Chapter X — Financial Procedures

Introduction

The Standing Orders on financial procedures are fundamental as a codification of the financial relationship between Parliament and the Crown. Reduced to its simplest expression, the relationship is as follows: “…the Crown demands money and Parliament grants it… but the Commons do not vote money unless such taxation be necessary for the public service, as declared by the Crown through its constitutional advisers”. This chapter provides descriptions of the Standing Orders governing these complex procedures and practices. Supply, Ways and Means and Budget proceedings are all explained as are the Royal Recommendation and the right of the Commons to grant aids and supplies. For the sake of logic and cohesiveness, the historical summaries and reference notes of these closely related Standing Orders have been combined.

Recommendation

Commentary — Standing Order 79(1)

In our system of parliamentary government, the Sovereign, as represented by the Governor General, and acting on the advice of His or Her responsible ministers, is charged with the management of all revenues of the State and the payment of all public expenditures. The appropriation of money for these payments has to be first recommended by the Governor General to the House (known as a Royal Recommendation) and then approved by Parliament. Section (1) reaffirms the Crown’s initiative as expressed in section 54 of the Constitution Act, 1867, in matters of expenditure by expressing the requirement that a Royal Recommendation must be provided for every vote, resolution, address, or bill for the appropriation of public revenues. The message must be obtained in the same session in which the measure requiring it is introduced.

Commentary — Standing Order 79(2)

The message from the Governor General and the Royal Recommendation relating to any bill involving spending provisions must be printed in the Notice Paper. If they are placed on notice before the bill’s introduction, they must be entered in the Journals for the sitting during which the bill will be introduced in the House. [1] If they are placed on notice after the bill has been introduced in the House, they must appear in the Journals for the first sitting during which the order is called for consideration of the bill to which the recommendation applies. [2] An additional requirement is that the text of the recommendation must also be printed with such bills.

Commentary — Standing Order 79(3)

Whenever Main or Supplementary Estimates are presented in the House, the Minister tabling them delivers a message from the Governor General to the House which, according to this section, is read by the Speaker as the Members stand in their places. The message containing the Royal Recommendation is then printed in the Journals of that sitting.

Right of the House

Commentary — Standing Order 80(1)

Section (1) of Standing Order 80, unchanged from Confederation, asserts the Commons’ claim to pre-eminence in financial matters. The text copies a resolution from the United Kingdom passed in 1678, and is based on section 53 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which states that “Bills for appropriating any part of the public revenue, or for imposing any tax or impost, shall originate in the House of Commons”. Such bills (relating not only to Supply but also to Ways and Means) are not amendable by the Senate. [3]

Commentary — Standing Order 80(2)

Although the House claims pre-eminence over the Senate in financial matters, as explained in this Standing Order, it is willing to expedite the business of Parliament with regard to any bill originating in the Senate or any amendment proposed by the Senate which simply imposes financial penalties to punish or prevent crimes, but which is not a substitute for taxation. Section (2) of Standing Order 80 copies an old resolution from the United Kingdom to this effect.

Supply

Commentary — Standing Order 81(1)

During the Speech from the Throne at the start of each session, the Governor General traditionally addresses the House and says, “You will be asked to appropriate the funds required to carry on the services and expenditures authorized by Parliament.” [4] As a result, the House will adopt a motion at its earliest convenience, pursuant to Standing Order 81(1), which generally reads as follows: “That this House at its next sitting consider the business of Supply.” [5] This is the mechanism by which a continuing order is inserted under Government Orders on the Order Paper to deal with Supply. In other words, the House orders that the business of Supply will be on its agenda for every sitting of the session thereafter. [6] Whenever a Supply item on an allotted day is to be considered by the House, it will appear under this Order of the Day on the Order Paper.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(2)

The importance of the business of Supply is underlined by the fact that for allotted days, section (2) gives it precedence over all other government business. Just the same, the government has the option of calling or not calling the order for the business of Supply. [7] If the day is to count as an allotted day, the business of Supply must be the first Government Order read; pursuant to section (15) of this Standing Order, opposition motions (if there are any) will have precedence, followed by government Supply motions. If all Supply business is exhausted, any other Government Order could be read, pursuant to Standing Order 40. [8]

Commentary — Standing Order 81(3)

The business of Supply is composed of many different items. Standing Order 81(3) lists those items of parliamentary business which come under the heading of Supply and which can be moved on a day allotted for those purposes by the government. Each item of Supply in Standing Order 81(3) can be succinctly described as follows:

Interim Supply: Since the fiscal year begins on April 1 and since the appropriation bill based on the Main Estimates is not expected to be adopted until the last allotted day in the Supply period ending June 23, the government will be without funds for roughly three months. Consequently, the Crown will ask for an advance against the Main Estimates, known as “interim Supply”.

Main Estimates: The annual spending plans of the government are known as the Main Estimates and normally are tabled on or before March 1 each year.

Supplementary Estimates: Since Main Estimates are prepared long in advance of the start of the fiscal year, it often happens that amounts calculated for certain programs are too small or that an expenditure for a new purpose is needed. As a result, the Crown may introduce Supplementary Estimates from time to time.

Motions to restore or reinstate: During consideration in committee, an estimate item (known as a “Vote”) may be reduced or eliminated by the committee. Usually, at the end of a Supply period before a motion of concurrence in Main or Supplementary Estimates is considered, the government would propose motions to restore any Vote reduced by the committee or to reinstate any Vote previously eliminated. [9]

Motions regarding appropriation bills: Once a motion for the concurrence in estimates or interim Supply is adopted, an appropriation bill can then be immediately read a first time without a motion of leave for introduction. This would usually be on the last allotted day in a Supply period, when all three readings of the bill would be dealt with.

Opposition motions on allotted days: A certain number of days per Supply period are allotted to the opposition such that they would have the first chance to move motions and debate any matter falling within the jurisdiction of Parliament. These are commonly known as “Supply”, “opposition” or “allotted” days.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(4)

Detailed examination of estimates takes place in the standing committees of the House. Section (4) stipulates that the Main Estimates for the incoming fiscal year are deemed referred to committees on or before March 1 of the current fiscal year and are reported back, or are deemed reported back, to the House not later than May 31 in the current fiscal year.

This provision of the Standing Orders also allows for the consideration of specific Votes in the Main Estimates in Committee of the Whole. Each year, under this rule, the Leader of the Opposition is permitted to select, in consultation with the leaders of the other opposition parties, the Main Estimates of no more than two departments or agencies for consideration in Committee of the Whole for up to four hours. Not later than May 1, the Leader of the Opposition must in this respect give 48 hours’ notice of a motion to refer to Committee of the Whole the consideration of the Main Estimates of the selected departments or agencies; the motion is deemed adopted at the end of the notice period and the estimates in question are deemed withdrawn from the standing committee to which they had initially been referred. The estimates are considered on the appointed day, but not later than May 31, at the conclusion of the adjournment proceedings or, if taken up on a Friday, at the conclusion of Private Members’ Business. When the estimates are to be considered following the adjournment proceedings, the motion to adjourn is deemed withdrawn.

During the debate, the Chair is guided by the rules of Committee of the Whole and may exercise discretion and flexibility in applying these rules. [10] No Member will be recognized for more than 15 minutes at a time; Members may not give a speech for more than ten minutes within that period. The 15 minutes may be used both for speeches and for posing questions to the Minister or a Parliamentary Secretary acting on behalf of the Minister. When the Member is recognised, he or she shall indicate how the 15 minutes is to be apportioned. [11] Members may speak more than once, they need not be in their own seat to be recognized, and they must have unanimous consent to split their time.

At the conclusion of the proceedings, the Committee rises, the estimates are deemed reported and the House immediately adjourns to the next sitting day. According to current practices in the House, decisions on the Main Estimates continue to be made on the last allotted day.

Subsection (b) allows the Leader of the Opposition the option of extending consideration in committee of the Main Estimates of one department or agency. [12] Written notice must be given at least three days before May 31 and the motion to extend such consideration is deemed adopted when called on “Motions” during Routine Proceedings on the last sitting day prior to May 31.

Subsection (c) specifies the amount of time which the selected committee has to consider and report the said estimates back to the House. There are two restrictive conditions: they must be reported back no later than the ordinary hour of daily adjournment at least one sitting day prior to the last allotted day, and the extended study cannot last more than ten sitting days.

Subsection (d) allows the selected committee to take full advantage of the extension granted by submitting its report at any time on the final day. In providing that the House shall, upon request of the Chair or a member of the committee, immediately revert to “Presenting Reports from Committees”, the Standing Order eliminates the usual requirements for unanimous consent to be requested.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(5)

This section provides a mechanism for the referral of Supplementary Estimates to standing committees. As soon as they are presented in the House, Supplementary Estimates are deemed referred to the appropriate standing committee and are to be reported back (and if not, are deemed to have been so reported) not later than three sitting days before the final sitting or last allotted day in the current Supply period. For example, if Supplementary Estimates are presented in November, then they must be (or are deemed to be) reported back within the Supply period ending December 10. However, these reporting dates do not apply to Supplementary Estimates for the forthcoming year.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(6)

When it was deleted, Standing Order 81(6) read: “A motion, to be decided without debate or amendment, may be moved during Routine Proceedings by a Minister of the Crown to refer any item or items in the main estimates or in supplementary estimates to any standing committee or committees and, upon report from any such committees, the same shall lie upon the Table of the House.” In its first report, tabled in June 2001, the Special Committee on the Modernization and Improvement of the Procedures of the House of Commons recommended that the estimates, like all reports, returns or other papers laid before the House, automatically be deemed referred to the appropriate standing committee. The Committee report was accepted by the House on October 4, 2001. [13]

Commentary — Standing Order 81(7) and (8)

This Standing Order enables House standing committees to study and report on the future expenditure plans and priorities of the departments and agencies whose estimates they are considering. [14] These reports must be tabled in the House no later than the last normal sitting day in June [15] as prescribed by the parliamentary calendar, and motions to concur in the report may only be considered on an allotted day.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(9)

After a committee has examined the estimates and the expenditure plans and priorities of the departments and agencies referred to it and reported on them to the House, a motion of concurrence may be moved. This provision stipulates, however, that no debate can take place on such a motion except as a Supply motion by the opposition for an allotted day (see section (13) of this Standing Order).

Commentary — Standing Order 81(10)

Each year a minimum of 22 sitting days per session are provided for the business of Supply. Standing Order 81(10) establishes three periods ending December 10, March 26 and June 23, in which different aspects of the business of Supply are considered. Members in opposition to the government can move opposition motions (as described in Standing Order 81(13)) on any of these 22 days. Seven days are allotted during the period ending December 10; seven days during the period ending March 26; and eight days during the period ending June 23. Of these 22 days, no more than one-fifth may fall on a Wednesday and no more than one-fifth on a Friday (the shortest sitting days of the week).

The normal Supply cycle can be disrupted by an extended adjournment, a prorogation or a dissolution. In these cases, the number of allotted days in each Supply period may be increased or decreased. [16] If the number of sitting days in any Supply period is fewer than the number prescribed under the parliamentary calendar, the number of allotted days in that period will be reduced by an amount proportional to the number of sitting days the House stood adjourned. The Speaker will determine and announce to the House the reduction in the number of allotted days for that period. [17] Conversely, should the House sit more than the prescribed number of sitting days, the total number of allotted days will be increased by one day for every five additional days the House sits, [18] excluding the days when the House meets solely for the purpose of granting Royal Assent to a bill, pursuant to Standing Order 28(4).

Commentary — Standing Order 81(11)

Section (11) indicates the possibility of an additional number of days being added to the designated minimum of 22, in the event that either the Address Debate does not last the specified six days or the Budget Debate does not last the specified four days. The unused days may, if the House agrees, be added to the number of days in the specific Supply period in which the said Address or Budget Debate took place.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(12)

If Supplementary Estimates for the preceding fiscal year are to be concurred in in a subsequent fiscal year, then section (12) sets aside three additional Supply days for the consideration of concurrence motions for those Supplementary Estimates and the passage at all stages of the related appropriation bill. The Standing Order stipulates that these three additional days are allocated whenever concurrence is sought for Supplementary Estimates relating to the fiscal year ending March 31 during the Supply period ending no later than June 23.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(13)

Standing Order 81(13) indicates that opposition motions on allotted days can only be moved by Members “in opposition to” the government. Such motions may be concerned with any matter “within the jurisdiction of the Parliament”; [19] that is, they may express approval or condemnation of the government and government policy.

This Standing Order also indicates that concurrence motions on standing committee reports based on estimates may be considered as Supply business on an allotted day. [20] This is equally true for concurrence motions on standing committee reports relating to the expenditure plans and priorities of a government department or agency. [21]

Commentary — Standing Order 81(14)(a) and (b)

Before certain motions can be moved under the Order of the Day for the consideration of the business of Supply, they must satisfy the notice requirements of Standing Order 81(14)(a). Forty-eight hours’ written notice is required for opposition motions, mentioned in Standing Order 81(13), the motions to concur in interim Supply, Main or Supplementary Estimates, or to restore or reinstate any item in the estimates. Notices to oppose any item in the estimates require 24 hours’ written notice, except during the period ending June 23, when 48 hours’ written notice is required. After notice is given to oppose any item, the government cannot include that opposed item within the general motion for concurrence. As explained in a Speaker’s ruling, this notice to oppose is not in itself a motion. [22] Its effect is only to require separate motions of concurrence for each of the opposed items.

Occasionally, notice of more than one opposition motion is given and printed on the Order Paper for consideration on an allotted day. Under these circumstances, Standing Order 81(14)(b) empowers the Speaker to select which of the motions will have precedence for consideration. In deciding, the Speaker is not obliged to give any reason for his or her choice. However, most Speakers usually give a short explanation for their decision, once again usually (but not necessarily) based on the representation of the parties in the House, the distribution of supply motions to date, fair play towards small parties, the date of notice, the sponsor of the motion, the subject matter, whether or not the motion is votable, and what has happened, by agreement among the parties, in the preceding Supply periods. [23]

Commentary — Standing Order 81(15)

This section defines the precedence of opposition motions over government Supply motions, indicating that the opposition motions will be considered first. The manner in which these opposition motions are disposed of is described in the following sections. If there are no opposition motions, then government motions may be taken up.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(16)

All opposition motions may come to a vote, unless the sponsor of such a motion informs the Clerk in writing that he or she wants the item designated non-votable.

This section also provides the possibility for the opposition to choose the duration of proceedings on any opposition motion, subject of course to the government’s prerogative in designating allotted days. [24]

Specific conditions also specify how such votable motions should be disposed of. Unless debate is concluded by 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for the consideration of Government Orders on an allotted day (or the last allotted day if more than one day’s debate is chosen), then at that time the Speaker must interrupt the proceedings and put every question necessary to dispose of the motion without further debate or amendment. (Standing Order 85 permits the introduction of only one amendment and one subamendment for each opposition motion on an allotted day. Moreover, an amendment to an opposition motion may only be moved with the consent of the mover of the motion. [25])

Commentary — Standing Order 81(17)

At the end of each Supply period, a number of different Supply items must usually be disposed of. Section (17) prescribes the procedures to be employed in two of the Supply periods: those ending on December 10 and on March 26. On the last allotted day in each of these periods, the Speaker will interrupt the proceedings at 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders. If the proceedings are in relation to a votable opposition motion, the Speaker will first put every question necessary to dispose of that motion without further debate or amendment, before disposing of the other Supply items (e.g., interim Supply, Supplementary Estimates, the restoration or reinstatement of any item in the estimates or any opposed item in the estimates, and the passage of any appropriation bills based thereon). If the proceedings are not in relation to a votable opposition motion, the Speaker would proceed to put every question necessary to dispose of all Supply items without debate or amendment. While subsections (a) and (b) enumerate which Supply items must be called, the rule does not establish the sequence; this has been established by practice. [26]

Commentary — Standing Order 81(18)

The business for the last allotted day in the Supply period ending June 23 is defined in section (18) as the consideration of an opposition motion and any motion or motions to concur in the Main Estimates. The House considers an opposition motion until 6:30 p.m., at which time the Speaker interrupts the proceedings. If the opposition motion is not a motion that must come to a vote, proceedings on the motion expire at the conclusion of the debate and the House proceeds to consider a motion or motions relating to the Main Estimates. If on the other hand the opposition motion is a motion that must come to a vote, the Speaker must put, forthwith and without further debate or amendment, every question necessary to dispose of the proceedings and any recorded division requested is deferred to the end of the consideration of a motion or motions to concur in the Main Estimates.

Once the proceedings on the opposition motion are completed, the House proceeds to the consideration of a motion or motions to concur in the Main Estimates. Unless already disposed of, the Speaker will interrupt the proceedings at 10:00 p.m. and proceed first to the taking of any deferred division or divisions on the opposition motion, as the case may be, and subsequently put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the motion or motions relating to the Main Estimates. Immediately thereafter, the Speaker must put successively and without debate every question necessary to dispose of any business relating to the final Estimates for the preceding fiscal year or for any Supplementary Estimates, the restoration or reinstatement of any Vote in the final or Supplementary Estimates, or any opposed item in the final or Supplementary Estimates, and the passage of any appropriation bills based thereon or on the Main Estimates that were concurred in. [27] The ordinary hour of daily adjournment is extended until the House has disposed of the business of Supply.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(19)

Section (19) provides for the disposition of an opposition motion which does not come to a vote. The proceedings on such a motion expire when the debate has been concluded or at the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders. Whenever a statement is made by a Minister pursuant to Standing Order 33(2), Government Orders are extended by a period of time corresponding to the time taken for such proceedings. Similarly, when a recorded division is deferred to the end of Oral Questions, the time set aside for Government Orders is extended by a period of time corresponding to the time taken for such division. If the debate on the opposition motion concludes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders, the House may then consider other items of Supply (opposition motions first) and, following that, any other Government Orders.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(20)

Any Member may give notice of opposition to any item in the estimates, thus forcing a separate motion for that item. Section (20) provides for the disposition of all unopposed items in the estimates (i.e., all the items in the estimates for which no notices of opposition have been filed). Although the practice is to present only one motion to cover all unopposed items, this Standing Order permits the presentation of more than one such motion. This would be the case if part of the estimates are to be considered using Standing Order 82.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(21)

Whenever the House adopts a motion to concur in any estimate or estimates or interim Supply, it stands as an order to bring in a bill or bills based thereon, which are commonly referred to as “Supply” or “appropriation” bills. In this case, of course, no notice is required for the bill, and the House proceeds to first reading without having to grant leave to introduce the bill.

Commentary — Standing Order 81(22)

Section (22) imposes a time limit of 20 minutes on speeches delivered by any Member. Pursuant to Standing Order 43, provision is made for a ten-minute period after each speech to allow other Members to ask questions and make brief comments. Moreover, a Member may speak only once on any item of the business of Supply: in other words, the Member can address the House once on either the main motion, the amendment or the subamendment.

Commentary — Standing Order 82

Standing Order 82 indicates that, in the event of urgency regarding certain estimates, the relevant Supply business must be taken up under Government Orders and not on an allotted Supply day. The significance of this provision is that, in these circumstances, the debate is in no way subject to a time limit or guillotine. Furthermore, debate can occur at all stages of the subsequent bill and there is no limit to the number of amendments which can be moved, although other provisions for limiting debate (Standing Orders 57 or 78) could be applied.

Ways and Means

Commentary — Standing Order 83(1)

The procedures by which taxes are authorized to meet public expenditures are known as “Ways and Means” proceedings. The first step in this lengthy process begins when a Minister tables a notice of a Ways and Means motion in the House. Standing Order 83(1) specifies that this notice may be laid upon the Table at any time during a sitting. [28] Since a private Member cannot bring in a Ways and Means motion, the power to initiate taxation rests entirely with the government. [29] Section (1) places one further condition on the motion: it cannot be proposed in the same sitting that the notice is given. [30]

Notices of Ways and Means are the first step in the legislative process for taxation. Sometimes they indicate a request for legislation retroactive to the time of their notice. They have also been used as a vehicle for public scrutiny prior to the introduction of legislation based thereon. Notices of Ways and Means can be expressed in general terms [31] or be very specific, as in the form of draft legislation. [32] There are essentially no procedural restrictions on the wording or content of the notice. [33]

Commentary — Standing Order 83(2)

Whenever the government wishes that one or more of its Ways and Means motions be considered, a Minister will rise in his or her place and request that an Order of the Day be designated for these purposes. In establishing this procedure, section (2) bypasses a decision of the House ordering the consideration of a Ways and Means motion, and deems it ordered purely on the request of a Minister. The Order of the Day may then be taken up when called under Government Orders.

Ways and Means motions can be of two types: those which are the first step in the legislative process to amend, repeal or create statutes, or those which seek to obtain the general approval of the government’s budgetary policy.

Whenever the government wishes to make a Budget presentation, a Minister [34] will rise in the House to request that an Order of the Day be designated for this purpose; the Minister will also specify the date and time of the presentation. The Minister’s announcement has been deemed to be the request that a day be designated pursuant to the requirements of the Standing Orders; no notice is required. The Order of the Day is also deemed to be an Order of the House to sit beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment if required. [35]

At the specified time on the designated day, typically in the late afternoon after the financial markets have closed, the Speaker interrupts any proceedings then before the House, which are deemed adjourned, and the House proceeds to the consideration of the Order of the Day for the Budget presentation. [36] The Minister of Finance then rises in the House to move a Ways and Means motion, “That this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the Government” and to deliver the Budget speech. At the conclusion of the Budget presentation, the Speaker recognizes a representative of the Official Opposition who, after a brief speech, moves the adjournment of the debate, which is then deemed adopted. In doing so, that Member reserves the right to speak first when debate on the motion resumes at a subsequent sitting. The Speaker then adjourns the House until the next sitting day. [37]

Commentary — Standing Order 83(3)

The tabling of a notice of a Ways and Means motion pursuant to Standing Order 83(1) is the first step in a process by which taxes are authorized to meet public expenditures. Before legislation can be brought in to implement taxation measures, the Ways and Means motion must be concurred in. Section (3) indicates restrictions in the consideration of such Ways and Means motions. When called, the motion to concur must be decided without debate or amendment. Furthermore, the adoption of such a motion or any Ways and Means motion presented at some other point in the session cannot be proposed during a Budget Debate, in order to ensure that the general Budget motion is disposed of before the House proceeds with individual Budget proposals. [38]

Commentary — Standing Order 83(4)

The result of the adoption of a Ways and Means motion is that a bill (or bills) based on the provisions of the motion is brought in and read a first time without notice. [39] This may also be done to propose an amendment or amendments to a bill already before the House.

Occasionally a bill proposing both to raise taxes and to spend money comes before the House. Such a bill is preceded by the required Ways and Means resolution. However, a motion for leave to introduce the bill is then given, and when the bill is read a first time, it is accompanied by a Royal Recommendation. [40]

Budget Debate

Commentary — Standing Order 83.1

Every year, the Standing Committee on Finance is specifically empowered to hold "pre-budget" consultations. [41] In order to do so, the Committee normally asks that the House authorize the Committee to travel throughout Canada during its proceedings and to broadcast its deliberations. [42] While a tradition has now developed in this regard, these yearly trips are neither automatic nor obligatory. Pursuant to this Standing Order, the Committee can report to the House [43] no later than the tenth sitting day before the last normal sitting day in December, as prescribed in the parliamentary calendar. [44]

Although there is no requirement for the House to do so, the House has usually considered the subject matter of the report on pre-budgetary consultations in a “take-note” debate. [45] The debate is held under Government Orders some time before the Budget is actually presented. [46] A take-note debate does not have the effect of preventing the moving of concurrence in the report of the Standing Committee on Finance tabled pursuant to Standing Order 83.1. [47]

Commentary — Standing Order 84(1)

The government traditionally makes a Budget presentation at least once a year, although there is no obligation to do so. [48] Section (1) stipulates that whenever an Order of the Day has been designated for this purpose, the proposed motion shall read, “That this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the Government”.

Commentary — Standing Order 84(2)

This section provides a maximum of four days for resuming debate on the Budget motion and on any proposed amendments (up to five days altogether). The days allotted to the debate need not be consecutive and the debate can be less than the four resumed days. [49] Any unused days may be added to the number of opposition days in the same Supply period, as suggested by Standing Order 81(11).

Commentary — Standing Order 84(3)

Standing Order 84(3) establishes the precedence given to an Order of the Day for resuming a Budget Debate. Whenever such an item is called, it must stand as the first Order of the Day. Furthermore, no other Government Order can be considered in the same sitting unless the order for the Budget Debate is first disposed of. In essence, this firmly establishes the precedence of an Order of the Day for the Budget Debate over all other orders when called that day.

Commentary — Standing Order 84(4), (5) and (6)

During the Budget Debate, the opportunity exists to propose one amendment and one subamendment to the motion “That this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the Government”, in accordance with Standing Order 85. Traditionally, on the first day of resumed debate on the motion, a Member of the Official Opposition moves an amendment at the end of his or her speech, followed immediately by a Member from another opposition party, who moves a subamendment at the end of his or her speech. Sections (4), (5) and (6) prescribe how the subamendment, amendment and motion are to be disposed of.

At the end of the second day’s resumed debate, the Speaker interrupts the proceedings at 15 minutes before the expiry of time provided for Government Orders and puts the question on the subamendment. In the same manner, at the end of the third and fourth day’s resumed debate, the Speaker puts the question on the amendment and motion, respectively. If for some reason, the subamendment was moved after the second day, it would be voted on before the amendment on the third day. If the subamendment and amendment were moved after the third day, they would be voted on at the end of the fourth day.

Commentary — Standing Order 84(7)

Section (7) puts a 20-minute time limit on the speeches delivered by all Members, with the exception of the Minister of Finance, the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the first Opposition Member speaking to the motion, all of whom have unlimited time. Pursuant to Standing Order 43, a ten-minute question-and-comment period is made available following any 20-minute speech, and following any speech by the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, a Minister moving a government order, or a Member speaking in reply immediately after such Minister.

Amendments

Commentary — Standing Order 85

During debates on the Budget and on opposition motions on allotted days, Standing Order 85 permits the moving of only one amendment and one subamendment. The original purpose of this rule (and a continuing purpose regarding the Budget Debate) is to permit third parties officially to present their proposals on an issue and have the House come to a decision. In the case of the business of Supply, all parties give notice of their own motions directly. The Standing Order prescribes, however, that an amendment to an opposition motion may only be moved with the consent of the mover of the motion, the purpose being to prevent a government majority from changing the content of the debate (and any future decision of the House) during an opposition day.

Historical Summary — Standing Orders 79 to 85

1. Introduction

   Standing Orders 79 to 85 codify long-standing practices whose roots are found in British parliamentary history and in the rules and procedures followed in the various Canadian provinces prior to Confederation. These two patterns of experience eventually formed the basis for the rules and practice adopted in 1867. [50]

   In general, the first Standing Orders governing financial procedures reflected sections in the Constitution Act, 1867. Section 54 was quoted in the rules directly under the heading “Aid and Supply”, supplemented by the 1867 Rule 88, providing that such financial business be considered first in Committee of the Whole. Rule 89 represented the claim of the Commons that it alone grants Supply, while Rule 90 waived certain rights when dealing with Senate bills and amendments. Financial procedures as specified in these rules and as interpreted by the Chair remained fundamentally the same until 1968.

   The cardinal principle practiced by the House in financial matters was that such measures be given full consideration in committee and in the House. The rules provided specifically that whenever the government found it necessary to incur a public expenditure, the Crown had first to bring forward a recommendation, and that all financial matters had to be considered in committee as a preliminary to legislation. [51]

   Consideration of the estimates (proposals for spending) and of taxes required to meet public expenditures were the primary functions, of the House. [52] To exercise these functions the House established a Committee of Supply and a Committee of Ways and Means.

   As in Britain, the Committee of Supply controlled public expenditure by considering the amounts of money required annually by the government, based upon estimates of expenditures presented by Ministers of the Crown. The Committee of Ways and Means considered proposals to raise money by the imposition of taxes and voted the resolutions which authorized the issue out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the sums required to meet the moneys voted by the Committee of Supply.

   (a) Supply Procedures (1867 to 1968)

   Supply procedures remained basically unchanged during the first 100 years after Confederation and consisted of two principal steps prior to the consideration of legislation: the process of entering into the Committee of Supply and the study of spending proposals in the Committee of Supply.

   The Committee of Supply was established by motion at the beginning of a session. Before its work could begin, the Finance Minister tabled the estimates by message from the Governor General and moved that they be referred to the Committee of Supply. [53] When the Order of the Day was read for the House to resolve itself into the Committee of Supply, the Speaker put the question “That I do now leave the Chair”. This initiated the first major phase of Supply proceedings — the opportunity for Members to debate and, if they chose, to move amendments, and represented the long-established doctrine that redress of grievances be considered before the granting of Supply.

   The second phase of Supply proceedings was the consideration of items in the Committee. Each resolution specifying the amount of the estimate was formally proposed from the Chair as a distinct question. Amendments were possible and no time limits were placed on debate.

   When the Order of the Day was read for reporting the resolutions agreed to in Committee, a formal motion for their first reading was proposed; the motion was never debated or amended. If the House agreed, each resolution was read separately a second time. The Speaker then put the question for concurrence in each resolution, and both amendment and debate had to be relevant to the resolution. [54]

   The final and formal stage of Supply proceedings involved the Committee of Ways and Means. When all the estimates had passed the Committee of Supply, the Finance Minister moved a motion for the House to resolve itself into the Committee of Ways and Means to consider the formal resolutions for granting certain sums out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. [55] The resolutions were reported and agreed to by the House, after which the appropriation bill founded upon them was introduced and often passed two or more stages in the same day.

   Following passage in the House, the Supply bill was sent to the Senate for passage, after which it was returned to the House. When the Governor General had summoned the Commons to prorogue Parliament, the Speaker took the bill to the Senate for Royal Assent. [56] Over time, a body of precedents was established concerning the conduct of Supply proceedings, but the basic practices of the two important phases of Supply remained unchanged until 1968.

   1913 and 1927 Amendments

   Although there was frequent criticism of the lack of effective procedures to examine and control expenditures, [57] no changes were incorporated into the written rules until 1913, when the Prime Minister introduced a motion to amend then Rule 17 of the Standing Orders by adding three separate sections. [58] The basic purpose of the third section of the amendment was to enable the House to consider items in Committee of Supply on at least two days of the week. [59]

   These changes were adopted after a long and bitter debate and, under these new conditions, the number of opportunities for moving amendments to the Supply motion was reduced. [60] No further changes to the Standing Orders on Supply were adopted until 1927, although proposals to improve Supply procedures were discussed on a number of occasions. [61]

   In 1925, a special committee was established to consider revisions to all the Standing Orders. During debate on the motion to appoint the committee, Members expressed concerns regarding parliamentary control over public expenditure, the study of estimates in Committee and the rules applying to amendments to motions that the Speaker leave the Chair for the House to resolve into Supply or Ways and Means. [62] The relevant debate revealed a deep division of opinion as to whether or not estimates should be considered in an alternative manner in standing committees. [63]

   The committee’s recommendation — that only one amendment to the motion for the Speaker to leave the Chair could be made, and that the amendment itself could be amended — was repeated by another special committee and was adopted by the House in 1927. [64] The issue of referring estimates to standing committees was revived in 1930, 1933 and 1936, and throughout the war years criticism continued that large sums of money were being spent annually with very little detailed parliamentary scrutiny. [65]

   1955 and 1967 Amendments

   In January 1955, a special committee was again appointed to consider the procedures of the House and, by adopting its Second Report in July 1955, the House agreed to major changes in the Standing Orders with respect to Supply proceedings. [66] A new Standing Order provided for a minimum of six motions to go into the Committee of Supply and allowed a two-day debate on each. The new rules also included a procedure to refer estimates to standing or special committees. These estimates would be withdrawn from the Committee of Supply and, upon report from the standing or special committee, would again stand referred to the Committee of Supply.

   In February 1955, more than 30 years after the idea was first put forward as a motion, the House had finally agreed to establish a Special Committee on Estimates. [67] Initially it appeared to be only a smaller version of a Committee of Supply, and lacked the authority to send for persons, papers and records. However, in 1958 the House amended the Standing Orders to provide for a Standing Committee on Estimates with those powers. [68]

   In April 1967, the House agreed to temporary changes to Supply procedures. [69] Among the most important changes were that the number of occasions on which the motion for the Speaker to leave the Chair for the House to go into the Committee of Supply could be called was set at four, a limit of 38 days was allotted to Supply during the session and the business of Supply was clearly defined.

   (b) Ways and Means Procedures (1867 to 1968)

   As with Supply, Ways and Means procedures remained basically unchanged in the first 100 years after Confederation. The main business was the consideration of taxation measures, but the Committee of Ways and Means also voted the resolutions authorizing the issue from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the sums required to meet the estimates voted by the Committee of Supply.

   Similar to the motion for the House to go into Committee of Supply, the motion for the Speaker to leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into the Committee of Ways and Means was debatable, amendable and not subject to time limitations. Proceedings were the same as in Committee of Supply or in other Committees of the Whole. Changes in the tariff were proposed in the form of resolutions, each of which had formally to be adopted and reported to the House. The resolutions were then read a first and second time and agreed to before being embodied in one or more bills which then passed through the same stages as other bills. [70]

   Undoubtedly, the major item of Ways and Means business became the consideration and adoption of the resolutions emanating from the Budget Speech. Tradition held that the Minister of Finance made an annual financial statement, although it was not obligatory. For a number of years after Confederation, there was no established procedural pattern in which the Minister would make this Budget Speech. Sometimes it was made on the motion for the House to resolve itself into the Committee of Supply; [71] on other occasions, he made his statement in the Committee of Ways and Means. [72] From 1912 to 1968, the financial statement was made on the motion for the House to resolve itself into the Committee of Ways and Means.

   In the early years after Confederation, the financial statement and replies could not really be termed a debate. On a designated day, the Minister of Finance would rise in his place and address the House on “the financial condition of the Dominion”, giving estimates of revenue and expenditure for the coming year. At the conclusion of the statement and replies, and upon the House resolving into Committee, consideration was given to any resolutions which the Minister might put forward affecting the tariff. Thus, initially, the Budget Speech and subsequent consideration of those Ways and Means resolutions occupied only a small proportion of the work of the Committee.

   Gradually, however, debate on the financial statement lengthened, until debate in 1900 lasted 17 days. It was clear that the presentation of the financial statement was evolving into a major political event — an opportunity to debate financial policy and, by bringing forward amendments, to draw attention to specific government actions.

   1913 and 1927 Amendments

   No formal changes to the Standing Orders governing Ways and Means were adopted until 1913, when it was agreed that on Thursdays and Fridays the House would resolve itself into the Committee of Ways and Means with no debate on or amendment to the motion for the Speaker to leave the Chair.

   Criticism of Ways and Means proceedings focussed on two concerns: the right to move subamendments to the motion to resolve into Committee, and the length of debate on the motion applying to the budget presentation. The first was resolved in 1927, when the House agreed to the right to move a subamendment. [73]

   The second issue — the length of debate — was more complex. The questions of limiting individual speeches and the overall proceedings were often discussed in the context of time allotment for debate in general. [74] A new Standing Order in 1927 limited speeches to 40 minutes on most occasions and for most speakers, [75] although some Members attempted unsuccessfully to exempt the Budget Debate from the application of these limits. [76]

   1955 and 1962 Amendments

   It was not until 1955 that the House agreed to a major change involving proceedings on the motion for the House to go into the Committee of Ways and Means. Henceforth, there would be only one occasion, on the presentation of the Budget, when debate would occur on the motion for the Speaker to leave the Chair. The new rule provided for a maximum of eight resumed days to debate the motion and any amendments, for a fixed time to dispose of any subamendment (on the fifth day) and of the amendment (on the seventh day) and gave precedence to the debate when it was called. [77]

   In 1960 and 1961, the House agreed to further provisional changes to the Standing Orders respecting the Budget Debate. [78] The debate was limited to six resumed days, with the subamendment to be disposed of on the second day and the amendment disposed of on the fourth. The changes also limited each speech, with the exception of those of the Minister of Finance, the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and the Opposition spokesperson, to 30 minutes. The mover of the subamendment could speak for forty minutes. These provisional changes were permanently adopted in 1962. [79] From then until 1968, no further recommendations on this particular aspect of Ways and Means business were made.

   (c) Resolutions preceding bills providing for new or increased expenditure (1867 to 1968)

   Section 54 of the Constitution Act, 1867 specified that where money was to be appropriated, the measure had to be recommended by the Governor General, a procedure specified in the Standing Orders under the title “Aid and Supply” until 1906. By adopting the 1867 Rule 88, the House ordered that all measures involving expenditures and charges upon the people had first to be considered in a Committee of the Whole. These two stipulations — the Governor General’s recommendation and the consideration of financial measures in Committee — remained in force from 1867 to 1968, the purpose being to give Members an opportunity for full discussion on these measures and to give notice of the government’s specific intentions.

   Both Members and various Speakers frequently drew attention to what they considered breaches of either the section of the Act or the Standing Order. A number of motions were ruled out of order [80] and bills were not proceeded with [81] for not having complied with these two requirements. At the same time, Speakers were careful to distinguish between the relative importance of the two requirements. In rulings in 1871 and 1903, Speakers stated that whereas the Standing Order was somewhat flexible “as the House shall determine”, the constitutional principle embodied in the Act was absolutely binding. [82] This distinction became important when the Standing Orders were permanently amended in 1968.

   The original 1867 Rule 88 remained unchanged until 1968. In essence it involved two stages: first, a debate on the motion for the Speaker to leave the Chair for the House to go into Committee of the Whole on a proposed resolution, followed by a debate in Committee of the Whole on the content of the proposed resolution itself. Neither stage was subject to a time limit.

   A continuing dispute as to whether or not the motion (for the Speaker to leave the Chair) was debatable [83] was resolved in 1955, when the House concurred in a special committee’s recommendation for a new Standing Order to the effect that henceforth it was not. [84]

   By 1964, support was growing for the abolition of debate in Committee of the Whole on resolutions preceding bills involving the expenditure of public money. [85] A special committee noted this support and recommended on a trial basis that one day be given to consideration of such resolutions in Committee of the Whole and that a 20-minute limit be applied to speeches in Committee. After debate, the proposal was adopted on a temporary basis. [86] During debate, it was clear that a number of Members favoured the complete abolition of the resolution stage. [87]

   In 1966, the House agreed to continue the provisional application of the new Standing Order, but passed a resolution exempting the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition from the 20-minute time limit on speeches. [88] These new provisions remained in effect until 1968.

   (d) Commons claim to predominance in financial affairs (1867 to the present)

   The Constitution Act, 1867 specified that all bills concerned with the appropriation of money and the imposition of any tax or impost must originate in the House of Commons. In adopting the 1867 Rule 89 (now Standing Order 80(1)), the House claimed extensive and exclusive privilege in relation to financial measures, the text and assertion of which remains unchanged today. The rule specified that the Commons alone grants “aids and supplies” and that these measures may not be amended by the Senate. The House adopted a second Standing Order (now Standing Order 80(2)) which indicated a willingness on the part of the House to waive certain of its privileges “in order to expedite the business of Parliament”.

   Since 1867, the House has maintained its claim to the predominance expressed in present Standing Order 80(1) and has frequently noted the infringement of its privileges, usually by message to the Senate concerning bills or amendments thereto. [89] On other occasions, when the House chose to accept such amendments or bills, a Journals entry usually specified that “the House, while disapproving of any infraction of its privileges or rights by the other House, in this case waives its claims to insist upon such rights and privileges, but that the waiver of the said rights and privileges in this case is not to be drawn into a precedent”. [90]

2. Standing Orders (1968 to 1991)

   In December 1968, the House adopted the Fourth and Fifth Reports of a special procedure committee, thereby agreeing to substantial changes in the way it dealt with the major aspects of financial proceedings. [91]

   (a) Supply Procedures (1968 to 1991)

   The special committee had described Supply procedures as “time-consuming, repetitive and archaic”, claiming they did not permit an effective scrutiny of the estimates, did not provide the House with the means of organizing meaningful debate on pre-arranged subjects, had failed to preserve effective parliamentary control over expenditures and had failed to guarantee an expeditious decision on appropriation bills. The committee found that the traditional Supply procedures were irrelevant to the realities of government in the present day. [92]

   The committee’s specific proposals, agreed to by House concurrence in the Fourth Report, provided first for the abolition of the Committee of Supply. The new Standing Orders initiated a division of the parliamentary session into three periods ending on December 10, March 26 and June 23, respectively, for the purposes of Supply. All estimates were referred to standing committees on or before March 1 and reported back to the House by May 31. Twenty-five days were designated as “allotted” days, apportioned over the three new Supply “periods”, during each of which two of the motions could be votable motions of non-confidence in the government. The new rules also indicated that any unused days from the Address in Reply and Budget Debates could be added to the number of allotted days; the business of Supply was accorded precedence over all other government business if the sitting was to count as an allotted day, and time limits were set for speakers. Finally, Supply resolutions and bills based thereon would be disposed of by the House, by the latest at the end of the specific Supply period. [93]

   In March 1975, the House concurred in the Second Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and Organization, [94] which recommended a provisional Standing Order on Supply proceedings whereby selected items in the estimates could be examined in a Committee of the Whole. With respect to the use of allotted days, it recommended that opposition Members have the option of calling selected items in the estimates before a Committee of the Whole for debate, possible amendment and eventual decision. This method of proceeding was used on nine occasions in 1975 and 1976, [95] but the experiment was not renewed after the end of the Second Session of the Thirtieth Parliament.

   Although criticism of Supply procedures continued, [96] no further changes were made to the Standing Orders until 1982 when provision was made for 48-hours’ notice if a recorded division on an opposition motion was to take place on a Friday. The 20-minute limit for each speaker now applied to all Members without exception and the rule was amended to provide for a ten-minute question-and-comment period following each speech. [97]

   In 1985, the Standing Orders were further amended by removing the “no-confidence” reference, [98] and in February 1986, two additional changes followed: first, provision was made for the Leader of the Opposition, after notice, to extend the consideration of the Main Estimates of a named department or agency in the relevant standing committee for an additional ten sitting days; second, on the last allotted day in the Supply period ending June 30, the motion to concur in the Main Estimates would be the subject of debate, with a provision to extend the debate beyond the normal hour of adjournment. [99] In June 1987, the House agreed to further amendments to the Standing Orders governing Supply: to provide for 48 hours’ notice to oppose any item in the estimates in the supply period ending June 30; to provide for a revision to the number of days assigned to each supply period; to provide for a maximum of four votable Opposition motions in each supply period within a total of eight votable motions overall; and to provide for a change in the reporting time (on Fridays) for a standing committee in which the consideration of Main Estimates had been extended. [100]

   (b) Ways and Means Procedures (1968 to 1991)

   The special committee in 1968 was also critical of the Ways and Means procedures. [101] The committee declared the procedure “if anything, even less readily comprehensible than that relating to Supply”, with an underlying purpose which appeared “to be lost in obscurity”. It addressed the two functions of the Committee of Ways and Means: the taxing function, in which capacity it approved the changes in taxation being sought and thereby allowed the House to consider the appropriate legislation, and its spending function, in which capacity it authorized the issue from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the sums voted by the Committee of Supply.

   The committee’s report recommended abolishing the Committee of Ways and Means, first to eliminate a superfluous stage in relation to Supply, and second, to eliminate the repetitive process of the budget proposals being debated initially on the motion to resolve into the Committee of Ways and Means, debated again in the Committee of Ways and Means and again during the various stage of the bills introduced on the proposals.

   By adopting the Fourth Report of the special committee in December 1968, the House agreed to a process whereby the Budget Debate would take place on a generally worded motion permitting wide-ranging debate. The Ways and Means resolutions would not be debated separately, and the questions on them would be put without debate or amendment after the general resolution had been decided. Specific consideration of the taxation proposals would arise at the various stages of the bills introduced to implement the resolutions. [102]

   Between 1969 and 1991, dissatisfaction was expressed with the new procedures governing Ways and Means, centering on particular aspects of the budget process and the study of taxation bills. Numerous proposals were put forward in general debate, in committee reports and in the form of position papers recommending changes in budget timing, the pre-budget consultation process and budget secrecy. [103]

   Two changes were made to the Standing Orders dealing with Ways and Means between 1982 and 1991. In 1982, the time limit for the majority of Members speaking on the budget motion was reduced from 30 to 20 minutes, with a ten-minute question-and-comment period following each speech. [104] In 1985, a significant change was made whereby Ways and Means bills would no longer be dealt with in Committee of the Whole, but would be referred after second reading to legislative committees. [105]

   (c) Royal Recommendation (1968 to 1991)

   The 1968 special committee recommended that the resolution stage required prior to the introduction of a bill involving the expenditure of money be eliminated. [106] In conjunction with the abolition of the Committees of Supply and of Ways and Means, this ended the practice requiring that a charge on the Consolidated Revenue Fund had to originate by way of a resolution agreed to in a Committee of the Whole House. In its place, the House adopted the present Standing Order 79.

   No changes were made to this Standing Order between 1968 and 1991. Speakers, however, were frequently called upon to rule on questions pertaining to the scope and adequacy of the Royal Recommendation [107] and, indeed, the form of the Royal Recommendation itself underwent evolution. [108]

3. Standing Orders (1991 to 2005)

   In April 1991, February and June 1994, June 1998, October 2001, September 2003, and February 2005, the House adopted a series of amendments impacting mainly on the Business of Supply, and less so on the Business of Ways and Means. As well, although the text of the Standing Order on the Royal Recommendation changed only slightly, the practices surrounding its interpretation and use — as clarified by numerous Speaker’s rulings — occupied the House during this time period, especially with respect to the procedural acceptability of amendments and of private Members’ public bills.

   (a) Supply Procedures (1991 to 2005)

   In April 1991, as part of a group of Standing Order amendments, the House agreed to reduce the overall number of supply days from 25 to 20, and provided for a proportionate reduction or addition of supply days when the parliamentary calendar was not followed. While there continued to be three supply periods, the number of days assigned to each period was revised. In addition, the end date of the third and final supply period was moved from June 30 back to June 23. As well, the maximum number of votable motions in each of the supply periods was reduced from four to three. [109]

   In February 1994, the House accepted proposals to provide that, concurrent with consideration of the Main Estimates for the current fiscal year, each standing committee was authorized to consider and report on the future expenditure priorities for the subsequent fiscal year of the department and agencies for which it was responsible. The standing committee could then report on these priorities until the last supply day was called in June. In a second change, the rules were amended to stipulate that not more than one fifth of the supply days could be held on Wednesdays and not more than one fifth could be held on Fridays. [110] In June 1994, two amendments were made. First, the House eliminated the reference to deferral of opposition motions on Fridays from the Standing Orders respecting supply in this chapter, as the deferral was already provided for by Standing Order 45. [111] Second, an amendment (consequential upon the adoption of Standing Order 28(4)) provided that if the House met only for the ceremony of Royal Assent, that day would not be counted as a sitting day for the purposes of proportionately increasing the number of supply days overall. [112]

   In June 1998, the total number of supply days was increased from 20 to 21, with seven to be held in each of the three supply periods. Another amendment provided that a total of 14 opposition motions could be votable in the course of a year, with no limit on the number of votable motions in each period. Finally, there was a major change with respect to the last supply day in June. The House would now debate an opposition motion until 6:30 p.m. on that day, then proceed to consider the Estimates. If the opposition motion was votable, the rule provided that the division would be deferred until 10:00 p.m. [113]

   In October 2001, the House agreed to major amendments suggested earlier in the year by the Special Committee on the Modernization and Improvement of the Procedures of the House of Commons. [114] First, the amendments provided that henceforth the Main and Supplementary Estimates would be deemed referred to the appropriate committees following their tabling in the House, as opposed to referral by a votable motion. The amendments then provided that consideration of some of the Main Estimates could take place in the House itself in a Committee of the Whole. The new rule provided that the Leader of the Official Opposition could consult with the leaders of other opposition parties and, not later than May 1, could then select the Main Estimates of two named departments or agencies to be considered in Committee of the Whole for a period not exceeding five hours. Such consideration would take place at the conclusion of adjournment proceedings on the appointed day (at the conclusion of Private Members’ Business if that day were a Friday).

   A third amendment provided that written notice of an opposition motion would be filed not later than one hour prior to the opening of the sitting on the day preceding the allotted day. Following prayers, the Speaker would read the text of the motion to be proposed on the allotted day, and indicate whether the motion would come to a vote. A final change provided that amendments to supply day motions could only be moved, if found to be in order otherwise, with the consent of the mover of the motion. [115]

   In September 2003, again following the suggestion of the Special Committee on the Modernization and Improvement of the Procedures of the House, further amendments were adopted with respect to supply proceedings. [116] First, the number of hours devoted to consideration of the Main Estimates of the two named departments or agencies in Committee of the Whole was decreased from five hours to four hours. Second, time limits were set with respect to speeches and questions during such consideration. Each Member was restricted to no more than 15 minutes, of which a maximum of ten minutes could be on debate. The Member, when recognized, could use the 15-minute period for both a speech and for posing questions to the Minister of the Crown or a Parliamentary Secretary acting on his or her behalf. When the Member was recognized, he or she was to indicate how the 15-minute period was to be apportioned. Finally, provision was made for written notice of an opposition motion to be filed with the Clerk of the House during an adjournment of the House when the first or second sitting day following such an adjournment was designated as an allotted day. This notice was to be filed by the Thursday prior to the House returning.

   In February 2005, as part of a group of Standing Order amendments, the House agreed, by unanimous consent, to increase the number of allotted days in the supply period ending June 23 from seven to eight days, thus increasing the total number of allotted days to 22. Notice for opposition motions was set at 48 hours, rather than one hour before the opening of the previous sitting. All opposition motions were made votable, rather than a specific number per year, unless the sponsor of such a motion designated it as non-votable. [117]

   (b) Ways and Means Procedures (1991 to 2005)

   The written rules respecting the Business of Ways and Means were amended on two occasions during this time period, in April 1991 [118] and February 1994. [119]

   In April 1991, as part of a group of Standing Order changes, the House agreed to a reduction in the number of days designated for the Budget Debate from six to four, with a consequent change to the day on which the amendment and subamendment are to be voted upon. As well, amendments were adopted governing the notice provisions for a Budget presentation as well as the provisions governing proceedings on the day of the budget presentation.

   In February 1994, the House provided for the adoption of a Ways and Means motion to apply to an amendment or amendments to a bill then before the House, provided that such amendments would otherwise be admissible. At the same time, a new rule authorized the Standing Committee on Finance to consider and report on proposals with respect to the budgetary policy of the government. The Committee could begin its review on the first sitting day in September of each year and table reports on this matter until the tenth sitting day before the last normal sitting day each December.

   (c) Royal Recommendation (1991 to 2005)

   During the period 1991 to 2005, only one substantive amendment was adopted by the House with respect to the Royal Recommendation. Previous to June 1994, the Royal Recommendation was to be printed on the Notice Paper and in the Journals when the bill was introduced. In June 1994, the rules were amended to remove the requirement that this be done at the time of introduction. [120] Speaker’s rulings have since reinforced that a Royal Recommendation no longer had to be given upon notice or introduction, but could be brought in at a later stage, if required or desired. [121]

Content Disclaimer