Special Debates / Emergency Debates
Leave refused: fisheries; emergency debate already granted on the same subject a few months earlier
Debates, p. 12616
Context
On June 12, 2002, Loyola Hearn (St. John’s West) rose in the House to request that an emergency debate be held, pursuant to Standing Order 52, on overfishing on the nose and tail of the Grand Banks and the Flemish Cap.[1] Mr. Hearn noted that the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans had presented its Tenth Report (with respect to foreign overfishing) the day before, and argued that “without any consultation with his colleagues or the House… the Minister rejected the Report.” He added that his request for an emergency debate, should it be granted, would represent the last chance for all Members of the House to discuss the direction the Government should take at the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization’s autumn meeting.
Resolution
The Speaker ruled immediately. He stated that he had granted a request for an emergency debate on the subject a few months earlier and added that Mr. Hearn had not convinced him that the matter had become any more urgent since that time. Accordingly, he ruled that the request had not met the exigencies of the Standing Orders.
Decision of the Chair
The Speaker: I thank the hon. Member for St. John’s West for his submission.
As I said, I did grant an emergency debate on this very subject a few months ago because I believed there was some urgency to the matter. However I must say that nothing he has said today has convinced me that the matter has become more urgent today than it was when I granted the previous debate.
Accordingly, I am of the view that his request does not meet the exigencies of the Standing Orders at this time.
Some third-party websites may not be compatible with assistive technologies. Should you require assistance with the accessibility of documents found therein, please contact accessible@parl.gc.ca.
[1] Debates, June 12, 2002, pp. 12615-6.