Amendments and Subamendments to Motions / Relevance

Subamendment; beyond scope of amendment

Journals pp. 43-4

Debates p. 183

Background

During debate on the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne, to the amendment moved by Mr. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Official Opposition) that pensions received under the Old Age Security Act be increased, Mr. Godin (Portneuf) moved a subamendment regarding the absence of provisions for increases in family allowances based on the cost of living index. Before ruling on the acceptability of the subamendment, the Speaker asked for comments from Members.

Issue

Is the subamendment relevant to the amendment?

Decision

No, and is therefore out of order.

Reasons given by the Speaker

"A subamendment should not enlarge upon the scope of the amendment but it should deal with matters that are not covered by the amendment." Many subamendments moved in similar circumstances have been ruled out of order because they did not deal directly with the amendment. In this case, the subamendment deals with an entirely different subject. Although this matter is related to social security measures, the relationship is neither complete nor specific enough.

Sources cited

Beauchesne, 3rd ed., p. 142, c. 367; 4th ed., p. 169, c. 202(3).

Journals, March 5, 1948, pp. 220-1.

Debates, February 24, 1964, pp. 148-9.

References

Debates, January 24, 1966, pp. 180-3.