March 10, 1944 (19th Parliament, 5th Session)


Ian Alistair Mackenzie (Minister of Pensions and National Health)


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):

Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order, although I am not asking Your Honour to rule upon it now. Beauchesne's Third Edition, Speakers' Decisions, page 495, says:
The house resumed the adjourned debate on the proposed motion of Mr. Manion: That the Bill No. 37 (Letter A of the Senate), intituled: "An Act respecting the Canadian National Railways and to provide for cooperation with the Canadian Pacific Railway System, and for other purposes," be now read the second time, and the proposed motion of Mr. Mackenzie King in amendment thereto:
That all the words after "That" to the end of the question be left out in order to insert the following instead thereof: "the second reading of this Bill be postponed until this house have declared that nothing therein shall be taken to authorize any amalgamation of the Canadian National Railways with the Canadian Pacific Company; or to divest parliament of its rights; or to take from the House of Commons its primary duty to control expenditures of public moneys and the taxes required to meet the same; and that the provisions of said bill shall be read in the light of this declaration, and be construed so as to conform therewith, and that in so far as any of its provisions may be inconsistent therewith they shall be amended accordingly,
"and that the adoption of this amendment by this house shall constitute the declaration of its intention and purposes as set forth herein."
Mr. Speaker: There is in our journals one precedent of an amendment moved on the second reading of a bill which proposed that 'further consideration of the bill be deferred until the Tariff Bill has been disposed of.
It was a declaration of principle covering not only the second reading, but also the third reading and the final adoption of the bill, and it was moved, as a disapproval of the measure.
But the present amendment is different inasmuch as it proposes a postponement of the second reading pending a definite declaration of the house.
It does not purport to be adverse to the bill, but it makes suggestions for adding to its provisions by amendments which can only be moved after the adoption of the second reading.
May at page 390 says:
And the quotation is found at page 496. Then Mr. Speaker continued:
As this amendment has not the effect of disagreeing with the principle of the bill, it does not come within the class of amendments referred to by May.
"The allegation that nothing in the bill should be taken to divest parliament of its rights or to take from the house its primary duty to control expenditures is a declaration of general principles which can be moved as a reason for not agreeing to the second reading of a bill dealing with the constitutional rights of parliament, but which is beyond the scope of, and therefore irrelevant, to the present bill. May says at page 391 that the principle of relevancy in an amendment governs every such proposed resolution."
At page 391, May says further:
"Such an amendment may not deal with the provisions of the bill upon which it is moved nor anticipate amendments thereto which may be moved in committee."
The words "nothing therein shall be taken to authorize any amalgamation of the Canadian National Railways with the Canadian Pacific Company" anticipates an amendment w-hieh may be moved in committee.
The propostion that the bill shall be read in the light of certain declarations and be construed in a certain manner, and that its provisions shall be amended accordingly is in the nature of an instruction to the committee which cannot be moved as an amendment to the second reading.
For these reasons, the amendment is out of order.
See May 15th edition, page 391; Bourinot, page 509; Redlich, Vol. 3, page 89.
From this decision Mr. Mackenzie King appealed to the house.
And the question being put by Mr. Speaker: Shall the ruling of the Chair he sustained?- it was decided in the affirmative.
Debates, House of Commons, 1932-33, vol. 3, pages 2895-6.
Journals, House of Commons, vol. 71, pages 297, 298, 299.
I would ask Your Honour to give consideration to the arguments advanced at that time.
Industrial Development Bank

Full View