The Legislative Process / Stages

Introduction and first reading: admissibility; bill argued to be in violation of parent act

March 6, 2008

Debates, pp. 3754-5

On March 3, 2008, Wayne Easter (Malpeque) rose on a point of order with respect to Bill C-46, An Act to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act and chapter 17 of the Statutes of Canada, 1998. He argued that section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act (the Act) prohibited the introduction of amending legislation unless two conditions were fulfilled: first, the Minister must consult the Canadian Wheat Board’s Board of Directors; and, second, the Minister must hold a vote among prairie grain producers with respect to the legislative change. Mr. Easter charged that these two conditions had not been fulfilled and concluded that the Bill violated the terms of the Act and was, therefore, improperly before the House. After hearing from other Members, the Speaker took the matter under advisement.^[1]

On March 6, 2008, the Speaker delivered his ruling. Citing the terms of section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act, he declared that, as Bill C-46 did not appear to propose either the exclusion of any wheat or barley product from the provisions of part III or IV of the Act, or the extension of the application of these parts to any other grain, it was not subject to the requirements of that section of the Act. Accordingly, the Speaker concluded that the Bill had been properly introduced and could proceed.

Decision of the Chair

The Speaker: I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on Monday, March 3 by the hon. Member for Malpeque concerning the admissibility of Bill C-46, An Act to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act and chapter 17 of the Statutes of Canada, 1998, standing on the Order paper in the name of the hon. Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board.

I would like to thank the hon. Member for Malpeque for raising this matter, as well as the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and Minister for the Canadian Wheat Board for their contributions on the issue.

The Member for Malpeque contends that Bill C-46 is inadmissible because it contravenes section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act which states:

The Minister shall not cause to be introduced in Parliament a bill that would exclude any kind, type, class or grade of wheat or barley, or wheat or barley produced in any area in Canada… unless

(a) the Minister has consulted with the board about the exclusion or extension, and

(b) the producers of the grain have voted in favour of the exclusion or extension, the voting process having been determined by the Minister.

In particular, the Member for Malpeque alleges that the consultations referred to in paragraph (a) of section 47.1 of the Canadian Wheat Board Act have not taken place.

In arguing that the Bill is in order, the Government House Leader pointed out that the Bill does not propose to amend the mandate of the Canadian Wheat Board. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food added that the intention of Bill C-46 is, in fact, to amend section 47 of the existing Act and, therefore, that the provisions of section 47.1 do not apply in this matter.

The Chair has looked at Bill C-46 bearing in mind the arguments made. In light of the circumstances, it is perhaps helpful to highlight the Bill’s main objectives, as contained in its four clauses. Clause 1 amends the Act to confirm that the Government may repeal or amend any regulation it makes under the Act. Clause 2 establishes a dispute resolution regime which does not relate to the point of order of the hon. Member for Malpeque. Clause 4 is the coming into force provision found in most bills, regardless of their subject matter.

It is clause 3 that is at issue in this point of order. Clause 3 repeals a section of a 1998 amending statute; the effect of clause 3 is to cause the repeal of section 47.1, which I just read, and nowhere in the Bill can the Chair find reference to any matter prohibited within section 47.1.

The Chair must conclude that, as Bill C-46 does not appear to propose the exclusion of any wheat or barley product from the provisions of part III or IV of the Act, nor the extension of the application of these parts to any other grain, it is not subject to the requirements of section 47.1 of the Act.

Accordingly, the Chair cannot find that the Bill offends the requirements contained in section 47.1 and I am ruling that the Bill has therefore been properly introduced and may proceed.

Naturally, the Member for Malpeque will have the opportunity to debate the principle of the Bill at the second reading stage and, if the House adopts the Bill at that stage, the committee to which the Bill is referred will no doubt want to examine his arguments during its clause-by-clause consideration.

I thank the Member for Malpeque for bringing this matter to the attention of the House.