Amendments and Subamendments to Motions / Relevance

Contrary to fact

Journals p. 715

Debates p. 7007

Background

While the House was debating the motion of Mr. Pearson (Prime Minister) that "this House does not regard its vote on February 19 in connection with third reading of Bill C-193, [an Act to amend the Income Tax Act], which had been carried in all previous stages, as a vote of non-confidence in the Government," Mr. Latulippe (Compton-Frontenac) proposed to amend the motion by adding the words "on division" immediately after the word "carried". The Speaker asked for comments on the amendment from Members before making his ruling.

Issue

Is an amendment acceptable if it confuses the sense of the motion or is contrary to fact?

Decision

No. The amendment cannot be accepted.

Reasons given by the Speaker

"... the amendment, if carried, would make the motion difficult to understand." In addition, "it would also be contrary to the facts, since the bill was carried on first reading by unanimous consent of the House".

References

Debates, February 26, 1968, pp. 7001-7.