Rules of Debate

Introduction

One of the fundamental principles of parliamentary procedure is that debate and other proceedings in the House of Commons be conducted in a free and civil manner. Accordingly, the House has adopted rules and practices of order and decorum governing the conduct of members towards each other and towards the institution as a whole. Members are expected to show respect for one another and for viewpoints differing from their own. Offensive or rude behaviour or language is not in order, and opinions are to be expressed with civility.

It is the duty of the Speaker to safeguard the orderly conduct of debate by curbing disorder when it arises either on the floor of the House or in the galleries and by ruling on points of order raised by members. The Speaker’s disciplinary powers are intended to ensure that debate remains focused and that order and decorum are maintained. For example, on November 30, 2017, following calls for members to come to order during Oral Questions, the Speaker exercised the Chair’s power to name a member and asked the Sergeant-at-Arms to remove the member from the chamber for the remainder of the day’s sitting.

Speaker Regan also reaffirmed the Chair’s authority to maintain order. On May 25, 2018, following many points of order, and with several more members wishing to make additional points of order, Speaker Regan exercised his discretion to determine when the Chair felt it had heard enough in order to make a decision. Later during that sitting, he reminded members attempting to make further points of order on the matter that a ruling had been made and that challenging the decision of the Chair could be done only by motion.

The rules of debate include refraining from making reference in debate to matters that are awaiting judicial decisions, a practice known as the sub judice convention. For example, on April 5, 2019, the Chair ruled in response to a point of order suggesting that the sub judice convention should be applied to debate concerning the trial of Vice-Admiral Mark Norman. The Chair stated that the convention should be applied with discretion and that, when in doubt, the Chair should favour allowing debate.

Another fundamental principle of parliamentary procedure is that debate must lead to a decision within a reasonable time. While House business is often concluded without recourse to special procedures intended to limit or end debate, certain rules exist to curtail debate. When asked to determine the acceptability of a motion to limit debate, the Speaker does not judge the importance of the issue in question or whether a reasonable time has been allowed for debate but addresses only the acceptability of the procedure followed.

The Speaker is tasked with ensuring that any motions put before the House, both in their content and in their form, conform to the rules of debate. On June 9, 2016, when responding to a point of order regarding the admissibility of a private member’s motion that would instruct a committee to bring forth a bill, Speaker Regan confirmed that the authority to bring in a bill rested strictly with ministers, but he acknowledged that the Standing Orders did not fully prescribe the limits of what is possible in a private member’s motion. In addition to recommending that the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs examine the matter further, Speaker Regan ruled that it is ultimately up to the House to determine whether to adopt a proposal put before it.

During his tenure, Speaker Regan made a number of decisions to help ensure that the process of debate was not unduly impeded. For example, on May 27, 2019, the Speaker clarified the use of unanimous consent, reminding members of the process by which they must seek it, and explained the Chair’s authority to determine whether a motion for which unanimous consent is being requested may be read in extenso.

The Chair was tasked with, among other issues, responding to points of order on the use of props in the chamber. The Chair reminded members that props—including books, buttons, and lapel pins—expressing a specific position, disrupt proceedings and are therefore unacceptable in the chamber.

This chapter contains decisions that touch on various rules of debate and reflect Speaker Regan’s respect for the traditions and practices of the House of Commons. The decisions demonstrate Speaker Regan’s commitment, in politically charged and often emotionally intense circumstances, to maintaining order and decorum in the House and to enforcing the rules of debate while respecting the rights and privileges of members.