Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Second Reading

Second reading

Journals p. 551

Debates p. 5852

Background

During debate on the second reading of Bill C-47, an Act to amend the Judges Act and certain other Acts for related purposes and in respect of the reconstitution of the Supreme Courts of Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island, Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre) proposed to move that all the words after the word "That" be replaced with the following:

"this House declines to give second reading to Bill C-47 because it fails to limit the salary increases contained therein to the restraint limits proposed by the government, namely that executive and professional salaries should not be increased by more than 12 per cent or $2,400 per year, whichever is the lesser."

Issue

Does the proposed amendment express a principle? Is the principle expressed opposed to that of the bill?

Decision

The amendment is out of order.

Reasons given by the Speaker

The principle of the bill is surely the idea of an increase in salary, and not its increase to a specified level. The amendment therefore, does not express a principle. It could be held to express an opinion, but it is not one that opposes the principle of the bill.

Precedents cited

Journals, February 6, 1975, pp. 275-7.

Debates, February 6, 1975, pp. 2971-2, 2979.

References

Debates, May 15, 1975, pp. 5840-2, 5847-9.