Adjournment Motion Proposed Under Standing Order 26 / Application Not Accepted

Supply day

Debates p. 7836

Background

Mr. Saltsman (Waterloo) sought leave to move the adjournment of the House, under the provisions of Standing Order 26, in order to discuss "the federal Government's policy to implement a restraint program against the wage and salary earners of this country... Any policy which seeks to hold down the incomes of one group of the economy while leaving the incomes of other groups unrestrained is discriminatory and inequitable and should be resisted by this Parliament."

Issue

Does the application meet the requirements of Standing Order 26?

Decision

No. The application is not accepted.

Reasons given by the Speaker

Since government business has already been set aside to discuss a supply motion, it would be difficult to pre-empt consideration of the supply motion in favour of a motion for an emergency debate even if the debate were to be postponed. The matter is of extreme importance and national concern, and will be the subject of continuing discussions and negotiations. Finally, the motion is in the form of a condemnation of a proposed government policy, and is normally put before the House by way of a non-confidence motion.

Sources cited

Standing Order 58.