Chapter 9Sittings of the House

Daily Sitting

Each sitting of the House normally occurs on a separate day. However, in the 19th century, two or more sittings were sometimes held on a single day.³² This was done to expedite the business of the House by circumventing the rule that did not allow a bill to receive more than one “reading” on a single day.³³ This practice was abandoned with the introduction of extended sittings, of extended hours prior to the June adjournment, and of various kinds of time limits for debate on certain items of legislation. In the 20th century, the holding of two sittings on one day occurred for entirely different reasons, namely, to terminate one session and open the next session of a Parliament,³⁴ and to allow Members to attend special ceremonies.³⁵ Since the beginning of the 21st century, the House has never held more than one sitting on a single day, although it has extended its sitting hours on many occasions, notably during the last sitting days in June,³⁶ for emergency or take-note debates,³⁷ or to continue consideration of a particular item of business.³⁸

The Standing Orders state that the House shall meet on Mondays at 11:00 a.m., on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Fridays at 10:00 a.m., and on Wednesdays at 2:00 p.m.³⁹ Once the House meets and begins its proceedings, it normally does not adjourn until the scheduled adjournment time, namely, 6:30 p.m. on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, and 2:30 p.m. on Fridays.⁴⁰ At the ordinary hour of daily adjournment on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, a motion to adjourn the House is deemed to have been made and seconded. Standing Order 38 states that this motion is debatable for not more than 30 minutes. In reality, the debate, officially referred to as the Adjournment Proceedings and informally as the “late show”,⁴¹ consists not of debate on the motion, but on topics arising from matters first raised during Oral Questions or in written questions. After the maximum of 30 minutes or when there are no further interventions, the Speaker deems the motion to adjourn to have been carried, and adjourns the House until the next sitting day.⁴² On Fridays no such motion to adjourn the House is proposed; the Speaker adjourns the House without putting (or being deemed to have put) the question.

Altering Days and Hours of Sitting

The House may adopt special orders to alter its usual sitting days or times. Through the years, these have been adopted for many reasons, such as: to shorten or eliminate a sitting for the convenience of Members while political conventions⁴³ or ceremonies to mourn the passing of public figures⁴⁴ are taking place; to allow for special events in the Chamber, such as the 2008 apology to former students of Indian residential schools;⁴⁵ to start a sitting earlier on given days in order to consider Government Orders;⁴⁶ to accommodate the installation of a new Governor General;⁴⁷ to begin a sitting earlier or later in order for a visiting leader or head of state to address both Houses;⁴⁸ to refrain from sitting on days on which the House would otherwise have sat;⁴⁹ to sit on days on which the House would otherwise have not sat, including Saturdays and Sundays;⁵⁰ and to sit as a Friday on another weekday in order to adjourn at an earlier hour.⁵¹

If a special order is adopted to sit on a Saturday or Sunday and it does not explicitly state otherwise, the Order of Business will be that of a Friday sitting.⁵² At one time, Saturday sittings of the House were common towards the end of a session or prior to the summer adjournment, when the government wished to expedite the passage of legislation. However, since the adoption of Standing Orders to allow for extended hours of sitting within the regular House of Commons timetable, the House rarely sits on Saturdays or Sundays.⁵³

On October 22, 2014, the House did not sit due to unforeseen and tragic events that had taken place earlier that morning. Questions arose as to how the Speaker could have modified the meeting times of the House had the House wished to meet later that day.⁵⁴

Suspending a Sitting

Although proceedings run continuously from the beginning of a sitting through to its adjournment, the House may agree to a temporary suspension. Suspensions are a common and simple method by which the House is able to manage its time, and may be initiated for a number of reasons. When a sitting is suspended, the Speaker leaves the Chair but the Mace remains on the Table to indicate that the House is still constituted. Sittings of the House are routinely suspended with the intention of resuming the proceedings sometime later that day, usually soon thereafter.

There is no Standing Order explicitly governing the suspension of a sitting. Provision for a suspended sitting may be contained within the wording of a motion or special order of the House,⁵⁵ or the House may suspend its proceedings by unanimous consent.⁵⁶

Sittings are most frequently suspended when the House, having terminated the consideration of an item of business, halts its proceedings “to the call of the Chair” (i.e., until the Speaker indicates the resumption of proceedings), or to the time when the next order of business is scheduled to begin. A Member may ask for the unanimous consent of the House to suspend the sitting,⁵⁷ or the Speaker, seeing that debate on an item has come to a conclusion, may suspend the sitting.⁵⁸ In the latter case, however, it is understood that the Speaker is acting with the concurrence of the House.

In recent years, the House has suspended its sittings for a variety of reasons: to await a specified time ordered by the House for a recorded division;⁵⁹ to accommodate a Royal Assent ceremony;⁶⁰ to allow the Speaker to deliberate on a ruling;⁶¹ to await the time ordered for a budget presentation;⁶² to heed a fire alarm;⁶³ to allow particular Members to be present in the Chamber for debate;⁶⁴ to await a message from the Senate regarding an amendment to a bill;⁶⁵ to allow for negotiations between parties on an item of legislation;⁶⁶ to allow a Member to obtain information about the terms of a debate;⁶⁷ to await the starting time for a take-note debate;⁶⁸ to allow copies to be made of motions introduced without notice;⁶⁹ to await an anticipated statement by the Prime Minister;⁷⁰ to allow Members to attend the funeral of a Member⁷¹ or another memorial service;⁷² to allow Members to attend the unveiling of a statue on Parliament Hill;⁷³ to rectify a technical problem with simultaneous interpretation in the Chamber;⁷⁴ and to address the sudden illness of a Member in the Chamber.⁷⁵

To resume a suspended sitting, the Speaker takes the Chair and has the bells rung briefly. The proceedings of the House recommence without a count of the House, and are conducted according to the agreement or understanding reached by the House prior to the suspension, or according to the terms of a special order adopted by the House, which may consist of simply resuming the normal order of business.

Moments of Silence

The House interrupts its business from time to time to observe a short period of silence in commemoration of particularly solemn occasions.⁷⁶ While some of these are one-time commemorations, others are observed every year with a moment of silence, notably Veterans’ Week and Remembrance Day,⁷⁷ the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women,⁷⁸ and the National Day of Mourning for those killed in workplace incidents.⁷⁹ These moments are often held at the end of Statements by Members, during Routine Proceedings (often at the end of “Statements by Ministers”), or after Oral Questions. The Speaker usually introduces the moment of silence by indicating that prior consultations have been held among the parties and that they have agreed to observe a moment of silence for the occasion in question. The Speaker, the Members, and others in the Chamber and galleries rise to their feet and remain silent for about one minute. Broadcasting normally continues uninterrupted throughout. The moment of silence usually ends with the Speaker stating the next item of business.

Continuing or Extending a Sitting Beyond the Ordinary Hour of Daily Adjournment

Under certain conditions, any Member may move a motion, without notice, to extend a sitting beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment time, in order to continue the consideration of a specific item of business at one or more stages.⁸⁰ However, while a motion to extend the sitting may “propose the continuation” of the debate, it may not propose its completion.⁸¹

From 1927, when the fixed adjournment rule came into effect, until 1965, many motions to continue or extend sittings through mealtimes or beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment were agreed to, often by unanimous consent. By the early 1960s, however, it had become increasingly difficult to secure agreements to extend a sitting beyond the obligatory adjournment time on any given day.⁸² This inflexibility led to the introduction of a new Standing Order in 1965 which created a different sitting extension mechanism.⁸³

Since then, motions to extend a sitting have generally been moved, by Ministers as well as Members, during Government Orders.⁸⁴ A motion to continue or extend a sitting of the House must be proposed while the item to be considered is under discussion,⁸⁵ and the mover must present it during the hour preceding the moment when Private Members’ Business or the ordinary hour of daily adjournment would normally interrupt consideration of the item.⁸⁶ A motion of this nature is neither debatable nor amendable⁸⁷ and may not be moved during Private Members’ Business.⁸⁸ Such a motion can be moved by a Member in the course of debate, but not on a point of order,⁸⁹ nor during the period reserved for questions and comments following a Member’s speech,⁹⁰ nor when the House is bound to complete a proceeding by a specific time.⁹¹ For example, a motion to extend the sitting beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment may not be proposed when votes are scheduled on days allotted for the Business of Supply, during debate on the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne or on the budget, when time allocation or closure is applied to a bill or motion, or when any special order of the House prescribes a precise time to dispose of a proceeding.

When a motion to continue or extend the sitting has been moved, the Speaker puts the question to the House and specifically requests those Members who object to rise. If 15 or more Members do so, the motion is deemed to have been withdrawn; otherwise, the motion is adopted.⁹² Occasionally, the same motion has been moved more than once in the same hour.⁹³ If the House is in a Committee of the Whole, it is necessary for the Committee to rise briefly so the motion can be properly moved and disposed of with the Speaker in the Chair.⁹⁴

When a motion to extend a sitting is adopted prior to the consideration of Private Members’ Business on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday, the extended debate continues after Private Members’ Hour is completed.

A sitting may be extended as a consequence of a Standing Order or special order of the House that requires that an item of business be continued, disposed of, or concluded within a given sitting. In such cases, only a Minister may propose a motion to adjourn the House before the proceedings on the item are completed.⁹⁵ Otherwise, once the proceedings in question are completed, the House adjourns as usual.⁹⁶

There are other reasons for the House to continue to sit beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment prescribed in the Standing Orders, including: adoption of a special order to this effect;⁹⁷ the extension of Government Orders as a result of a period of questions and comments on a time allocation motion, or as a result of Statements by Ministers;⁹⁸ consideration of specific votes in the main estimates in Committee of the Whole;⁹⁹ completion of debate on a closured item;¹⁰⁰ an emergency debate;¹⁰¹ or a take-note debate.¹⁰²

The House may also sit beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment to elect a Speaker. The election of a Speaker has precedence over all other matters; no motion for adjournment is accepted until a Speaker is declared elected and installed in the Chair. Once the Speaker has been elected, after the customary thanks and congratulations have been expressed and, after announcing the time and the date for the Speech from the Throne, the Speaker adjourns the House until the next sitting.¹⁰³

Adjournment of a Sitting Before the Ordinary Hour of Daily Adjournment

The House may wish to adjourn earlier than the time prescribed in the Standing Orders. Once again, the House may do this by adopting a special order to this effect.¹⁰⁴ At other times, when debate on an item of business concludes before the ordinary hour of daily adjournment, the House may adjourn earlier by unanimous consent: the Speaker, or a Member through the Speaker, seeks the consent of the House to “see the clock at” or “call it” 6:30 p.m. (or 2:30 p.m. on Fridays, or some other specified time when the House has adopted an order to that effect, as is often the case in late June). Since this consent is usually granted, no motion to adjourn is necessary.¹⁰⁵

A Member may propose the motion “That this House do now adjourn” to adjourn the House without notice,¹⁰⁶ except under circumstances where this is explicitly prohibited by the Standing Orders.¹⁰⁷ The motion is not debatable or amendable, and its adoption immediately concludes a sitting. If the motion is not adopted, the same motion may be moved again in the same sitting, but only after an intervening proceeding has taken place.

Among the factors that have led the House to adjourn earlier than the time prescribed are a lack of water within the Parliamentary Precinct, which posed a health and safety risk,¹⁰⁸ and notification of the death of a Member, former Member, or dignitary.¹⁰⁹

Extending Sitting Hours in June

Since the advent of a fixed House of Commons calendar in 1982, the Standing Orders have provided for the extension of sitting hours during the last 10 sitting days in June.¹¹⁰ This rule codified a long-standing practice whereby, in preparation for the prorogation of Parliament or the start of the summer recess, the House would arrange for longer hours of sitting in order to complete or advance its business. These longer hours of sitting were generally made up of Saturday sittings,¹¹¹ earlier meetings on weekdays,¹¹² sitting during evenings when the House was not scheduled to sit,¹¹³ and the omission of lunch and dinner breaks.¹¹⁴

In order to extend the hours of sitting in June, a motion must be moved by a Minister during Routine Proceedings on the 10th sitting day preceding June 23.¹¹⁵ The motion, for which no notice is required, must propose to extend sittings to a specific hour, though not necessarily for every day during that period.¹¹⁶ It is subject to a maximum two-hour debate before the question is put by the Speaker.¹¹⁷

Although this Standing Order has been in effect since 1982, it has not been used at every opportunity. On a number of occasions, special orders have been moved instead and adopted, usually by unanimous consent.¹¹⁸

A Sitting That Lasts More than One Day

A single sitting of the House may take place over more than one calendar day. Prior to the establishment, in 1927, of a fixed hour of adjournment for each day of the week,¹¹⁹ sittings often extended over more than one day.¹²⁰ Since then, multi-day sittings have occurred only infrequently, occasioned by such factors as the prolonged ringing of the division bells,¹²¹ the extension of a sitting beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment for the purpose of considering a specified item of business,¹²² the continuation of an emergency or a take-note debate past the hour of adjournment stipulated in the Standing Orders,¹²³ the decision to complete all remaining stages of a bill¹²⁴ or to allow all Members wishing to do so to speak on an item,¹²⁵ and the holding of recorded divisions at the report stage of a bill.¹²⁶ At the conclusion of an extended sitting, the House stands adjourned until the regular commencement time of the next sitting, which is either later the same day if that hour has not yet been reached,¹²⁷ or the next sitting day if the extended sitting has gone beyond that hour.¹²⁸

32.: See, for example, Journals, July 18, 1895, p. 300. On June 21, 1869, the House conducted three separate sittings throughout the course of one day. This is the only known example of this occurrence (Journals, pp. 292–308).
33.: Standing Order 71.
34.: See, for example, Journals, October 9, 1951; November 20, 1952; January 8, 1957; May 8, 1967; October 12, 1976.
35.: See, for example, Journals, March 8, 1955, pp. 245–7 (unveiling of the memorial to the late Agnes Macphail, the first female Member elected to the House of Commons); Debates, March 29, 1973, pp. 2726–7; Journals, March 30, 1973, p. 229 (joint address by the President of Mexico).
36.: See, for example, Journals, June 9, 2006, p. 259; May 27, 2014, pp. 1068–70.
37.: See, for example, Journals, April 28, 2003, pp. 700–1; September 28, 2006, p. 471; September 16, 2014, p. 1441; May 5, 2015, p. 2477.
38.: See, for example, Journals, June 5, 2000, p. 1790; October 22, 2003, p. 1149; January 31, 2008, pp. 366–7; June 9, 2014, p. 1218. In the latter instance, the House sat until midnight in accordance with an order made pursuant to Standing Order 27, and then continued sitting past midnight in accordance with an order made pursuant to Standing Order 26.
39.: Standing Order 24(1).
40.: Standing Order 24(2). Until 1906, there was no predetermined adjournment time. That year, the House agreed to adjourn the proceedings of the House at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesdays in order to allow for one night in the week when the House would not sit (Debates, July 9, 1906, cols. 7463–5). It was not until 1927 that the House adopted a mandatory time of adjournment for all sitting days (Journals, March 22, 1927, pp. 318–9).
41.: Since the Adjournment Proceedings normally take place at the end of the sitting, they thus became known as the “late show” at the time of late evening sittings.
42.: Standing Order 38. For further information on the Adjournment Proceedings, see Chapter 11, “Questions”.
43.: See, for example, Debates, September 29, 2005, p. 8237; Journals, October 21, 2013, p. 41.
44.: For example, the House decided not to sit when the funeral was being held for His Holiness the late Pope John Paul II (Debates, April 6, 2005, p. 4753). See also the changes to sitting days following the death of Prime Minister Sir John Alexander Macdonald (Journals, June 8, 1891, p. 208), former Governor General Georges Philias Vanier (Journals, March 6, 1967, p. 1489), Member Shaughnessy Cohen (Journals, December 10, 1998, p. 1438), and former Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty (Journals, April 11, 2014, pp. 836–7).
45.: Journals, June 10, 2008, p. 952.
46.: See, for example, Journals, May 30, 1977, p. 874; June 18, 2009, p. 669.
47.: See, for example, Journals, September 26, 2005, p. 1015; September 27, 2005, p. 1049; Debates, September 23, 2010, pp. 4281–2.
48.: See, for example, Journals, February 24, 2004, p. 119; March 9, 2004, p. 151 (sitting delayed for the speech to be given by the Secretary General of the United Nations); May 5, 2006, pp. 134–5; Debates, May 18, 2006, p. 1549 (sitting moved ahead for the speech by the Prime Minister of Australia); Journals, October 27, 2014, p. 1651 (sitting delayed for the speech of the President of the French Republic).
49.: See, for example, Journals, June 21, 2006, p. 340; November 9, 2006, p. 673; December 12, 2012, p. 2634–5; September 15, 2014, p. 1342.
50.: See, for example, Journals, December 19, 1975, p. 970; December 20, 1975, p. 971; March 23, 1995, p. 1265.
51.: See, for example, Journals, February 26, 2015, p. 2188. The House has at times adopted a Friday schedule for another weekday without identifying it as such. See, for example, Journals, September 25, 2012, p. 10433.
52.: An unusual situation occurred in 1961 when the House, having adopted an opposition amendment to a government motion extending the hours of sitting, agreed to Saturday sittings without determining their order of business (Journals, April 24, 1961, p. 468). The government attempted to introduce a motion rectifying the omission but failed to receive the consent of the House to do so (Debates, May 5, 1961, p. 4443). As a result, the Order Paper for Saturday, May 6, included the items available for consideration ordered as for a Friday sitting. See Speaker Michener’s ruling (Journals, May 6, 1961, pp. 511–4). On March 23, 1995, the House adopted an order to sit at 9:00 a.m. on Saturday, March 25, 1995, and at 1:00 p.m. on Sunday, March 26, 1995, for the purpose of considering Government Orders and attending a Royal Assent ceremony. On these two days, the House considered Bill C-77, An Act to provide for the maintenance of railway operations and subsidiary services, 1st Sess, 35th Parl, 1995, at the report and third reading stages. Royal Assent took place on the Sunday (Journals, March 23, 1995, p. 1265; March 25, 1995, pp. 1277–88; March 26, 1995, pp. 1289–91).
53.: The last occasion of a continued period of Saturday sittings was in 1961, prior to the summer adjournment of the House. The House sat on every Saturday in the months of May, June and July, prior to the adjournment of the House for the summer on July 13, 1961, pursuant to a Sessional Order to that effect adopted on April 24, 1961 (Journals, pp. 467–8). The House has conducted a Sunday sitting only twice: on March 26, 1995 (Journals, pp. 1289–91), and on June 26, 2011 (Journals, pp. 175–7), in the latter case only for the purposes of Royal Assent.
54.: This question was in fact raised by Speaker Scheer in a letter to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs in which he proposed that it review the Standing Orders regarding the lack of provisions that would allow the Speaker to modify the hours or days of sitting in an emergency situation. Arguments could have been made, however, that the Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 1, had the authority to do so. At its meeting on February 3, 2015, the Committee agreed to propose a change to the Standing Orders to that effect (Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, Minutes of Proceedings, February 3, 2015, Meeting No. 66). The Committee did not report on the matter.
55.: See, for example, Journals, September 20, 2001, p. 618; April 8, 2002, p. 1264.
56.: See, for example, Journals, October 8, 2003, p. 1114; March 21, 2005, p. 523; June 16, 2011, p. 105, Debates, p. 431.
57.: As in the case of motions to adjourn earlier than scheduled, suggestions to suspend the sitting are often proposed by House Officers such as the House Leaders, the Whips, or their deputies. This is normally done after consultation or agreement among the parties. See, for example, Debates, March 20, 2003, pp. 4451, 4453; March 21, 2005, p. 4344.
58.: This is often true of Private Members’ Business. It has become the practice that when proceedings on an item of Private Members’ Business on a Monday have been completed before the end of the time provided in the rules, as there can be no further business before the House at that moment, the Chair will suspend the sitting until the time to proceed with Government Orders. Over the years, suspension of House business has been proposed both by Members and the Chair. On many occasions, the Chair has suspended the sitting with the implicit consent of the House. See, for example, Debates, January 31, 2005, pp. 2824–5; November 28, 2005, p. 10183; December 1, 2014, p. 9963–4. It is also frequently proposed by Members and by the Chair that the House, by unanimous consent, proceed immediately without a suspension to the next scheduled order of business. See, for example, Debates, December 13, 2004, p. 2695; May 31, 2005, pp. 6430–1; May 8, 2015, pp. 13672, 13674.
59.: See, for example, Debates, October 1, 2003, p. 8057; October 8, 2003, p. 8342.
60.: See, for example, Debates, October 10, 1991, p. 3618; October 29, 1991, pp. 4203–4.
61.: See, for example, Debates, January 29, 2002, p. 8471; May 27, 2003, p. 6590; June 12, 2014, p. 6802.
62.: See, for example, Debates, April 26, 1993, pp. 18464, 18470; March 23, 2004, p. 1615.
63.: See, for example, Debates, October 19, 2006, p. 3973; November 30, 2010, p. 6630.
64.: See, for example, Debates, November 28, 1989, p. 6338 (sitting suspended in order to wait for Members who were late because of inclement weather); March 11, 1993, p. 16893; March 27, 2003, p. 4842 (sitting suspended in order to await the arrival of Members for the Adjournment Proceedings); April 3, 2003, p. 5139 (sitting suspended to await the arrival of a Member for Private Members’ Business); June 13, 2003, p. 7282 (sitting suspended to await the arrival of Members for Statements by Members).
65.: See, for example, Debates, July 24, 1986, pp. 15011–2, 15061.
66.: See, for example, Debates, December 11, 1989, p. 6784.
67.: See, for example, Debates, February 23, 2004, p. 905.
68.: See, for example, Debates, October 7, 2004, p. 128.
69.: See, for example, Debates, June 14, 1990, p. 12788.
70.: See, for example, Debates, January 17, 1991, pp. 17268–70.
71.: See, for example, Debates, November 20, 1989, p. 5853; Journals, November 21, 1989, p. 862.
72.: See, for example, Debates, September 20, 2001, pp. 5329, 5336. The House suspended its sitting to enable Members to attend an interfaith service to commemorate the victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States. In 2002, the House suspended its sitting by unanimous consent to allow Members to attend the Commemoration Service for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother (Journals, April 8, 2002, p. 1264).
73.: See, for example, Debates, September 26, 1990, pp. 13452–3, 13455.
74.: See, for example, Debates, June 18, 2013, p. 18516.
75.: Debates, December 9, 1998, p. 11122.
76.: For example, moments of silence were observed to commemorate the deaths of World War II veteran Cliff Chadderton (Debates, December 2, 2013, p. 1613); Nelson Mandela (Debates, December 5, 2013, p. 1854), Jean Béliveau (Debates, December 3, 2014, p. 10124); Corporal Nathan Cirillo (Debates, October 23, 2014, p. 8691); and Speaker of the Senate Senator Pierre-Claude Nolin (Debates, April 24, 2015, p. 12999); and to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Empress of Ireland (Debates, May 29, 2014, p. 5853) and the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz (Debates, January 27, 2015, p. 10689).
77.: See, for example, Debates, November 5, 2014, p. 9225.
78.: See, for example, Debates, December 5, 2014, p. 10242.
79.: See, for example, Debates, April 28, 2015, p. 13127.
80.: Standing Order 26(1).
81.: Debates, June 5, 1987, p. 6804; August 23, 1988, p. 18778.
82.: On one occasion, the refusal of unanimous consent to extend a sitting to complete the consideration of an item of business indirectly resulted in the holding of a sitting on a Good Friday (Journals, March 27, 1964, p. 137).
83.: Standing Order 6(2) (Journals, June 11, 1965, p. 224). Today’s Standing Order 26 is a variation of that initial change.
84.: See, for example, Journals, November 3, 2004, p. 191; February 16, 2007, p. 1021; June 9, 2014, p. 1218.
85.: On November 7, 1986, a motion was adopted to sit beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment for the purpose of continuing the rubric “Introduction of Bills” under Routine Proceedings (Journals, p. 190).
86.: Standing Order 26(1)(a) and (b). See the ruling of Acting Speaker Milliken (Debates, November 27, 1996, pp. 6813–4).
87.: Standing Order 26(1)(c). On one occasion, a motion was amended by unanimous consent to provide for a dinner hour (Debates, August 31, 1966, pp. 7862–3).
88.: On June 3, 1987, the House amended its Standing Orders to prohibit the moving of such motions during Private Members’ Business (Journals, pp. 1016–28, in particular p. 1017). See the ruling of the Chair on December 14, 1990 (Debates, pp. 16797–9). From 1965 to 1985, six motions to extend the sitting on Private Members’ Business were moved and two were adopted (Journals, February 13, 1976, p. 1021; February 9, 1983, p. 5587; February 16, 1983, p. 5612; Debates, February 23, 1983, pp. 23153–4; Journals, February 7, 1984, p. 149; March 18, 1985, p. 387).
89.: See, for example, Debates, May 20, 1992, p. 10968; June 8, 1992, pp. 11596–7; March 9, 1993, p. 16747; October 30, 2002, pp. 1106–7.
90.: See, for example, Debates, February 17, 1987, p. 3541; March 26, 1991, pp. 19010–1; October 30, 2002, pp. 1106–7.
91.: See, for example, Debates, November 28, 1996, p. 6876.
92.: Standing Order 26(2). See, for example, Journals, February 16, 2007, p. 1021(motion adopted); June 9, 2014, p. 1218 (motion adopted); November 3, 2004, p. 191 (motion deemed withdrawn).
93.: See, for example, Debates, November 3, 2004, pp. 1178, 1183.
94.: Standing Order 26(1)(a). See, for example, Debates, March 13, 1969, p. 6606; November 17, 1970, p. 1270. For further information about Committees of the Whole, see Chapter 19, “Committees of the Whole House”.
95.: Standing Order 25. Ministers have rarely moved the adjournment of the House before the completion of proceedings under this rule. See, for example, Journals, October 31 to November 1, 1983, pp. 6383, 6388–9. However, on several occasions, motions to adjourn the House have been refused on days when a special or Standing Order required completion or disposition of an item or items of business. See, for example, Debates, January 31, 1983, p. 22341; February 1, 1983, pp. 22400–1; May 23, 1985, pp. 4984, 5011–2; December 7, 1990, p. 16470.
96.: Standing Order 24(2). See, for example, Journals, April 6, 2006, pp. 28, 30; May 3, 2006, pp. 122–3, 127; April 22, 2015, p. 2385; April 24, 2015, pp. 2412, 2415.
97.: See, for example, Journals, May 16, 2006, pp. 177–8; December 5, 2006, pp. 865–6; December 11, 2007, pp. 295–6.
98.: See, for example, Journals, October 17, 2013, pp. 24, 28 (postponement of adjournment when Government Orders are extended because of Statements by Ministers); Debates, December 3, 2012, pp. 12748, 12793 (postponement of adjournment when Government Orders are extended by the period of questions and comments on a time allocation motion).
99.: Standing Order 81(4)(a).
100.: Standing Order 57. See, for example, Journals, May 29, 2012, pp. 1331–42.
101.: Standing Order 52(10) and (12).
102.: Standing Order 53.1. The special order governing a take-note debate may establish a specific mechanism for adjournment. See, for example, Journals, April 6, 2006, p. 28; April 7, 2006, p. 32; May 1, 2006, p. 113. For further information on take-note debates, see Chapter 15, “Special Debates”.
103.: Standing Order 2. The election of John Fraser as Speaker in September 1986 serves as an excellent example of the operation of this Standing Order. The House met at 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, September 30, and proceeded with the election process. After 11 ballots, John Fraser was elected Speaker and, after taking the Chair, adjourned the House at 2:30 a.m. on the morning of October 1 (Journals, September 30, 1986, pp. 1–9). For further information on the election of the Speaker, see Chapter 7, “The Speaker and Other Presiding Officers of the House”.
104.: See, for example, Journals, May 5, 2006, pp. 134–5; June 21, 2006, p. 340; June 22, 2006, p. 352.
105.: Such suggestions are usually made by the government, either the Chief Government Whip, the Government House Leader, or the Parliamentary Secretary to the Government House Leader. See, for example, Debates, May 6, 2005, p. 5778; May 19, 2006, p. 1617; June 20, 2012, p. 9944. Occasionally, when an item of business has been concluded, the Chair, sensing the mood of the House, will suggest “seeing the clock”. See, for example, Debates, December 10, 2002, p. 2548.
106.: See, for example, Journals, May 11, 2005, pp. 740–2; May 12, 2005, pp. 745–6; May 13, 2005, pp. 751–2.
107.: Standing Order 60. For example, the motion is prohibited during the election of a Speaker (Standing Order 2(3)). For further information regarding the restrictions on the use of this Standing Order, see Chapter 12, “The Process of Debate”, and Chapter 14, “The Curtailment of Debate”.
108.: Debates, May 5, 2008, p. 5457.
109.: For example, the House adjourned when it was notified of the death of former Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Debates, September 28, 2000, pp. 8838–9). The House adjourned again the following day, but this time for several days (Journals, September 29, 2000, p. 2013). The House similarly adjourned early on March 23, 2016 out of respect for the memory of Jim Hillyer, the Member for Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner, who died earlier that same day (Journals, March 23, 2016, p. 287).
110.: Standing Order 27.
111.: See, for example, Journals, April 24, 1961, pp. 467–8, when the last sessional order providing for a Saturday sitting was adopted by the House.
112.: In the 19th century, the House met earlier each day, usually at 11:00 a.m., and arranged to hold two distinct sittings each day. This allowed the House to advance certain business, such as the completion of several stages of a bill, on the same day. By 1900, however, longer hours were provided for mainly through earlier meeting times. See, for example, Journals, June 8, 1897, p. 222; June 22, 1900, p. 359.
113.: See, for example, Journals, July 20, 1956, p. 911.
114.: See, for example, Journals, June 27, 1950, p. 600.
115.: Until 1991, the Standing Order permitted a motion of this nature to be moved by any Member. On June 15, 1988, Nelson Riis (Kamloops—Shuswap), the House Leader for the New Democratic Party, moved a motion to extend the hours of sitting pursuant to the Standing Order, as was permitted at that time. Debate on the motion was adjourned before the maximum two hours of debate had taken place (Journals, p. 2894, Debates, pp. 16498–501). The Standing Order was amended on April 11, 1991, limiting the moving of the motion to Ministers (Journals, p. 2906).
116.: Since 1982, Standing Order 27 has been used successfully 11 times. In 1995 and 1998, motions to extend the hours of sitting extended the hours for the full 10 days referred to in the Standing Order (Journals, June 9, 1995, p. 1604; June 9, 1998, p. 954), but it happens quite regularly that the motion does not apply to all 10 days. For instance, in 1983, the motion to extend the hours of sitting omitted the Friday and the days set aside for Private Members’ Business (Journals, June 15, 1983, p. 6036); in June 2007, the motion adopted did not refer to Monday, June 11, Tuesday, June 12 or Friday, June 22, 2007 (Journals, June 11, 2007, p. 1503); and in June 2012, Fridays in the period in question were likewise exempted (Journals, June 11, 2012, pp. 1476, 1483–6). On these days not covered by the motion, regular hours of sitting remained in effect. Motions moved pursuant to Standing Order 27 have also at times been defeated (Journals, June 9, 2008, pp. 944–5; June 9, 2009, p. 601).
117.: Standing Order 27. For an example where the motion was debated, see Journals, June 11, 2012, p. 1476.
118.: Special orders to extend June sittings have generally been adopted when the House has wished to take this decision prior to the date on which Standing Order 27 could normally have been invoked. See, for example, Journals, June 14, 1984, p. 566; June 13, 1985, pp. 803–4; June 11, 1986, p. 2301; June 12, 1987, p. 1089; June 13, 1989, pp. 360–1; May 31, 1990, p. 1791; June 5, 1990, p. 1821; May 22, 2013, pp. 3155–65; May 27, 2014, pp. 1064–70. On June 20, 1988, the House adopted a government motion to extend not only the hours of sitting but also the House’s sitting days further into the summer (Journals, pp. 2925–7).
119.: Debates, March 22, 1927, pp. 318–9.
120.: There are numerous examples of single sittings consuming many days at a time. See Sir John George Bourinot, Parliamentary Procedure and Practice in the Dominion of Canada, 4th ed., ed. Thomas Barnard Flint (Toronto: Canada Law Book, 1916), pp. 213–4.
121.: A notable example occurred in 1982, when division bells were rung continuously for several days resulting in a two-week sitting (Journals, March 2–17, 1982, p. 4608). See also Journals, March 19, 1984, pp. 260–3; March 28, 1984, pp. 314–6.
122.: Standing Order 26. See, for example, Journals, October 31, 1983, p. 6383; February 3, 1987, pp. 433, 443; November 28, 1990, pp. 2312, 2316; June 18, 1991, pp. 216, 223; February 19, 1992, pp. 1043–4; May 25, 1993, pp. 2993, 3004.
123.: Standing Orders 52 and 53.1. See, for example, Journals, September 18, 2000, pp. 1910 (emergency debate), 1926; April 9, 2002, pp. 1274–5 (emergency debate); October 7, 2004, p. 33; October 12, 2004, p. 83 (take-note debates). For further information on emergency and take-note debates, see Chapter 15, “Special Debates”.
124.: See, for example, Journals, March 23, 1999, pp. 1650–3, 1656–7; June 23, 2011, pp. 151, 174.
125.: See, for example, Journals, October 7, 2004, p. 33; May 16, 2006, pp. 177–8.
126.: Journals, December 7, 1999, pp. 337, 345, 765–7; March 13, 2000, pp. 1071, 1133, 1394. In 1999 and 2000, more than 400 motions were filed for the report stages of Bill C-9, An Act to give effect to the Nisga’a Final Agreement Act, 2nd Sess, 36th Parl, 2000 and Bill C-20, An Act to give effect to the requirement for clarity as set out in the opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada in the Quebec Secession Reference, 2nd Sess, 36th Parl, 2000. The divisions on these report stages lasted two days. After the adoption, in February 2001, of the motion amending Standing Orders 76 and 76.1 to limit the type of amendments admissible at report stage, there was initially a decrease in the number of such motions (Journals, February 27, 2001, pp. 140–3). Then, in June 2012, more than 800 motions were filed for report stage of Bill C-38, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, 1st Sess, 41st Parl, 2012 (Journals, June 13, 2012, pp. 1508–832), and more than 1600 for report stage of Bill C-45, A second Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 29, 2012 and other measures, 1st Sess, 41st Parl, 2012, in December of the same year (Journals, December 4, 2012, pp. 2417–531). For both budget implementation bills, the House sat well past the ordinary hour of daily adjournment and, in the case of Bill C-38, through the night and into the following day. For further information about amendments at report stage, see Chapter 16, “The Legislative Process”.
127.: See, for example, Journals, June 21, 2006, p. 342; May 29, 2012, p. 1342.
128.: See, for example, Journals, April 28–29, 1987, pp. 796–7; December 7, 1999, p. 767; June 23, 2011, pp. 153–7, 160–1, 168, 174.

For questions about parliamentary procedure, contact the Table Research Branch

613-996-3611

trbdrb@parl.gc.ca