Save Search

Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Ch16 Non-government business / MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE / Criteria for determining a matter in order / Matter discussed previously



Download WordDownload Word

House of Representatives                                Ch 16                                                 p 580

 

Non-government business / MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE / Criteria for determining a matter in order

 

Matter discussed previously

Under the same motion rule the Speaker has the discretion to disallow any motion or amendment which he or she considers is the same in substance as any question already resolved during the same session. 1 The same principle may be applied to a proposed matter of public importance which has substantially the same wording as a motion previously agreed to. When a matter of public importance is proposed which is substantially the same as a matter of public importance discussed earlier in the session, the case is less clear. However, even if the same subject has been discussed, it can hardly be said to have been resolved, and indeed, the whole intention of the MPI procedure is to allow discussion on an issue without purporting to resolve it.

Nevertheless, Speakers have attempted to avoid matters with identical wording. The Speaker has privately disallowed a matter that was substantially the same as one discussed earlier in the session. 2 However, more recent thinking has been that a subject can continue to be one of public importance and that the Opposition should not be restricted in bringing it forward again with different wording. Thus matters are submitted and discussed on the same subject as ones previously discussed, the Chair having ruled privately that new, different or extenuating circumstances existed. 3 It has also been ruled that the scope of a matter was wider than the previous one, debate thus being permitted provided it did not traverse ground covered in the previous matter, 4 although this would be almost impossible to enforce.

It is normal practice that matters on which no effective discussion has taken place may be resubmitted and allowed during the same session. 5



S.O. 114(b).



Matter submitted on 23 August 1971 was amended before submission to House so as not to be identical to matter previously discussed on 7 April 1971, VP 1970-72/514, 666-7.



VP 1951-53/357-8, 421-2; VP 1985-87/1431, 1485, 1511, 1539; VP 1998-2001/1080, 1128.



H.R. Deb. (1.11.50) 1718.



VP 1977/302, 308.