Amendments to Motions on Progress of Bills / Third Reading

Recommittal; to add a specific provision

Journals pp. 121-2

Debates pp. 1416-7

Background

On November 23, during debate on the motion for third reading of Bill C-181, an Act to provide temporary emergency powers for the preservation of public order in Canada, Mr. Douglas (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands) proposed an amendment that the bill be not now read a third time but be referred back to Committee of the Whole. By the terms of the amendment, the committee would reconsider a specific clause possibly to include a provision to establish an independent body to review the administration of the bill. The Speaker expressed doubts about the acceptability of the amendment, but waited until the following day to make his ruling.

Issue

Is a third reading amendment acceptable if it includes an instruction to add a provision to a clause of the bill?

Decision

No. In this case, however, the amendment will be put, but only on the understanding that it will not alter the general principles that apply on third reading.

Reasons given by the Speaker

''A bill such as this one, which deals with individual rights and fundamental freedoms, should be discussed as freely as possible and should be given the benefit of the liberal interpretation of the rules and precedents." At third reading, a motion to refer a bill back to committee for the purpose of reconsidering any clause is always in order. As ageneral principle, it is doubtful that it is procedurally correct to refer the bill back with instructions to add a provision not included in the clause, which is beyond the purview of the clause. However, it seems to be the disposition of the House that latitude be allowed at this stage of the proceedings in this particular case. Though there may be serious reservations about doing so, the amendment may be put.

Sources cited

Beauchesne, 4th ed., p. 288, c. 418.

May, 17th ed., p. 572.

References

Debates, November 23, 1970, pp. 1397-401.