House of Commons Procedure and Practice
Edited by Robert Marleau and Camille Montpetit
2000 Edition — More information …
 Search 
Previous PageNext Page

5. Parliamentary Procedure

[1] 
Franks, p. 116.
[2] 
Wilding and Laundy, p. 605.
[3] 
Black’s Law Dictionary,6th ed., St. Paul, Minn.: West Publishing Co., 1990, p. 1005, defines parliamentary law as, “The general body of enacted rules and recognized usages which governs the procedure of legislative assemblies. …”
[4] 
Bourinot, 2nd ed., pp. 258-9.
[5] 
According to C.E.S. Franks, three modern developments have led to a more rigid set of rules: the ever increasing amount of business before the House; the Member’s job becoming a full-time occupation; and the increasing willingness on the part of the opposition to use dilatory tactics (Franks, pp. 128-9).
[6] 
May, 22nd ed., p. 4.
[7] 
In testimony to the validity of pre-Confederation experiences, a few days into the First Parliament, a special committee was appointed to assist the Speaker in framing permanent rules and regulations for the House and, in its deliberations, was to study the “Rules and Standing Orders of the Imperial House of Commons, of the Legislative Assembly of the late Province of Canada, and of the Houses of Assembly of the Provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick” (Journals, November 15, 1867, p. 16).
[8] 
May, 22nd ed., p. 4.
[9] 
See, for example, Sir Thomas Smith’s 1560 “De Republica Anglorum”, which contains an impressive list of procedural rules and practices that, after more than 430 years, have barely changed. Quoted in Redlich, Vol. I, pp. 26-51.
[10] 
Griffith and Ryle, p. 176.
[11] 
Most notably theConstitutional Act, 1791, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 3, and the Union Act, 1840,R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 4.
[12] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 44. For more information on the election of the Speaker, see Chapter 7, “The Speaker and Other Presiding Officers of the House”.
[13] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 45.
[14] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 46.
[15] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 48. For more information on the quorum, see Chapter 9, “Sittings of the House”.
[16] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 54. For more information, see Chapter 18, “Financial Procedures”.
[17] 
R.S.C., 1985, Appendix II, No. 4, ss. XXXIII-IV, LVII.
[18] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.C.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 49. For more information on the casting vote, see Chapter 7, “The Speaker and Other Presiding Officers of the House”.
[19] 
Constitution Act, 1867, R.C.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 128. For more information on the oath taken by Members, see Chapter 4, “The House of Commons and Its Members”.
[20] 
Constitutional Act, 1791, R.C.S. 1985, Appendix II, No. 3, ss. XXVIII-IX.
[21] 
At the first sitting of the Nova Scotia House of Assembly on October 2, 1758, a Speaker was chosen as the first item of business before the Speech from the Throne was read (Votes of the House of Assembly, p. 1). This was repeated in the following legislature (Votes of the House of Assembly, July 1, 1861, p. 1). No formal constitution was conferred on the colony of Nova Scotia; the constitution was always considered as being derived from the terms of the Royal Commissions to the Governors (see Journals, 1883, Sessional Paper No. 70 (Provincial Charters) pp. 7-8).
[22] 
Lower Canada Journals, December 18, 1792, pp. 10-4; Upper Canada Journals, September 17, 1792, p. 1.
[23] 
Lower Canada Journals, January 11, 1793, pp. 86-90; Upper Canada Journals, September 18, 1792, p. 3.
[24] 
Bourinot, 2nd ed., p. 210.
[25] 
R.S.C. 1985, Appendix II, No. 5, s. 18. For more information on parliamentary privilege, see Chapter 3, “Privileges and Immunities”.
[26] 
R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1. Major amendments to the Act were adopted in 1991. See S.C. 1991, c. 20.
[27] 
Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 10.
[28] 
Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 25.
[29] 
Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 32.
[30] 
Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 42.
[31] 
Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 46.
[32] 
Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 55.
[33] 
Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 73.
[34] 
Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 50. For further information on the Board, see Chapter 6, “The Physical and Administrative Setting”.
[35] 
See, for example, Access to Information Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1; Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-2; Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 23; Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. c. E-3; International Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Development Act, S.C. 1988, c. 64; Official Languages Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 31, (4th Supp.) and Referendum Act, S.C. 1992, c. 30.
[36]
The Standing Orders are found in Appendix 15, “Standing Orders of the House of Commons”.
[37] 
The House adopted the following motion: “That until otherwise provided, the Rules, Regulations and Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly of the late Province of Canada, be those of this House” (Journals, November 7, 1867, p. 5, and Debates, November 6, 1867, p. 4). See also Journals, December 20, 1867, pp. 115-25, and Debates, December 20, 1867, p. 333, for the first written rules of the House of Commons.
[38] 
See Province of Canada Debates, June 15, 1841, pp. 22-3, and June 19, 1841, pp. 72-81. An analysis of these rules confirms their Lower Canadian origin. See O’Brien, pp. 255-6. For a description on how the customs and practices of Upper and Lower Canada were transformed into constitutional provisions, see David Hoffman and Norman Ward, Bilingualism and Biculturalism in the House of Commons, Ottawa: Queen’s Printer, 1970, pp. 2-20.
[39] 
Lower Canada Journals, January 1793.
[40] 
A comparative analysis of the rules of the various assemblies may be found in O’Brien, Table 6.1, pp. 439-45.
[41] 
The first amendments to the written rules occurred as early as four months after the adoption of the first Standing Orders (Journals, March 19, 1868, p. 144).
[42] 
For example, in reply to a point of order arguing that the motion “When shall the bill be read a second time?” was a votable motion, Speaker Fraser ruled that it would not be appropriate to apply to current practices what may well have been appropriate one hundred years ago (Debates, May 24, 1988, pp. 15706, 15719-23).
[43] 
For example, a long-standing practice had been for the House to arrange for longer hours of sitting prior to the start of the summer adjournment in order to complete or advance its business. In 1982, this practice was codified by adopting Standing Orders for the extension of sitting hours during the last 10 days in June. See Standing Order 27.
[44] 
There are two notable examples: First, when in December 1912, the government of Sir Robert Borden introduced a resolution on the Naval Aid Bill, it triggered one of the most bitter debates known to Parliament. After a particularly acrimonious two-week continuous sitting during a filibuster of the Bill early in 1913, the government brought forward a motion on April 9, 1913, to amend the Standing Orders. As a result of this incident, rules were adopted which, among other things, introduced closure. After an uncharacteristically long debate on the motion, the rules were adopted on April 23, 1913 (Journals, April 9, 1913, pp. 451-2; April 23, 1913, pp. 507-9; Debates, April 9, 1913, cols. 7388-414). Second, decades later, in what is known as the “Bell ringing” episode, changes were made to the Standing Orders in order to prevent a recurrence of the situation that took place in March 1982 when division bells were rung continuously for two weeks. For a detailed account of the political causes and procedural consequences of the Bell ringing episode, see Charles Robert, “Ringing in Reform: An Account of the Canadian Bells Episode of March 1982,” The Table, Vol. LI, 1983, pp. 46-53.
[45] 
Standing Order 51. For an example of such a debate, see Debates, April 21, 1998, p. 5863. For more detailed information about this proceeding, see Chapter 15, “Special Debates”.
[46] 
The Standing Committee on Procedure and Organization, as it was first called, was created on December 20, 1968 (Journals, December 20, 1968, pp. 554-74). Up to that point, it had not been uncommon for the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Speaker to sit on a special (or select) committee created to revise the rules or to chair such a committee. For example, Prime Minister Alexander Mackenzie sat on such a select committee in 1876, as did Prime Minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier in 1906 and 1909 (Journals, February 14, 1876, pp. 58-9; March 16, 1906, p. 61; December 14, 1909, p. 130). It was also common for the Prime Minister to take an active role in the process of amending the Standing Orders (see, for example, Journals, February 11, 1938, p. 60; September 18, 1945, p. 52).
[47] 
Standing Order 108(3)(a)(iii).
[48] 
See, for example, Journals, June 8, 1989, p. 340. On November 4, 1998, a report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs concerning rule changes to Private Members’ Business was concurred in (Journals, p. 1238). The next day, a point of order was raised concerning the implementation of those recommendations. Speaker Parent ruled that certain recommendations contained in the report would be implemented immediately since they were matters of practice or administration, but that other recommendations required substantive amendments to the Standing Orders which involved technical interpretations. He stated that when the House pronounced itself on a specific text, the Chair would be governed accordingly (Debates, November 5, 1998, p. 9923). The House adopted such a motion to amend the Standing Orders on November 30, 1998 (Journals, pp. 1327-9).
[49] 
See Speaker Fraser’s ruling, Debates, April 9, 1991, pp. 19236-7.
[50] 
See, for example, the Special Committee on Procedure, Journals, September 24, 1968, pp. 67-8 (Committee established), and December 20, 1968, pp. 554-79 (Fourth and Fifth Reports concurred in), and the Special Committee on the Reform of the House of Commons, Journals, December 5, 1984, pp. 153-4 (Committee established), and June 27, 1985, pp. 903, 910-9 (amendments to Standing Orders adopted).

Top of documentPrevious PageNext Page