate is determined by the rules of
the House. [185]
There
have been two exceptions: in 1977 and 1985, the House adopted motions
restricting the length of
speeches. [186]
Interruption of Debate
Most statutes which prescribe provisions
for statutory debates also stipulate that the debate may not be interrupted.
With the exception of the Petroleum Administration
Act, [187]
the
acts pursuant to which statutory debates have been held in the House contained
these “no interruption” provisions. However, in 1977, debate on the
motion pursuant to the Anti-Inflation Act, which took place over four days,
was interrupted on three occasions for the Adjournment Proceedings, after which
the motion to adjourn was deemed withdrawn and debate continued, due to an Order
of the House adopted on May 30,
1977. [188]
In 1985,
the debate held pursuant to the Western Grain Transportation Act
was interrupted for a ministerial statement by the Minister of Finance pursuant
to an Order made by the
House. [189]
Termination of Debate
A statutory debate concludes in accordance
with provisions outlined in the legislation. Typically, if debate has not
concluded earlier, the Speaker is required to interrupt the proceedings at the
expiration of a given sitting day or hour of debate and put the question on the
motion. [190]
If a
confirmation motion is adopted by the House of Parliament in which it was
introduced, the statute will normally prescribe that a message be sent to the
other House requesting its concurrence. If the motion is subsequently adopted by
the other House, the regulation or Order in Council is thereby confirmed,
amended or
revoked. [191]
If a
revocation motion is not adopted by the House in which it originated or by the
House where it was sent for concurrence, the regulation or Order in Council
comes into force or remains unaffected as the case may
be. [192]
Normally, motions moved and debated in
accordance with a statutory provision are voted on at the conclusion of
debate. [193]
In 1985,
the proceedings held pursuant to the Western Grain Transportation Act
expired at the ordinary hour of daily adjournment: no question was put on the
motion nor the amendment
thereto. [194]