May 28, 1956

LIB

James Sinclair (Minister of Fisheries)

Liberal

Mr. Sinclair:

It is according to the rules of the house.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
LIB

Louis-René Beaudoin (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

Well, I have listened very carefully to the remarks of the hon. member for Kamloops and in making his submission how he can indicate that there is on my part a ruling for one case and another one for another case I really cannot see.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
PC

Edmund Davie Fulton

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Fulton:

I was pointing out the facts.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
LIB

Louis-René Beaudoin (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

If the hon. member wishes to take the case of last Friday in point he is forgetting that before the motion was made there was discussion as to the type of motion that would be moved. If at that moment instead of three or four hon. members only rising there had been 264 I would have had to see them all. From the moment the motion is made it is not debatable. There is the distinction.

In this case the hon. member for Kamloops insists, after I have indicated to the house: that a motion such as the one that is contemplated by citation 225 is one that must come up under routine proceedings, I say that it is debatable and do undertake to rule so, as I am positive that that is the way under standing order 32 (m), he still insists that there is no way that he can bring this about because there is no way a private member can give a notice of motion at this time. There is a distinction between a private member's notice of motion contemplated

436S

House of Commons

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drew:

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that the time for private members' motions has expired.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
LIB

Louis-René Beaudoin (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

Order. It does not come

under that heading, may I submit with respect, because this is a matter which is covered by standing order 32, paragraph (m), which reads as follows:

32. (1) (m) such other motion, made upon

routine proceedings, as may be required for the observance of the proprieties of the house, the maintenance of its authority, the appointment or conduct of its officers, . . .

I submit that the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker and chairman of committees and the deputy chairman of committees are officers of the house. There is therefore no doubt in my mind that the proper course to be followed is for notice to be given of a substantive motion. Once the notice time has elapsed for the motion on the order paper, it is placed upon the routine proceedings, namely under "motions". By virtue of standing order 32 (1) (m) it is debatable and must be taken up when it comes up.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
CCF

Major James William Coldwell

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. Coldwell:

May I say a word, Mr. Speaker?

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
LIB

Louis-René Beaudoin (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

Yes,

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
CCF

Major James William Coldwell

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. Coldwell:

I certainly think it would be an ill-advised move to turn down this proposal on a technical question. There is no doubt about it that there is in the house a feeling with regard to the Chair-and I am using the word "Chair"-in this debate which I think is most unfortunate. I have been one of those, I think, who have respected the Chair generally and who have respected this institution and I think it would be well to have this matter cleared up before we proceed any further with the debate that is under way. From the point of view of the house and from the point of view of Your Honour I think it would be a mistake to refuse to accept this motion on the ground that the proper thing to do is to introduce a substantive motion which could be debated only after this debate is over.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
LIB

Louis-René Beaudoin (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

No. I want to make the matter clear. The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) seems to be under the impression that the motion could be debated only after this debate is concluded. Of course I do not know how long it will take to conclude this debate, but the debate could take place 48 hours from now.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
CCF

Major James William Coldwell

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. Coldwell:

I am wondering whether the government would allow that, having in mind what has occurred on this pipe-line bill. The government brooks no delay, no discussion and no debate. It invokes closure at every stage.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
LIB

Louis-René Beaudoin (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

May I submit to the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar that it is not a matter for the government or for the opposition to decide. It is a motion which, as the standing orders provide, must follow its course.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
CCF

Stanley Howard Knowles (Whip of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation)

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. Knowles:

Except that the government may move the adjournment of the debate.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
LIB

Louis-René Beaudoin (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

Is that not so with regard to any substantive motion? There is no question that the mover, in making his motion, or in taking up his order, has the right to make a speech. Just to go a little bit further-of course we are anticipating what may happen, but I do so just in order to elucidate the position as I see it-I submit that the person concerned in the motion, namely the chairman of committees, should be heard as soon as the motion is made and the speech of the mover is heard. The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar says it would be a mistake to turn down this motion; there may be something in what he says. But I submit that, if the course that he suggests- that of accepting the motion-is to be followed, it is one that should be adopted by the house itself. So far as I am concerned, as Speaker, I am interested in only one thing, and that is to give the proper ruling, and I stand by that statement.

So far as this motion is concerned, in my opinion the right ruling to give, since it is a motion in which the conduct of the deputy chairman is necessarily involved-I do not think anyone will construe this motion otherwise-under our rules and under our practice is that there is a procedure provided with which to deal with this matter. I think I have tried to clear up the apprehensions of hon. members as to whether or not this motion is debatable when it comes up, and what happens to it. The motion goes on the notice paper, and after it has served its 48 hours' time as determined by standing order 41, the motion comes up during routine proceedings under "motions". By virtue of standing order 32 (m), I am advising the house immediately that in my humble opinion the Speaker, the Deputy Speaker, and deputy chairman of committees are officers of the house. At that moment, when the motion comes up, the same as a motion for concurrence in a committee report, it is taken up and the mover has the floor. What happens to the motion after that is the same as what happens to any substantive motion.

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink
PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drew:

I had not completed my remarks, but I sat down when you rose. What I would point out is this. 1 submit there is a distinct difference between this motion and the manner in which it has been interpreted. What we are asking is permission to debate

Monday, May 28, 1356

Topic:   PIPE LINES
Subtopic:   TRANS-CANADA PIPE LINES-INQUIRY AS TO DECISION BY FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION
Permalink

May 28, 1956