Chapter XVI — House Administration

Notes on Standing Order 148:

[1]

Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1, s. 50-3; R.S.C. 1985, c. 42 (1^st Supp.), s. 2; S.C. 1991, c. 20, s. 2; S.C. 1997, c. 32, s. 1. See also Debates, October 29, 1997, pp. 1291-6.

[2]

Journals, May 19, 1868, p. 414. See also S.C. 1867-68, c. 27.

[3]

Debates, July 9, 1906, col. 7465. See also 1906 Rule 56 as compared to 1867 Rule 102. This rule concerning salaries remained in existence until 1994 (see Standing Order 149).

[4]

Debates, October 9, 1979, p. 6; Ninth Report of the Special Committee on Standing Orders and Procedure, tabled on June 22, 1983 (Journals, pp. 6073-4); First Report of the Special Committee on the Reform of the House of Commons, tabled on December 19, 1984 (Journals, p. 211). See also Commons Debates Index for 1980-83 and 1984-86, under “House of Commons – Internal Economy Commission”.

[5]

Debates, June 27, 1985, pp. 6327-32.

[6]

Debates, October 29, 1997, pp. 1291-6.

[7]

See the minutes of the Board of Internal Economy for February 15, 1994. See also Debates, February 17, 1994, p. 1507. For examples of minutes being tabled, see Journals, May 12, 1994, p. 461; December 4, 1998, p. 1400; March 12, 2004, p. 179.

[8]

See the First Report of the Special Committee on the Reform of the House of Commons, tabled on December 20, 1984 (Journals, p. 211). The recommendation was adopted on June 27, 1985 (Journals, pp. 918-9).

[9]

The last tabling relating exclusively to a committee budget was on June 21, 1994 (Journals, p. 647). Before the regular tabling of all Board minutes, extracts relating to committees were tabled in accordance with Standing Order 148(2). See for example, Journals, April 13, 1987, p. 743; January 15, 1991, pp. 2560-1; June 10, 1993, p. 3197.

Note on Standing Orders 149 and 150:

[1]

See the Twenty-Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, tabled June 8, 1994 (Journals, p. 545) and adopted June 10, 1994 (Journals, p. 563). For the history of these former Standing Orders, see the first edition of the Annotated Standing Orders of the House of Commons, published in April 1989.

Notes on Standing Order 151:

[1]

Bourinot, 4^th ed., p. 184. Bourinot cites Hatsell, Volume II, p. 265. Nonetheless, control of the House over all matters relating to its publications has always been carefully maintained. See for example, Debates, November 4, 1987, pp. 10725-6.

[2]

Parliament of Canada Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-1; Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act, S.C. 1986, c. 41.

[3]

As Chair of the Board of Internal Economy and “Minister” for the House, the Speaker naturally retains a strong influence in personnel management questions. Similarly, on behalf of the House, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs occasionally makes recommendations on such matters, pursuant to its mandate under Standing Order 108(3)(a).

[4]

Safe-keeping was doubly important in the early years of Confederation since many House documents were original copies made available to Members only after they had been recopied by hand (Debates, April 9, 1878, p. 1823).

Notes on Standing Order 152:

[1]

From 1867 to 1994, the Standing Orders also required the Clerk to have a certified copy of the Journals delivered to the Governor General each day. This section was deleted in June 1994. See the Twenty-Fourth Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, tabled June 1, 1994 (Journals, p. 516) and adopted June 3, 1994 (Journals, p. 529). For the history of this former rule, see Standing Order 152(1) in the first edition of the Annotated Standing Orders of the House of Commons, published in April 1989.

[2]

Rules and Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly of Canada, 1854, Standing Order III.

Notes on Standing Order 153:

[1]

Although the Standing Order specifies that it is the duty of the Clerk, responsibility for the preparation of the “List of Reports and Returns” is in fact delegated to the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel.

[2]

See 1868 Rule 106. Between 1961 and 1994, this Standing Order contained a second section, requiring the Clerk to send two copies of every bill to the Department of Justice so that it could be examined for compliance with the Canadian Bill of Rights. This requirement was deleted in June 1994. See the Twenty-Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, tabled June 8, 1994 (Journals, p. 545) and adopted June 10, 1994 (Journals, p. 563). For the history of this former rule, see Standing Order 153(2) in the first edition of the Annotated Standing Orders of the House of Commons, published in April 1989.

[3]

Bourinot, 2^nd ed., p. 218, note 2.

Notes on Standing Order 154:

[1]

Debates, June 27, 1986, pp. 14967-8. Members have insisted that messages regarding bills be printed in full in the Journals. See Debates, May 31, 1994, pp. 4619, 4661. In the past, messages about bills to which the Senate had proposed amendments were occasionally read in the House. See Debates, August 13, 1987, pp. 8056-7.

[2]

Bourinot, 1^st ed., p. 397.

[3]

Bourinot, 4^th ed., p. 272.

[4]

Beauchesne, 1^st ed., pp. 151-2.

Note on Standing Order 155:

[1]

See the Twenty-Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, tabled June 8, 1994 (Journals, p. 545) and adopted June 10, 1994 (Journals, p. 563). For the history of this former Standing Order, see the first edition of the Annotated Standing Orders of the House of Commons, published in April 1989.

Note on Standing Order 156:

[1]

See the Twenty-Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, tabled June 8, 1994 (Journals, p. 545) and adopted June 10, 1994 (Journals, p. 563). For the history of this former Standing Order, see the first edition of the Annotated Standing Orders of the House of Commons, published in April 1989.

Notes on Standing Order 157:

[1]

For example, although the Standing Order was silent on the point, some Members felt that as the officer responsible for the buildings, the Sergeant-at-Arms had a right, if not a duty, to reside in the parliament buildings. For discussions about his living quarters, see Debates, March 31, 1892, cols. 784-6; August 9, 1904, col. 8987; March 27, 1911, col. 6175.

[2]

Journals, March 22, 1927, pp. 338-9.

[3]

See, for example, Journals, May 20, 1964, pp. 331-7; March 16, 1971, pp. 415-6.

[4]

See the Twenty-Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, tabled June 8, 1994 (Journals, p. 545) and adopted June 10, 1994 (Journals, p. 563).

Notes on Standing Order 158:

[1]

The fee is also payable by any stranger wishing to be released from the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms after having been committed to the latter’s custody for any other reason deemed appropriate by the House, and as expressed in a House Order to that effect.

[2]

See Journals, March 2, 1967, p. 1482, for an example of a special discharge order.

[3]

An amusing discussion on this subject may be found in Debates, March 22, 1927, p. 1427.

[4]

Debates, May 10, 1879, p. 1940; May 12, 1879, pp. 1943-4, 1980-2.

[5]

Journals, February 24, 1880, pp. 58-9.

[6]

See, for example, Debates, May 10, 1899, col. 2897.

[7]

Debates, March 2, 1911, cols. 4468-9. In another case, an apparently over-zealous Sergeant-at-Arms ordered a black Methodist minister out of the building, an action for which he was sharply criticized (Debates, April 15, 1910, cols. 7182-3). See also Debates, February 28, 1890, cols. 1278-9.

[8]

Debates, February 9, 1962, p. 733.

[9]

Debates, August 24, 1964, p. 7177. See also contemporary newspaper accounts.

[10]

Debates, May 18, 1966, p. 5268; May 19, 1966, p. 5287. See also contemporary newspaper accounts.

[11]

Debates, March 2, 1967, pp. 13669-70. A few weeks later a Member introduced a bill to amend the Criminal Code as a consequence of this incident (Debates, April 19, 1967, p. 15081).

[12]

Debates, May 11, 1970, p. 6796; May 12, 1970, pp. 6843-4. The Standing Committee on Procedure and Organization studied and reported on the whole question of security (Journals, March 16, 1971, pp. 415-6).

[13]

Debates, June 20, 1973, p. 4945; January 25, 1983, p. 22187; April 14, 1986, p. 12188; June 1, 1987, pp. 6584, 6595-6; November 28, 1989, p. 6342. In this last case, the galleries were temporarily cleared.

[14]

A Member was accused of complicity in the demonstration, but the Speaker ruled out this allegation after the Member denied it. See Debates, October 17, 1990, p. 14277; October 18, 1990, pp. 14359-68; November 6, 1990, pp. 15177-81.

[15]

See the Twenty-Fourth Report of the Standing Committee on Privileges and Elections, tabled March 6, 1991 (Journals, p. 2666).

[16]

Debates, October 17, 1970, p. 328; May 17, 1973, p. 3867; September 12, 1983, p. 26987; May 5, 2004, p. 2812. A related example includes Debates, June 17, 1966, p. 6574.

Notes on Standing Order 159:

[1]

See 1868 Rule 103 and 1906 Rule 57.

[2]

A 1975 procedure committee report underscores how radically the House’s (and Members’) workload has increased (Journals, July 18, 1975, pp. 725-6). See also Debates, November 1, 1979, pp. 841-3; November 2, 1979, pp. 923-6.

Content Disclaimer