Precedence and Sequence of Business / Supply Day

Selection of motions

Debates p. 4358

Background

Before calling the Order for the Business of Supply, the Speaker stated that two notices of motion bad been received, one from each of the two opposition parties, and that he was prepared to hear argument before selecting one for debate. In his representations to the Speaker, Mr. Hnatyshyn (Saskatoon West) used various statistics on the distribution of allotted days in the past, and pointed to the different methods used by the two opposition parties to calculate this split. Mr. Hnatyshyn also questioned the procedural correctness of the motion proposed by Mr. Murphy (Churchill) on the grounds that the proper procedure for having it placed on the Order Paper was not followed, and that the wording of the motion contravened the rules set out in Citation 423 of Beauchesne's Fifth Edition.

Issue

How many supply periods are to be taken into consideration in calculating the distribution of allotted days between the Opposition parties?

Decision

The distribution of allotted days is made in proportion to the percentage of opposition seats held by each party. In this instance, the number of supply motions moved by each party to date is counted for the three supply periods ending June 30th. Based on these calculations, the Conservative motion standing in the name of Mr. Wenman (Fraser Valley West) was selected.

Reasons given by the Speaker

When the Opposition parties are not in agreement on how to divide the available allotted days between them, the Chair must decide how they are to be split and on what basis the split is to be calculated. The questions raised by Mr. Hnatyshyn concerning the style and nature of Mr. Murphy's motion will not be ruled on. The Chair would like to renew its appeal to the Standing Committee on Procedure and Organization to clarify the intent of the House with regard to the allocation of Opposition days.

Sources cited

Standing Order 62(4)(c).

Debates, May 31, 1984, pp. 4219, 4223-4.

References

Debates, June 5, 1984, pp. 4355-7.